5 ms·

You can't be arrested for resisting arrest alone. You can be charged with resisting arrest and nothing else. This is an important distinction. Imagine someone

by wl 13y ago

You can't be arrested for resisting arrest alone. You can be charged with resisting arrest and nothing else. This is an important distinction. Imagine someone is suspected of murder. There is probable cause that this person has committed a crime so a judge issues an arrest warrant. A police officer finds this murder suspect and arrests him. The suspect resists but is ultimately taken into custody. Under interrogation, the suspect gives an alibi that ultimately checks out. This person isn't charged with murder because it's apparent he didn't commit the murder. However, the arrest was legal and resisting it was a crime. So the suspect is charged with resisting arrest with no other charges.

mindcrime 13y ago
It's all a matter of perspective. If you come to arrest me for a crime I know I didn't commit, then no, the arrest is not "legal" per my definition of "legal". The government might, indeed, be following it's own rules (and getting to that on a consistent basis would be a slight improvement over where we are now) but my rights have still been violated.
- tg3 13y ago
  There is only one definition of "legal": allowable under the law. The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights (if you live in the US). Part of the deal is that sometimes you can be arrested for crimes you didn't commit. But that's why we make sure that people who are arrested are guaranteed a speedy trial from a jury of their peers, etc.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    > The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights (if you live in the US). It seems fairly uncontroversial that the constitution and laws are merely imperfect encodings of your rights. The encoding is necessary, since our legal system runs on it, but due to its imperfect nature it cannot be considered the master copy. Pre-1960s, many of our laws did not reflect what we expect of them and as a consequence of this the rights of countless were 'legally' trampled. Lectures about the law are rarely of comfort to those that are a victim of it.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    There is only one definition of "legal": allowable under the law. But there is more than one definition of "the law". The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights Not really. The constitution is more properly thought of as a list of the restrictions on what the government can and can't do. My rights exist quite outside of that framework. Whether I can defend them or not is a separate issue, of course. Part of the deal is that sometimes you can be arrested for crimes you didn't commit. But that's why we make sure that people who are arrested are guaranteed a speedy trial from a jury of their peers, etc. Sounds good on paper. Probably works as intended most of the time. May be about as good a compromise as we can come up with. But by no means is this system totally just, especially if you're someone who is convicted of a crime you didn't commit, or a "crime" that is nothing of the sort (smoking marijuana, homosexual sex, etc.)
- darkarmani 13y ago
  > It's all a matter of perspective. If you come to arrest me for a crime I know I didn't commit, then no, the arrest is not "legal" per my definition of "legal". How does that work? The police can only arrest people after they are convicted? They have to arrest them first and then charge them.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    How does that work? The police can only arrest people after they are convicted? They have to arrest them first and then charge them. Yeah, that's the rub, innit? I don't see any way to avoid a certain measure of injustice in this system. But it does argue that if the police arrest somebody, they better be pretty damn sure they are actually guilty of a crime. IOW, if we're going to accept this system of police, laws, arrests, courts, juries, etc., I think the bar for arresting someone needs to be pretty high. But, I adhere to the basic premise that it's better for a guilty man to go free, than for an innocent man to be imprisoned.
- rosser 13y ago
  For which you have separate remedy. It's an unpleasant irony, but resisting an unlawful arrest is, itself, not lawful.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    For which you have separate remedy. None of which will get me my time back. It's an unpleasant irony, but resisting an unlawful arrest is, itself, not lawful. Speaking only within the context of what passes for "the law" today (that is, the byzantine maze of statutes, regulations, codes, etc. pushed out by the US federal government, states, counties, cities, etc)... it may actually be, at least in some very specific cases. See: http://www.apbweb.com/cops-speak-out/1405-resisting-arrest-not-a-crime.html http://www.apbweb.com/cops-speak-out/1405-resisting-arrest-n... for example. Or: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/resisting-an-unlawful-arrest.html http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/resisting-an-u... And that is all, of course, totally side-stepping the bigger issues of whether or not our entire system of "law" as we know it today is really valid.
    - rosser 13y ago
      Sure, and it may also be legal to use deadly force to defend yourself when the cops execute a warrant against the wrong address, which happens to be yours. People have been acquitted of murder charges for killing police officers executing their lawful duties in exactly those circumstances. That won't make you any less dead should they respond in kind.
grecy 13y ago
> You can't be arrested for resisting arrest alone. There have been plenty of examples cropping up on YouTube recently showing videos of people being arrested for resisting arrest for their arrest and nothing more. Of course, they don't get charged. But they do get arrested.

