FBinNY 

Probably not. Cops in NY can show amazing restraint. Odds are they would probably have tried to get him to shut up for 5 minutes so they could finish writing the citation and move on.

In a confrontation, I once had a cop's partner tell me "you have the right to remain silent.....now would be a good time to start", and ultimately let me go.

NY cops don't need nonsense arrests and their supervisors frown on them because it's too much work. Fact is you have to work a bit to have a minor issue lead to an arrest.

KonAaron Snake 

I was agreeing with you.

FBinNY 

\


Oh. Not used to that on A&S.

GP

No but it should be painful. People, not just cops, should be lawfully able to beat the crap out of you if you act like a DB.

FBinNY 

Definitely not. Words are words, and fists are fists, and the former doesn't warranty the other. You aren't entitled to any courtesy from folks you're abusing, but you don't deserve anything worse than a proportional response.

Nikon Rep

good post.

The first amendment wasn't written so we can tell the government to have a nice day. It was written so we can tell the government to go f*ck themselves.

GP

IMHO, people would be nicer to each other if they knew there is a chance of a baseball bat hitting them in the head after a rude remark.

FBinNY 

Brilliant!!!!

Have you considered the flip side? People with bats would feel justified in using them more often.

So what's better, people putting up with some verbal abuse now and then, or accepting bashed heads as par for the course.

spare_wheel

Seriously???

The ACLU lives for these cases. And they win them again, and again, and again. The hilarious thing about contempt of cop arrests is that most of the time the inolved leos don't even realize that arresting someone because they told you to "f--- off" is not legal. The cases are usually won based on the officer's report and/or conversations with other leos.

spare_wheel

There are plenty of people who fervently believe that cyclists who ride in the road are ****** bags.

KonAaron Snake 

Are you really not getting this? Read again - slowly.

The courts are there to fix errors made on site. Charges like this usually won't stick, or will be pled down. As it should be. However, the individual is still inconvenienced and the police's discretion and enforcement of intentionally ambiguous laws is also still maintained. Until recently individuals had no civil recourse at all due to sovereign immunity. There is now SOME recourse available, but the burden of proof is difficult to overcome and courts will errr on the side of police in terms of negligence/damages. Their role as on site mediators with the authority to act in this manner is preserved as well - the individual's recourse is to seek remedy in court.

And I'm a proud card carrying, dues paying member of the ACLU.

FBinNY 

Yes, the system works ---- sort of. However, the fact that there's remedy through the courts doesn't excuse spiteful arrests or false charges. If there's a legitimate gray area, the cops may arrest and let the courts remedy it, but an arrest made with full knowledge that charges will be dismissed is out of line.

spare_wheel

a recent case:

https://www.wired.com/2013/01/flipping-off-cop-case/

The article also links out to two cases with cash settlements:

the precedent in these cases is clear and the police and local government always lose (whether via a settlement or judgement).

KonAaron Snake 

What are you not getting here? Read what I wrote again. You have not disagreed with me.

Settlements paid by the tax payer, and generally only when there's actual damages. There are very rarely judgements as a point of fact. In Philly the cops involved in cases like this are not disciplined or removed.

KonAaron Snake 

Yes - however addressing that in the courts is difficult, because on process the police will be given the benefit of the doubt and sovereign immunity as a concept does still exist, though it is not the iron dome it was. So the ultimate real world result is that the courts correct errors and the police have, for all intensive purposes, great discretion to act and mediate on scene. That grey area is a country mile when it comes to showing negligence sufficient to overcome sovereign immunity. It is better to challenge in the courts, not on scene.

It's really only recently that you had any chance of damages or recourse against the police.

We probably can't even get rid of these arse holes (granted Philly is worse than most):

https://articles.philly.com/2014-04-2...iminal-charges

GP

I'll bet the two most popular words would be sir and ma'am.

What do you think Baldwin would have done if a private bodyguard, mobster or gang member told him not to go the wrong way? Probably put his head down, mumble "yes sir", and get off the bike.

spare_wheel

that's almost irrelevant. leo are rarely disciplined for even more egregious violations of the law.

there are plenty examples of judgements (see my link for several). the courts love these kind of cut and dried 1st amendment cases -- they make a jurists day (even if they think the plaintiff is a scumbag).

CB HI

Five pages on Alec Baldwin because he is a dumb ass that gets insulted when two cops do not recognize him straight off. Then he is too stupid to understand that he was obligated to verbally tell the cops his name and birthdate since they had probable cause that he violated traffic code.

Gallo

AS card should be revoked

mconlonx

The ACLU takes on cases like these as they can based on how it will help them out politically. Many more don't get ACLU backing and when that happens, it's taxpayer supported legal representation against an individual. Who may or may not be able to afford a decent defense, who probably is not wealthy enough to pursue a follow-up, drawn out civil case.

And if it breaks down that way, cop gets paid for doing his job; victim might get off on the charge, but not without expense and inconvenience. So who actually wins most of the time in cases like this...?

spare_wheel

the aclu and local lawyers love 1st amendment cases because they help fund the not-for-profit (former) or subsidize the boat/sporstcar (latter).

Nikon Rep

Winners : The police state, the judges, the jails,

Losers : tax payers, freedom, truth, victims of abuse

CbadRider

That alone is enough to close this thread.