Quote:
Originally Posted by Tmall
I can't click the link from my phone.
But, he couldn't have been resisting arrest until he was told what he was being arrested for.
As for reaching for guns and anything else that happened off camera, all his word against theirs.
I have no problem with police, and if the guy had any form of weapon or been combative, then he should have been subdued.
But, he wanted to know why he was being detained, which he has a legal right to know.
Charged with disobeying a lawful order? Sure, that could stick. Resisting and deserving to be tased several times? Nope..
And the jury agrees.
So, what facts do you guys have to base the legality of his tasing on?
|
The liink is to a legal site that outlines the fact that you have to comply with police's orders. The officer does not have to tell him why he is being detained until the detainee complies with his orders.