by wl 13y ago

mindcrime 13y ago

It's all a matter of perspective. If you come to arrest me for a crime I know I didn't commit, then no, the arrest is not "legal" per my definition of "legal". The government might, indeed, be following it's own rules (and getting to that on a consistent basis would be a slight improvement over where we are now) but my rights have still been violated.

tg3 13y ago
There is only one definition of "legal": allowable under the law. The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights (if you live in the US). Part of the deal is that sometimes you can be arrested for crimes you didn't commit. But that's why we make sure that people who are arrested are guaranteed a speedy trial from a jury of their peers, etc.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  > The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights (if you live in the US). It seems fairly uncontroversial that the constitution and laws are merely imperfect encodings of your rights. The encoding is necessary, since our legal system runs on it, but due to its imperfect nature it cannot be considered the master copy. Pre-1960s, many of our laws did not reflect what we expect of them and as a consequence of this the rights of countless were 'legally' trampled. Lectures about the law are rarely of comfort to those that are a victim of it.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  There is only one definition of "legal": allowable under the law. But there is more than one definition of "the law". The constitution and the laws of your state outline your rights Not really. The constitution is more properly thought of as a list of the restrictions on what the government can and can't do. My rights exist quite outside of that framework. Whether I can defend them or not is a separate issue, of course. Part of the deal is that sometimes you can be arrested for crimes you didn't commit. But that's why we make sure that people who are arrested are guaranteed a speedy trial from a jury of their peers, etc. Sounds good on paper. Probably works as intended most of the time. May be about as good a compromise as we can come up with. But by no means is this system totally just, especially if you're someone who is convicted of a crime you didn't commit, or a "crime" that is nothing of the sort (smoking marijuana, homosexual sex, etc.)
darkarmani 13y ago
> It's all a matter of perspective. If you come to arrest me for a crime I know I didn't commit, then no, the arrest is not "legal" per my definition of "legal". How does that work? The police can only arrest people after they are convicted? They have to arrest them first and then charge them.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  How does that work? The police can only arrest people after they are convicted? They have to arrest them first and then charge them. Yeah, that's the rub, innit? I don't see any way to avoid a certain measure of injustice in this system. But it does argue that if the police arrest somebody, they better be pretty damn sure they are actually guilty of a crime. IOW, if we're going to accept this system of police, laws, arrests, courts, juries, etc., I think the bar for arresting someone needs to be pretty high. But, I adhere to the basic premise that it's better for a guilty man to go free, than for an innocent man to be imprisoned.
rosser 13y ago
For which you have separate remedy. It's an unpleasant irony, but resisting an unlawful arrest is, itself, not lawful.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  For which you have separate remedy. None of which will get me my time back. It's an unpleasant irony, but resisting an unlawful arrest is, itself, not lawful. Speaking only within the context of what passes for "the law" today (that is, the byzantine maze of statutes, regulations, codes, etc. pushed out by the US federal government, states, counties, cities, etc)... it may actually be, at least in some very specific cases. See: http://www.apbweb.com/cops-speak-out/1405-resisting-arrest-not-a-crime.html http://www.apbweb.com/cops-speak-out/1405-resisting-arrest-n... for example. Or: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/resisting-an-unlawful-arrest.html http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/resisting-an-u... And that is all, of course, totally side-stepping the bigger issues of whether or not our entire system of "law" as we know it today is really valid.
  - rosser 13y ago
    Sure, and it may also be legal to use deadly force to defend yourself when the cops execute a warrant against the wrong address, which happens to be yours. People have been acquitted of murder charges for killing police officers executing their lawful duties in exactly those circumstances. That won't make you any less dead should they respond in kind.

grecy 13y ago

> You can't be arrested for resisting arrest alone. There have been plenty of examples cropping up on YouTube recently showing videos of people being arrested for resisting arrest for their arrest and nothing more. Of course, they don't get charged. But they do get arrested.