Quote:
Originally posted by - Jesus Christ -
And if you buy the bullshit scalia is selling in that article I have some swamp land you may be interested in.
Such as this...
"Scalia also noted that a ruling to the contrary would deter officers from providing reasons for their arrest, as they did in Alford's case,"
Wich is complete and utter bullshit.
A ruling to the contrary would have detered them from filing charges that will eventually fall though so they can detain you long enough to set up new charges.
|
It would not necessarily have deterred the arrest...as they could have just as easily arrested him for "impersonating an officer" (this was there secondary reason for the arrest) and under State Law the arresting officers are not required to tell him what he is being arrested for.