• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
And right now Illinois Rep. Bobby Rush is on CNN wearing a hoodie, and repeating the lie that Martin was shot in the back of his head.

So much nonsense being repeated about this case, it makes my head spin.

"A lie goes around the world 3 times before the truth even gets its pants on"
 
Last edited:
Professor Yaffle said:
So you would usually only be arrested if the cops feel they already have enough to charge you? Here, an arrest would mean they could detain you and question you for x hours (initially 24, but can be extended by 12 hours at a time by a magistrate up to a maximum of 96 hours). If you are not charged in that time you must be released.
Click to expand...
They can question you but I don't believe they can take you to the station and/or actually hold you against your will unless they have a legally-valid reason ("probable cause") to charge you with a crime.

My knowledge on this is only that of a layman though.

Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
Maybe people who see someone they think is suspicious should call the police and then wait for those in authority to do their job. Neighborhood watch ought to be just that. Not neighborhood follow suspicious people with guns.

[qimg]http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1069/neighboorhoodwatch.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Well, you can't report the current location or activities of a person you think is suspicious unless you at least keep them in sight.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
So you would usually only be arrested if the cops feel they already have enough to charge you? Here, an arrest would mean they could detain you and question you for x hours (initially 24, but can be extended by 12 hours at a time by a magistrate up to a maximum of 96 hours). If you are not charged in that time you must be released.
Click to expand...

He appears to have been arrested on sight and released only after the initial investigation.
 
EGarrett said:
They can question you but I don't believe they can take you to the station and/or actually hold you against your will unless they have a legally-valid reason ("probable cause") to charge you with a crime.

My knowledge on this is only that of a layman though.

Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause
Click to expand...

Ok, sounds similar enough then - here the police have to have "reasonable grounds" for suspecting you have committed or are about to commit certain offences.

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla...ice_e/police_powers.htm#your_rights_on_arrest
 
WildCat said:
And right now Illinois Rep. Bobby Rush is on CNN wearing a hoodie, and repeating the lie that Martin was shot in the back of his head.
Click to expand...
Don't worry. Rep. Greg Harper, R-Mississippi, who was presiding over the House floor, put a quick end to it.

Rep. Harper said:
"The gentleman will suspend. The member is no longer recognized. The chair must remind members that clause 5 of rule 17 prohibits the wearing of hats in the chamber when the House is in session."
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/28/politics/congressman-hoodie/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

The Republic is once again safe.
 
Redtail said:
Funny thing. There are multiple keys on this touch pad that have letters on them.


Nah, a better solution would be for you to stop pretending that every response to your hypothetical scenarios are following, adjusting said scenario... Oh, but then you wouldn't get to play your little game.
Click to expand...

But I didn't type "more likely" and it would have made no sense if I had. I'm not sure why you added it.

But I did say the scenario was hypothetical, because I don't know what happened and I think it's become important to distinguish between opinion and fact and speculation, etc.

I wasn't pretending about anything.
 
Last edited:
Professor Yaffle said:
Can someone clarify for me exactly what "arrested" means in the US? From other discussions here I've got the impression that it means something slightly different to its meaning in the UK.
Click to expand...
Popularly, the whole process of being taken into custody, questioned charged, etc, is often referred to as 'being arrested', but the law makes a distinction

'Arrested' means that the person is not free to leave. Arrest does not require the police to make any formal statement or charge (although they can do it that way). Like everything else it has its parameters.

Being put in handcuffs at the scene and asked questions isn't an arrest, it is a *temporary detention*, a special case the courts have carved out.
It can extend to the back of the police car, or even being taken in for questioning and then released.



.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, you can't report the current location or activities of a person you think is suspicious unless you at least keep them in sight.
Click to expand...
Life's a bitch. Sometimes we have to make responsible decisions which means we don't always get what we want.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, you can't report the current location or activities of a person you think is suspicious unless you at least keep them in sight.
Click to expand...
When does keeping them in sight become fighting them on the side of the street?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Hindsight is a bitch, too.
Click to expand...
Hindsight? He never received any instructions as to appropriate behavior as a neighborhood watch representative? And I don't care if he was on the clock or not. The rules have a purpose. That idiots roll their eyes and think the rules are dumb or just bureaucratic CYA and thus don't apply to them when they are playing cop on their own time isn't something that impresses me. As a judge once told me when I was young and standing before the bench, "we don't have laws against public stupidity but it's not like we don't try".

Zimmerman's life is over.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know if Zimmerman had any racist or malicious thoughts that evening. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But, IMO, having a gun and getting worked up over suspicious people wasn't worth the potential of harm to himself or others. There was no evidence that a crime had been committed. There was no evidence that anyone was in imminent danger. Based on what I actually do know I can't find reason for tears.

Martin is dead.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom