I thought it was really cool of the cop who did not have a problem answering questions about why they were detaining the guy. He felt he had nothing to hide and I respect him being willing to explain why. But that is what is scary; he believed they were doing the right thing even though taking this man to jail should not have even been an option. Regardless, some police employees understand the meaning of transparency. His supervisor on the other hand who was standing right in front of him did not feel he should be disclosing details of the arrest with anyone. Supervisor turns to the officer and quietly tells him that he does not need to explain himself to anyone and to basically zip it. What is wrong? Does answering questions potentially reveal that you guys made an avoidable, unnecessary, unreasonable and illegal arrest when you had better, smarter and fairer alternatives? Because that is exactly what it ended up happening? The officer basically says that they had to detain him for his own protection since he was so drunk. He goes on to say that they would have let the man call his friends to pick him up but the man did not know his friend’s number. So they had no choice other than taking him to jail. Upon hearing that, the man turns to the cops and informs/reminds them that his friends phone number is written on his bracelet. So now the cops are on the spot as it is clear they have better options than to arrest him. So with that being the case, what do you think happens next??? A) They do the right thing and let the man call his friends to come get pick him up? B) They disregard it because they don’t care and haul the man off to jail anyway. Yes, the man had been drinking but was no drunker than anybody else walking around that night. He was doing absolutely nothing besides sitting down when the police showed up and started harassing him. The man was not argumentative, combative, belligerent or unable to care for himself, had friends already on their way to get him and was cooperative from the start. Still, they took him into custody On top of that, the way they put him in the cuffs was pretty rough under the circumstances. The guy was cooperative and showed no signs of resisting. What ever happened to asking a cooperative suspect to simply put their hands behind their back? I guess there is no reason to do that when you can just snatch his hands and strong arm him into submission instead! They claimed to be detaining the man to protect him but by the way they were handling him it did not seem as if they cared much about his safety. Civil protective custody is not an arrest per se, however people are usually intoxicated and for good reason uncooperative when they are detained “for their own good” and often end up doing or saying something while in custody that ends up resulting in some bogus charge filed before they leave that they did not have going in.
Posted on: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:38:51 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015