Replies

The "new" law is a repeat. The same law had been passed before the Indiana supreme Court ruled that there was no right to resist unlawful force by a police officer, period. The Indiana Supreme Court held that (there is no right to use force against unlawful force) and did not even mention the law that was on the books. It was a big enough deal that the Indiana Supreme Court reheard the same case, a second time, and repeated its ruling over a single dissent.

Wow, that's interesting; where'd you find it out?

The Indiana legislature picked up the challenge, and passed the law again.

I think the should also impeach the judges... and request the Feds charge them with Conspiracy Against Rights.
The wonton disregard of the law, and the State Constitution, by the IN supreme court is inexcusable.

There are several quite long write ups on the history of this particular bill. it did end up going through the legislature more than once even after that offending decision.

What's going on is Indiana has judicial preview ~ the laws get looked at by the supreme court right after passage to test them for constitutional adherence.

This Barnes guy got another trial as well, and that's sometimes looked at as a redo on the first trial ~ and that gets pretty complex when it comes to what happened on appeal to an intermediate court.

Nobody seems to want to come to grips with the fact this poor cop was there to defend a woman at her request. Next time we have somebody in here start kvetching about the cops not coming around to deal with crime I suggest we highjack his thread and revisit this Indiana situation.