Mar. 5th, 2012

mcity: (Default)
Alexis: And they were obstructing the police, but it was still a lawful protest.
Me: Nice of you to to admit they were breaking the law.
Alexis: N-no I didn't! They were peaceful, unarmed protestors! I didn't mean "obstruction" in the legal sense!
Me: You already said that they went there deliberately to protest. You said they were obstructing the police. The definition of obstruction in that state is willing and knowing obstruction of the police's duties. Unless you want to argue they were accidentally blocking the police's transport of prisoners.
Alexis: The police didn't give a lawful order!
Me: Doesn't matter whether the cops ordered them or not. The protestors specifically stated their intent to obstruct the officers unless their demands were met, and took actions, by your own admission, to keep the cops from doing their job. That is probable cause for an arrest.
Alexis: But it was police brutality!
Me: No, they used standard force for an arrest with a resisting perpetrator.
Alexis: But they were innocent, unarmed, legal protestors!
Me: If they broke the law, their protest was by definition, illegal. Not to mention threatening the cops, which is legally a riot.

October 2012

  12 3456
21 2223242526 27

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 21st, 2017 03:45 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios