Timeline for Can police charge someone with a misdemeanor in the total absence of evidence?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 4, 2021 at 18:18 | answer | added | ohwilleke | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 3, 2021 at 18:04 | answer | added | EX-CONstitutional | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 18, 2021 at 14:24 | comment | added | phoog | "the logical conclusion is that the police NEVER err": That's not the logical conclusion at all. The point that @Nij is making, or at least one point, is that the police must have had some evidence, not that they necessarily had correct evidence. Police make mistakes all the time, just as everyone does. But if the police arrest someone based on incorrect evidence, or on correct evidence interpreted incorrectly, it is not the same as arresting someone with no evidence. It might be an illegal arrest, but it might not be. | |
| Jan 18, 2021 at 0:57 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 25, 2021 at 3:07 | |||||
| Nov 2, 2019 at 22:04 | comment | added | abdul | It does have relevance to the question though. I mean, how many times in the US does a cop arrest a black dude just because they dislike him? They even kill homeless people just for an excess of word with one another so...that's the thing. I'm glad I don't live in the US, because with my attitude I'd be killed honestly. | |
| Nov 1, 2019 at 19:52 | comment | added | user4657 | Yes, they can, and they have. What relevance does that have to this question? @abdul | |
| Nov 1, 2019 at 14:13 | comment | added | abdul | @Nij because potentially any white cop can do this to a black man for no reason, by making up a false suspicion and get away with it for any outcome, confirmed suspicion or wrong suspicion. | |
| Oct 15, 2019 at 0:13 | vote | accept | mbmast | ||
| Oct 10, 2019 at 17:41 | comment | added | Nate Eldredge | The fact that Susan reported a crime is itself evidence, as is the officer's impression of Bob's behavior. There is certainly a question as to whether it is sufficient for probable cause, but I don't think it's legally accurate to call this a "total absence" of evidence. | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 22:26 | comment | added | mbmast | @Nij See the update. Thanks. | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 22:26 | history | edited | mbmast | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3018 characters in body
|
| Oct 9, 2019 at 20:34 | answer | added | user6726 | timeline score: 6 | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 20:31 | comment | added | user4657 | You haven't described the fact pattern at all - just that there was an arrest and a charge. Then without any basis, you claim there is no evidence, and therefore question whether the charge is legitimate. I am telling you that either probable cause did not exist, else why the arrest, or there must be evidence of some kind, else why the charge. Leaving out the details that matter isn't accepted etiquette on any SE site, and including such details is crucial for Law SE. | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 19:56 | comment | added | mbmast | @Nij I'm trying to adhere to the generally accepted Stackexchange etiquette of just stating the fact pattern and not including a lengthy discussion of the events leading up to the arrest. If I take what you are implying in your comments, the logical conclusion is that the police NEVER err in charging someone with a crime in the absence of evidence. I'm fairly confident this assumption is false and that, from time to time, the police make mistakes. I suspect a mistake was made in this case. That is what I'm asking about. | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 19:50 | comment | added | user4657 | Well, there obviously is evidence, or the police wouldn't have known that anything happened or be able to connect the arrested person with those events, would they? | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 19:48 | comment | added | mbmast | @Nij I didn't want to include all the details of what lead up to the arrest, as it's lengthy and would only obfuscate the question I'm trying to ask. Suffice it to say, there is no evidence. | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 19:45 | comment | added | user4657 | They obviously had probable cause for an arrest, so why would you suppose that they have no evidence on which to base a charge? | |
| Oct 9, 2019 at 19:34 | history | asked | mbmast | CC BY-SA 4.0 |