So, during a criminal investigation, an arrest occurs whereby the police has the legal and factual grounds to deprive someone’s liberty. This happens to question suspects for possible involvement in a criminal offence or if they hold any knowledge. In Spicer v Halt (1977), Lord Dilhorne stated, ‘Whether or not a person has been arrested depends not upon the legality of the arrest, but on whether he has been deprived of his liberty to go where he pleases’. This suggests, a person held against their will is arrested and in concluding whether the arrest is lawful or not has to satisfy the conditions of this. This leads to a lawful arrest is that of which is under a warrant, common law arrest and arrest under legislation.
The self-defense justifications can be used when a person commits a crime such as assault or murder when the defendant believed they were about to be or already been physically harmed. There are stipulations to this defense, such as the defendant cannot use more force than what is reasonable. Another fact is that the danger the defendant felt has to be Affirmative defenses 3 immediate. What this means is that the defendant cannot claim that they committed the crime because they felt they would be in danger in the future. The laws are different in every state as for some states will allow you can use self-defense if the danger is not immediate.
Officers abuse the power of police discretion which can lead to a greater threat in police corrupt. Another is that police officers also only concentrate on going after people of certain ethnicity’s or being bias about a certain crime. A final argument is that there is no uniformed manual to ensure that consistency across the board is achieved. Some people would say that there are plus sides of police discretion. One is that it allows officers the flexibility to handle each situation in a manner that best fits its individual needs.
It means that we have the right for privacy and the authorities have no right to search an individual unless there is probable cause. Probable cause falls under the fourth amendment which is that the police officer must have a reasonable amount of suspicion to make an arrest, get a search warrant, and seize property. In addition, if the police officers believe that there is probable cause, he or she may arrest and search an individual without a warrant. Police officers may also have a reasonable suspicion for an individual who has or will commit a crime. It is defined as more as a guess but it is less than probable cause.
Police do not necessarily need to suspect criminal activity. The second level of intrusion is known as the common-law right to inquire and is permissible only when the officer has a founded suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. This is a larger intrusion since the officer can interfere with a citizen in an effort to gain explanatory information. However, at this level the intrusion must fall short of a forcible search. The third level of intrusion is sanctioned when an officer has a reasonable suspicion that a particular person has committed, or is about to commit an offense or misdemeanor.
Discretion is the power given to officers to be able to choose to arrest someone based on their circumstances and the offender 's intentions. In other words, law enforcers are able to use their own personal judgement to judge incidents, Without discretion officers would have to arrest all offenders of the law, however occasionally these offenders had no true intention of infringing the law and it was an honest mistake. With discretion officers are able to turn the other cheek at the infringement of the law, if they feel morally obligated to. There are cases where the offender and victim are not so clear cut, cases such as verbal abuse are hard to determine who the victim. In this case, officers are required to use their own judgement to determine who instigated the fight (Hirbyand n.d.).
I believe that law enforcement officers should have the discretion to ask a person suspected of committing a crime to identify them self. Without police discretion in asking suspects of to identify the amount of people being brought into custody on unrelated warrants would definitely decrease because officers would not be able to check if they have warrants without identifying them. Also, by identifying someone suspected of a crime, law enforcement officers can check the suspect’s history to see if they any previous charges related to the crime that the person is suspected of committing.
The author has done research about how police base their initiation towards the procedure of stop-and-frisk. Researchers have found that stop-and-frisk is a crime prevention strategy that gives a police officer the permission to stop a person based on “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity and frisk based on “reasonable suspicion” that the person is armed and dangerous. This controversy is mainly because of racial profiling. “Reasonable suspicion” was described by the court as “common sense” (Avdija, A., 2013). Although, the
But at some point doesn’t a line have to be drawn? Yes, in some manner in some situations I believe that you must step off the position of power and leadership, and get your hands dirty. Klockars argues that all persons encountered by police officers in situation of enforcement, such as a traffic stop, must be considered guilty. The officer must take that stand in order to protect themselves. If nothing is found the person is merely innocent this time.
The Supreme Court says there are two factors that are involved to use deadly force, dangerousness and necessity (Hall, 2004). An example of dangerousness is a suspect threatening an officer with a weapon. Necessity on the other hand is hard to prove and there has been legal issues surrounding the necessity of deadly force. Legal Issues The first legal issue is that deadly force was not necessary because there was a less lethal way of handling the situation meaning an officer would have to consider other options before he chooses to use deadly force. The second legal issue is that the officer’s actions made it necessary to use deadly force meaning the officer would have to know what the suspect is going to do and prevent the suspect from making the officer use deadly force.