Posted on 05/20/2012 1:35:59 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
So what is wrong with requiring someone who has been cited for an infraction to promise to appear in court before releasing them on their own recognizance?
Also as an aside, legislators are not "faceless". The people who elect them can readily learn who they are and how they vote, if they so choose.
But you’re ugly.
Its time to remove the Taser from the police arsenal, and give them training in application of common sense.
Since they had full identification of their victim, there was no reason to “arrest” her. All they had to do was photograph her for proof of identity and mail the citation to her home.
Anything beyond the above is insane.
What you say here is totally stupid. Signatures are not mere "formalities" (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean). Signatures are signatures. They are commonly used in society to create legal obligations. Post less dumb please.
They need to take the tasers away from all cops. Period.
So how would you prefer that officers force someone from their car if not with a taser? Please answer intelligently.
As least they did not shoot her. At one time, the officer explained that signing a citation was not an admission of guilt, but,was just saying that they would appear in court. I suppose like everything else, that is gone with the wind. One now only must obey the master’s command without questioning.
For reasons that are very simple and obvious and are well understood by millions and millions of Americans.
The real question for you is, why can't you figure out why the signature is required?
Thank you for posting reasonably on a FR anti-cop derangement thread.
You have served civilization and promoted liberty here today.
Thanks again.
This "fact" is less than crystal clear and obvious from the linked article.
The parents sued for $40 million each and the case was settled. the size of the settlement was not stated and was probably much less than even $40 million for one parent.
nor can I. Could it be that the “pigs”[your term] began hating the citizens first?
Forcing someone to comply with a lawful order (e.g. in this case the order that the detainee must exit her vehicle) is not meting out punishment. It is enforcing a lawful order.
So as soon as a female becomes pregnant the laws no longer apply to her?
She can drive however she wants and if the cops stop her she can just tell them to shove off?
You weren’t even there and you’ve got the whole step-by-step.
Pretty slick.
Everyone who posts anything other than deranged cop-hating garbage on a FR anti-cop derangement thread is either a cop or fetishises cops.
That is a given.
“The city’s insurance settled for $40 million for the girl.
This “fact” is less than crystal clear and obvious from the linked article.
The parents sued for $40 million each and the case was settled. the size of the settlement was not stated and was probably much less than even $40 million for one parent.”
No argument. Did you have anything to say about the substance of my post, namely LE seems to be far too trigger happy these days?
Kelly Thomas beat to death in Fullerton, this girl in Huntington Beach shot to death, an off duty marine a few weeks ago shot to death in San Clemente?
My general point is maybe the citizen-taxpayers would expect the officers to be better trained, and use better weapon options.
I think the residents of Fullerton are absolutely NOT in favor of their PD beating mentally ill people to death.
The frequency and severity of these incidents appears to be spiking up rapidly, and that concerns me, as a long time resident of this area (ie. have lived in Fullerton, San Clemente and Huntington Beach).
Signing the citation is a promise to appear. Then if the person cited fails to appear, the court can issue an arrest warrant for failure to appear.
These procedures are logical and straightforward and standard across jurisdictions. Do you really think you’ve discovered some shortcut here that all of the pros have overlooked?
It’s called excessive force. She wasn’t a threat to anyone.
It has been years since I was issued a citation but the officer explained it at the time. Are you claiming that the procedure has changed everywhere? How do you know that in this instance the officer did not explain to the woman that her signature was just a promise to appear, not an admission of guilt?
My understanding is that the officers lawfully ordered the woman to get out of her car and she refused. Some amount of force was thus justified. They used the taser. Why exactly was this excessive? Isn't the whole point of the taser that it is a less-dangerous means of forcing uncooperative arrestees to comply with lawful orders than the alternatives?
Why not just mail the traffic ticket to her home address? They already had her driver’s liscence and had written down her name and address.
The answer to your question is common knowledge and has been provided several times on this thread as well as in the linked article.
Here it is again:
Signing the citation is a promise to appear. Then if the person cited breaks their promise and fails to appear, the court can issue an arrest warrant for failure to appear, which a separate and more serious charge.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.