11 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderI did. You made it sound like the swearing was over, then she said "give me the ticket".
No s**t. Read the post.
Swearing at an officer does not give him the legal power to use force against you.
You have a lot of trouble reporting the way things happen and constantly misrepresent things to fit your argument. It's a pattern of behaviour that must drive people around you nuts.
11 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by Sam The ShamThat post precisely related what happened. I suggest people look at the video to confirm that rather than believing anything anyone as biased as you says.
I did. You made it sound like the swearing was over, then she said "give me the ticket".
You have a lot of trouble reporting the way things happen and constantly misrepresent things to fit your argument. It's a pattern of behaviour that must drive people around you nuts.
She uses profanity; THEN she says "Give me the ticket and I'll sign it" THEN the officer bump/shoves her. That's what happened. Noticeably absent are the words "You're under arrest".
11 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by cashthetrashTexas Transportation Law:
Show that to me in a Texas law book. Not an Internet claim. The source has not been verified.
Sec.A543.005.AAPROMISE TO APPEAR; RELEASE.A To secure
release, the person arrested must make a written promise to appear
in court by signing the written notice prepared by the arresting
officer. The signature may be obtained on a duplicate form or on an
electronic device capable of creating a copy of the signed notice.
The arresting officer shall retain the paper or electronic original
of the notice and deliver the copy of the notice to the person
arrested. The officer shall then promptly release the person from
custody.
Note that there is no specific time limit or words to be used; once the woman offered to sign the notice, the officer should have allowed her to do so.
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by cashthetrashI live in the US. There have been 12 US Supreme Court rulings which state that the Police are Not required to protect any individual. They serve and protect the Gov't and it's LAWS. In other words....Dial 911 and Die !
I don't know how it is in your country but in the United States the government is 'we the People', meaning all of us. Protecting his employer is not the duty of the police against the people, That is not what the police is about. Police arrest Police all the time as they should. Not as much as they should, but they can and will. You are wrong.
This is a silly debate. The officer over reacted.
GRANNY.
11 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by smw6869The law also says that police officers cannot use excessive/unnecessary force to effectuate an arrest. How many Supreme Court rulings would you like saying that?
I live in the US. There have been 12 US Supreme Court rulings which state that the Police are Not required to protect any individual. They serve and protect the Gov't and it's LAWS. In other words....Dial 911 and Die !
GRANNY.
EDIT: Here's the most famous one: http://supreme.justia.com/us/471/1/case.html
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderAre you saying that the officer should have twisted her arms behind her back and maybe injured granny? Don't forget, she is elderly. Can you imagine the law suit? The jolt did her no permanent harm. Maybe he should have peppered her first.
smw689: Now, he may have broken granny's arm trying to arrest her, or he could give her a 5 second jolt to bring her to her senses.
Do you really believe that? If so, you're badly mistaken.
GRANNY.
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderIs using a Taser excessive force? If so, why is it legal?
The law also says that police officers cannot use excessive/unnecessary force to effectuate an arrest. How many Supreme Court rulings would you like saying that?
EDIT: Here's the most famous one: http://supreme.justia.com/us/471/1/case.html
GRANNY.
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by smw6869At her age the jolt could have given her a heart attack, luckily she has a strong heart, or she could be dead.
Are you saying that the officer should have twisted her arms behind her back and maybe injured granny? Don't forget, she is elderly. Can you imagine the law suit? The jolt did her no permanent harm. Maybe he should have peppered her first.
GRANNY.
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderYes, that was my understanding and I am sure that falls in line with the courts and Texas congress wants. Your argument is sound.
Texas Transportation Law:
Sec.A543.005.AAPROMISE TO APPEAR; RELEASE.A [b]To secure
release, the person arrested must make a written promise to appear
in court by signing the written notice prepared by the arresting
officer. The signature may be obtained on a duplicate form or on an
electronic device capable of creating a copy of the ...[text shortened]... e used; once the woman offered to sign the notice, the officer should have allowed her to do so.[/b]
I'm not sure that is the actual law we are looking for. (maybe so) I think there could be more as well. Signing a citation is not a release of prior arrest.
Am I reading this wrong #1? Because that is what it sounds like it is implying.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19036
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by cashthetrashwhy do i find myself agreeing with no1twit and rusty here?
Yes, that was my understanding and I am sure that falls in line with the courts and Texas congress wants. Your argument is sound.
I'm not sure that is the actual law we are looking for. (maybe so) I think there could be more as well. Signing a citation is not a release of prior arrest.
Am I reading this wrong #1? Because that is what it sounds like it is implying.
this goes against all rhp logic.
11 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauder"once the woman offered to sign the notice, the officer should have allowed her to do so."
Texas Transportation Law:
Sec.A543.005.AAPROMISE TO APPEAR; RELEASE.A [b]To secure
release, the person arrested must make a written promise to appear
in court by signing the written notice prepared by the arresting
officer. The signature may be obtained on a duplicate form or on an
electronic device capable of creating a copy of the ...[text shortened]... e used; once the woman offered to sign the notice, the officer should have allowed her to do so.[/b]
Granny wasn't tasered because she wouldn't sign the ticket. The situation had gone beyond that. She refused to follow the officers order to stay where he told her to stay so he could arrest her. This is about her not following Legal police orders. It's against the law to be belligerent towards a police officer. Maybe she should have been able to kick him in the knee also. I'd like to be able to.
GRANNY.