If you are riding in the car with an individual and the police pull you over is it okay for the police to arrest the passenger in the car even if he or she says that the contraband that he finds is not his? Another hypothetical question is this, Assume that police discover a crime that has been committed by one person, they go to seven people with questions about the crime, they all deny culpability, and the police already know that one of the guys is guilty. Can all six of these guys be arrested for this one crime even though police don’t really know which person is guilty? There are simple and easy answers to all of these questions : it depends if the police have “probable cause” to think that a person should be arrested and is guilty of a particular crime. That was the complicated part in the Pringle case that was brought out by the Supreme Court.
Our team found that we did not agree with those professionals who chose to commit crimes. We felt that those in our examples had the means that they needed and were being greedy. These were not values that our team found to be important. Ethics will always be a greatly debated subject because there are so many grey areas and differing opinions on what values support those ethics. It is key to an organization to have a
Police Powers in the Public Services P1 – describe the difference between arrest with and without a warrant M1 – explain the requirements of lawful arrest and detention D1 – evaluate the powers of arrest, detention and search There is a legal right that allows UK citizens to arrest another person. This law is given under Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), 1984. In order to carry out a citizen’s arrest, there are certain rules that say when you can and cannot make an arrest. If you have suspicions that someone has committed a crime, these suspicions are not enough, no matter how strong they are. You could find yourself getting into trouble with the police if you carry out an arrest that is incorrect.
The Parties • HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - P. Zambonini for the Crown • DEFENDANT - R. Rosonick for Marvin Blackwood Procedural History • Arrest • Bail Hearing • Set Court Date • Plea Court The Facts The defendant (hereinto Mr. Blackwood) was a passenger in a motor vehicle that was stopped by the police because of a Highway Traffic Act violation. The police officer (hereinto, Officer Haynes), recognized Mr. Blackwood due to past experiences with him and, through bulletins at the police station, a known offender who could be armed or dangerous. In the course of questioning, Officer Haynes could not get a straight answer out of Mr. Blackwood. In turn, the officer requested Mr. Blackwood
Police Encounters CJ227: Criminal Procedure Prof: Bernard Zapor 4/29/12 George Johnson Did Officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle? Yes Officer Smith had reasonable suspicion to suspect that the vehicle in front of her was the one involved in the killing of a fellow officer. One other reason is that Officer Smith believed that the older model gold Pontiac had a broken tail light that was covered with red tape. Officer Smith initial reason would be upheld by In People v. Remiro, 89 C.A. 3rd 809 (1979) if reasonable suspicion could be articulated in a court of law.
Code, Art. 27, ß594B (1996) (repealed 2001). A warrantless arrest of an individual in a public place for a felony, or a misdemeanor committed in the officerís presence, is consistent with the Fourth Amendment if the arrest is supported by probable cause. United States v. Watson, 423 U. S. 411, 424 (1976); see Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U. S. 318, 354 (2001) stating that if an officer has probable cause to believe that an individual has committed even a very minor criminal offense in his presence, he may, without violating the Fourth Amendment, arrest the
If police want to gain the respect of their community, they must respect all of the different cultures in the neighborhoods they are working in. If officers refuse to respect these people, this can end up leading to distrust in any police force, the loss of credibility, and the inability to be able to work together effectively. In order to learn from past mistakes in community policing, they must examine their past mistakes and correct
They may, of course, be permitted to engage in certain authorized conduct that would be a crime if committed by regular citizens (such as the use of deadly force in appropriate circumstances). ● Civil lawsuits against government officials—the police, mainly—can be filed when neither the exclusionary rule nor other criminal remedies apply. Section 1983 litigation requires the plaintiff to show that a constitutional rights violation was committed by an official acting under color of state law. Section 1983 lawsuits can be filed against individual police officers, supervisors,
1. Stop and Frisk on the Streets: Police officers have the authority to make a stop and searches of individuals in the streets. In the Terry v. Ohio (1968) the Court upheld the stop and frisk procedure when a police officer believed the person might be suspicious. The Court requires specific facts to exist in each situation in order for a stop and frisk to be permissible. A police officer is entitled for the protection of themselves and others in area to conduct a careful limited search of outer clothing.
A police officer is a person who puts their life in danger everyday as a duty to the citizen of their neighborhood. They should be respected, honored, and commended for their efforts in ensuring our security. Now, what actions should we as citizens take, if that very same person is the one invading and conflicting our safety? Police brutality has been a non going issue for many years, and as the very people they are sought out to shelter, it is time we make sure the job gets done. For a long time, silence has been the only option and today my essay today is going to be the voice for every victim.