What are your opinions of false arrests?
151760
First, there are several forms of false arrest. You can be detained by a concert organizer who closes a show and fails to tell you where the exits are. You can be detained by store security staff and threatened with prosecution. In the former, failure to indicate exits may constitute a form of false arrest. In the second, if the detention is maintained for a long period of time and is accompained with threats, without sufficient reason or probable cause for the restraint, may also constitute false arrest. Then there is the presumed  more common form performed by police. The latter is harder to prove absent a preponderance of evidence that the restraint was done maliciously and without reasonable cause. \n\nWhy do people do these things? For probably as many reasons as there are grains of sand, which is why the insistance by the courts upon an objective standard: what would a reasonable person do in the same or similar circumstances.
1042530
I think it depends on the lie.  \nIf some kid goes out and buys a trident and tells girls in the bar that he's a navy seal, should that hold the same penalty as someone who said they were a great hero in Vietnam but was actually escorted around by armed guards?\nHow about someone who was not in the military at all but claims they were?\nI say depending the extent of the lie, make it about the same as impersonating a police officer.  But not quite as severe.  Actually impersonating a police officer is a pretty serious crime considering that they are the only ones who have to power to interfere with your rights.
995204
Yes. These people are being denied their freedom but are charged with no crime. Sounds UnAmerican to me.
624359
Absolutely not! I am a police officer and I tell you that I would much rather prefer that everyone just obey the laws. When I make an arrest, depending on the circumstances, there are hours of paperwork, reports that have to be written, follow-up information to be gathered, court appearances, and countless hours of missed sleep (when you have to go to court, but work night shift).\n\nUsually the people that make these sort of comments are the ones that are breaking the law or hang out with the ones breaking the law. If you behave, I have no reason to mess with you. If you don't, you better believe I will do what needs to be done. It's that simple.
12713
In most instances, what is generally considered as profiling by law enforcement is wrong.  \n\nThe biggest problem I have with it is: if you put any one group under a microscope, you will catch more of the members of that group doing things, thus "verifying" your profile and removing resources from pursuing other groups.\n\nMany people say things like, "if I haven't done anything wrong I don't care if they need to search/stop me to catch the bad guys."\n\nThe problem with that thinking is it ignores the realities of the impact and embarrassment felt by those stopped/searched/scrutinized, and the chances of someone being wrongly accused of things, which does happen.  Remember Richard Jewell?
525028
Dear Friend,\n\nIf that's all there is to the story, there is a 0% chance you're going to jail.\n\nYour Friend,\nFrancesois
42064
I would disagree with the paranoid among the crowd ("the police will get you if you complain about one of them") but to each his own...and I'm sure it has happened in some places.  \n\nCertainly you can file a complaint with the officer's agency.\n\nYou can probably also file a complaint with the prosecutor's office.\n\nYou can hire a lawyer and pursue a 1983 action.  Hope you've got buckets of money, or a generous lawyer.\n\nWhat's more important to me, and what would really make the whole issue moot, is the issue of whether or not the officer "made up false charges."  Is this your opinion?  You may not know the law well enough to make that determination.  If it's an incident that you have no personal knowledge of, you may not even have all the facts.  \n\nIt's also entirely possible that the officer relied on information given to him/her by a witness or a victim.  If someone comes to me and claims to be a rape victim, I have to give them the benefit of the doubt and begin an investigation.  Given enough probable cause to make an arrest based on my investigation, I may arrest the suspect...even though he may eventually be proven to be factually innocent.  That doesn't mean I made anything up, it simply means there was enough information to justify making an arrest...and nobody will ever tell you (nobody that knows what they're talking about) that just because an arrest was made and the suspect was later proven to be innocent, that the officer absolutely had to be wrong about the arrest.  Sometimes things come to light after the arrest that shows the suspect didn't commit the crime after all...but that does not necessarily mean the officer made anything up.\n\nDo cops lie?  Sure...I hate to think so, but I know they do, just like doctors, lawyers, judges, auto mechanics, plumbers, dope dealers and garbage collectors.  I'd like to think we take steps to weed out liars, but I'm not about to say we (as a group) never do it...just as I would never say any one particular group of people does anything.  \n\nIf this is something you'd like to talk more about in email, I'm happy to help shed some different light on it for you or help point you in the direction you might want to go (though I'm not suggesting you should only listen to what *I* say).  If you'd like to talk about it, you can send an email to my nickname at yahoo.com.\n\nNo way will I say the officer in whatever case you're talking is not lying, but I don't know what the facts are and I'm certainly hoping there's another explanation for what you seem to be claiming is dishonesty.
474009
Let's wait to see if anyone's convicted before we start judging.  From what we have heard in the news media there are too many holes that need filled in.  \n\nIf someone is convicted hang 'em but let us extend the same courtesy that we would like to have if we were accused of a crime
1129452
Erm, 'love 2 b curious'\n\nExcuse me, hate to interrupt, but you do realise of course that your government is locking people up, with no contact to the outside world, no representation, no charge and no trial, for an indefinite period of time, and is not even trying to cover the fact up. It is totally public knowledge. It is not media hype. It's happened and is happening. Like the sun is shining.\nNow you may believe that of the hundreds of people that were rounded up and put into these prisons and made to kneel in the boiling heat for days on end all deserved it, but couldn't you just entertain the possibility, just humour me a little, that some of these people may have done nothing wrong?\n\nThink about it. Just maybe?
408966
anything that is intentionally untrue.  Giving a false name to an officer, or lying on your taxes.  Any lie or obfuscation is false information in the eyes of the law.
614454
Who really knows.  With all the arrests (and susbsequent releases) surrounding the case, too much false hope has been given to the public, to the police, and most importantly, to the family.\n\nThis was a horrible incident, and I for one have learned to NEVER, EVER visit Aruba.  The Dutch justice system isn't working there.
342745
you might as well explain ahead of time.  if they look up your record and see something was on there, even though it was pardoned, it will make you look dishonest.\n\nthis happened to me in court.  i was detained by the police, but never arrested and in court the "arrest record" appeared.  i could honestly say i was never arrested or charged with anything, but it made me look dishonest in court, even though i was not.  i forgot to tell my attorney about the incident as it was ten years ago and i wasn't charged.\n\njust best to come clean ahead of time.
515420
This is perfectly normal,almost every-one come across such persons.The art of it is to avoid confrontation with them and just keep cool.Main thing is, are you ready to stoop that low, perhaps not, there is no grace in it.One must not loose self esteem  and decorum for such persons,if you do it will be the same thing [rude and obnoxious].Iam with you on this.\nI too, came across a certain person in my locality, who opposed the idea of serving the community,free of charge.I went in for having an association and for its registration with the government authorities and succeeded in getting the registration no.But the gentleman in question went hammers and tongs for my skin, and declared he will devise a way for getting me arrested in a fake case.I stood by my conviction and avoided him. Now after a period of almost a year he has cool-down.
873091
You need to do a little research and think about these incidents for yourself instead of letting the media spoon feed you their bias ideas. \n\n1. I trust the words of the police more than i do some scum bag drug addict informant who could be lying about it being a cover up. Even if it was a lie, the woman began SHOOTING AT POLICE when they started up her porch. The police RETURNED FIRE. \n\n2. The boy in the school weighs 200 pounds and was in the process of violently attacking a female school mate. The policewoman weighed about 125 pounds and was about 5'2. The boy would not comply with verbal commands to stop. Would you rather the boy be striked with a baton? Or maced? Tazing is much safer than those. Or would you prefer the officer just watch this 200 lb boy beat a fellow female student (and by the way he was not 6 years old, he was in 6th grade.)\n\n3. The man in NY infered that he had a gun to 2 undercover NYPD officers. He then stormed to his car saying that he was going to get his gun. The NYPD officers then identified themselves as police officers and told them to turn off the engine. The man inside the car ran hit one of the NYPD officers with his car, and struck a NYPD vehicle. He was clearly trying to run the officer down. So the NYPD officers used deadly force against a deadly threat ( the person in control of a 2000 pound moving object). THAT is why.
560211
Not true.  Those laws are controversial and apply only to specific localities.  Step outside that locality and you will be arrested.  In fact, the feds freely ignore those local and even state laws and arrest people and successfully convict them.  California is the only state to pass a law like this on the state level and the feds freely ignore it and arrest people.  Actually, they show great restraint in this.  They only arrest the 90% of people who fraudulently claim they are sick in an attempt to smoke pot recreationally.  They ignore the ones who are actually sick.
107515
no b/c they just may be INNOCENT--the court system isnt always right.
1042335
Let me see if I can make this plain and simple enough for you to wrap your head around it.\n\nSay a group of eight policemen came to your house, pulled your grandfather from his bed, dragged him outside and shot him to death.  Your grandfather, a good man who never did so much as spit on the sidewalk has been brutally murdered.\n\nAn investigation reveals the eight policemen murdered your grandfather and tried to cover it up. The proof is more than sufficient to arrest them and charge them, and they were booked and jailed.\n\nNow, do you want them to be immediately released back into the community, or held?\n\nDid that help?