And no blood test?
Within 6 hours of the actual incident. The incident happened at 12:30, not 4 something when the arrest happened. They had to take him to the hospital first.
They still never got to see his age was wrong. If he was protesting the zip code not being accepted, then why not point out that he was underage if he wasn't trying to use the ID to get into someplace he knew wouldn't let him in underage? This is why there are problems with the explanations given. If you are being carded, using your real ID that you know shows you are underage, wouldn't you wonder why the guy was checking IDs to begin with and not accepting yours based on your zip code rather than your actual age?
But so long as no one ever mentioned that the ID said he was underage, there is no reason for the LEO to not suspect that the ID said he was of drinking age but fake.
How do we know that wasn't taken and submitted as evidence and simply not released or posted with the other information? We don't know that it wasn't taken and showed he had a BAC.
Yeah, OK, but that night the ABC agents would have "reasonable suspicion" to detain and question half the people on the street that night for breaking some law - either publicly intoxicated or underage drinking. They'd need a big f'ing jail to hold all the actual criminals (drunks, underage drinkers) out that night and on lots of party nights at UVA - thousands of criminals. If that's the kind of policing you want, we can agree to disagree.
because the ABC police would have let that leak or reported that ASAP to save the cops asses, plus if it was taken, and it showed a BAC it would have to be listed.
Often you can get into places underage, they but a wrist band on those of age.
Good point. I hoped they kept this belligerent drunk shackled and under guard at the ED, to keep the medical staff safe.....
Not necessarily. It is quite possible that many of the underage students simply decided to stay home/on campus and drink there or decided to go somewhere that they knew they could get in. Or perhaps they actually did have a fake ID that said they were of age and they knew the information on the card. Smart people trying to use a fake ID would know the information on the card. And they don't have to take all the kids in that are caught drinking underage. They could simply issue a citation to the kid or the business that they got the alcohol from.
They don't have to at all. And it could easily be claimed they are trying to persuade the public to view the kid as a thug or something. Look what happened when such a thing was done in Ferguson. Officers/departments are "damned if they do, damned if they don't" in these types of situations.
But not in this place. And they were still checking IDs, but the kid couldn't give his correct zip. This is an indication of a fake ID, hence why the owner was using it. That would also then give the officer a reasonable suspicion that the ID was fake.
Let me ask you honestly, do you think it possible the ABC cops in this case acted outside the law?
How would the kid know? how does that turn into reasonable suspicion? Do the ABC police say why they stopped him in the first place?
It doesn't matter if the kid knew that they had reasonable suspicion, which is why you cooperate with the cops, any cops, to the highest extent reasonable because if they have a reasonable suspicion of something, it might be wrong, but they get the benefit of the doubt. Fight it in court, not with the cops on the street.
Yes, if they tackled him without provocation or refusal to cooperate from him. But that doesn't mean I'm going to be like so many others and automatically assume that the ABC cops are wrong here and that this kid wasn't drinking or refusing to cooperate with the police. Regardless, they did have reasonable suspicion to at least stop the kid to verify his ID was not fake.
We don't know he "fought" the throngs of witnesses seem to indicate that didn't happen./
What was the reasonable suspicion? Overhearing part of a conversation that had a rational explaination is not reasonable suspicion.
lets say the kid was drinking, what justice was served by the selective enforcement? Who was harmed? who was the victim?
We know he resisted (it is actually obvious from the video that he put up some resistance in them cuffing him at the least once he was on the ground).
The witnesses are mainly his friends and others students so far who generally are not always reliable in accurately determining "resistance". Refusing to cooperate with police in an investigation, which starts with that "reasonable suspicion", is "fighting". Resisting arrest is "fighting".
Overhearing a conversation that a bouncer/ID checker refused to accept a driver's license as evidence of age is reasonable suspicion that the ID might be fake.
No judge would disagree with that. Asking to see that ID, verify it is in fact real, not fake, is a perfectly acceptable response to that legitimate reasonable suspicion.
Yes, if they tackled him without provocation or refusal to cooperate from him. But that doesn't mean I'm going to be like so many others and automatically assume that the ABC cops are wrong here and that this kid wasn't drinking or refusing to cooperate with the police. Regardless, they did have reasonable suspicion to at least stop the kid to verify his ID was not fake.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?