First off, I don't need to "Grok this". I get how it works, my dad was a cop for years. That doesn't preclude me from pointing out the obvious disparity in how these things work. Personally, whenever I have run "Afoul" of the cops I have been polite and friendly, you just get more mileage that way.
So, if you think it's a bad arrest, then get a lawyer. Cuz "he was legally resisting false arrest" is probably not going to be much consolation to the widow. The ONLY time it makes any sense at all to resist is if you believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, you're gonna end up dead because of the "False Arrest."
To combat the potential of abuse of authority is specifically why we have SO MANY systems in place such as Internal Investigations, External Review Boards, Watchdog groups, pre-training, post-training, continuing training, Mentoring programs, etc. Notice that "private citizen resisting arrest" isn't in that list. This is primarily because it doesn't work very well.
This becomes a grey area, as far as I am concerned. Yes, this is HOW it works...again, I understand that completely, but you should observe this from another perspective. Let me give you an example. (this may be long, pardon me)
Illinois has no carry provisions. We cannot carry a weapon, Period. HOWEVER... we can TRANSPORT a weapon in a case. So someone came up with the idea that you can transport your gun in a fanny pack, and that is considered "in a case" and is therefore legal. However, knowing Law enforcement would not see it this way, he worked with a laywer and drew up a letter designed to be carried when doing the "fanny packing" (also known here as the "six seconds to saftey" rule) that explained the law in detail, why the transportation was legal, etc...
Why the letter? Because in Illinois, L.E. are not responsible for "False Arrest" if they believe they are acting in accordance with the law.
So, lets say you are legally fanny packing, and get stopped for "matching the description of a suspect we are looking for" (not fictional, happed to me 3 times since I moved here, white guy in a predominatly hispanic neighborhood known as a place suburban white kids come to buy drugs... they stop me to find out why I'm here) and they pull you and find the gun being legally transported... but beliveing you are carrying Illegally, they haul you in. You get put into the system, detained, somtimes as long as 48 hours, you have the potential to lose your job, it goes in the paper and everyone can see that you are a "criminal" even if you are not... and
your only recourse is to suck it up and pay for an overpriced lawyer (that you might not be able to afford if the cop, unknowing of the law hauls you in and you lose your job) and hope that you draw a sympathetic Judge who doesnt toss your false arrest case because the cop believes he was acting in accordance with the law.
NOW... I'm no way citing that example of why we should be allowed to resist. It's stupid to do so, just like its stupid to get upset and argue with a cop. However, this does highlight an example of how the ignorance of the officers attempting to enforce the laws can have a profound effect on the innocent, (and Im not calling cops ignorant, don't assume that) well before court even comes up, and that I feel that needs to be recognized, and addressed in some way... Either a way to redress a grievance like that with a more knowlageable supervisor AT THE SCENE, or a possibly a penalty of some sort if the officer is wrong,
not so that we can punish cops, but rather to make them take the time to listen to the person/think thru what they are doing/know they are correct before subjecting someone to the above, or maybe an automatic rembursement by the courts for any *Real* financial hardship caused by the wrongful arrest (such as a re-embursement of legal fees)
I'll cite a personal example that is not quite as drastic as the above, but in all fairness, had the officer either a) been aware, or b) if he
was aware had cared more about doing the right thing than writing the ticket, would have saved me time and money that I didn't have to spare...
I took my roommates car to work one day, as mine was not running, and was stopped. The reason? The officer ran the plates, saw my roomate had a suspended licence, and assumed I was him. That's a fair stop, IMO, so I was polite and friendly when I explained the situation. I provided my Licence and proof of insurance, and the officer promptly told me he wanted the insurance for the vehicle I was driving. I explained (still politley) that the insurance I gave him was mine, and it covered me regardless of what vehilce I was driving to which he responded "No, it doesnt work that way." He cited me for no insurance, and I had to go to court. I had to use a vacation day from work to go to court, and took my copy of my policy and my ticket, pled not guilty, and was assigned a new court date. I was also informed that it was in my best interest to come back with a lawyer, if I didnt want to lose my licence. SO... I pay 750.00 out of my own pocket for the lawyer (which you have to understand was almost an entire paycheck for me at the time) and another Vacation day from work... to go in, have my lawyer present the copy of my policy and a letter from my carrier stating I was covered in that vehicle at the time, and be told, go home, have a nice day!
So, 80 hours of my life *GONE*, a hit on my Credit rating because I couldnt make my Mortgage payment on time plus the loss of 2 vacation days because 1 officer either didn't know or wouldnt listen... and I had no recourse. Should I just have had thicker skin about that? *shrug* I recognize that it's "just how it is" but wonder aloud if there shouldn't be a better way?
