TexasCHLforum.com

HankB wrote: . . . is resisting handcuffing a crime when one is NOT under arrest? Can it be argued that handcuffing an individual who is NOT under arrest and has committed no crime is excessive force? Is there any established case law on this?

There are hundreds of court decisions, SCOTUS and lower federal and state levels, about restraint and arrest. They are beyond my comprehension.

There is no bright-line rule.

I have two simple rules:

• Get crosswise the cops=go to jail, pay bond, go to court, pay a lawyer
• Be polite=go home under your own power with few or no consequences

I have a job to do, a family to support, and bills to pay.

Those who can afford to prove a point are more than welcome to do so. I support them, but I'm not going to be a test case.

- Jim

That was an interesting encounter. Did the talkative cop with the mirror sunglasses have a typical Manchester accent? He sounded to me like he was from Boston.

It may be possible to keep New Hampshire "live free or die." Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

- Jim

PC 9.31(b) The use of force against another is not justified:
(2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
(c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
(1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
(d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.

- Jim

I dunno. Southeastern New Hampshire is becoming a suburb of Boston. These more intrusive policing methods are tolerated when big-city crime becomes a problem.

That mentality is so ingrained in Chicago that I was not aware of it until I moved away.

- Jim

mgood wrote:Yeah, I was moving until they told me to come to them. I was on the oposite side of the street from them just walking along.
But they didn't know that. I don't believe they were aware of my presence until I was directly across the street from them. I saw them from a block or two away and considered changing directions to avoid them. But I was afraid that if they had seen me and saw me change directions that might look more suspicious.

It's a catch-22: Stick around and look suspicious. Leave and look suspicious.

Police work is not easy. I appreciate the dangerous work that they do., but I remain aware of my rights.

- Jim

mgood wrote:Turned out fine though except that I always wondered why they stopped me in the first place. I guess some long-haired guy walking down the street at one in the morning is suspicious.

I have had long hair for a decade now, and it does not get me undue attention. My age (50s) probably puts me outside certain profiles, and there are a lot of old hippies and harmless weirdos down here on the sandbar.

Police officers don't like it when someone shows interest in a stop. It is possible that someone scoping out an incident is an accomplice of the person that they are arresting.

You know the famous saying, "Move along, nothing to see here."

- Jim

Fangs, if someone does not appear to be drunk (intoxicated), the LEO has no probable cause to stop him on suspicion of public intoxication.

It is illegal to be in a public place or carry while intoxicated. It is not illegal to carry after one drink, unless it was a 55-gallon can of beer.

- Jim

agbullet2k1 wrote:... was there a curfew in effect?

In Austin, for adults?

I'm guessing anyone who has a CHL is an adult.

- Jim

IMHO, you are not over-reacting. No citizen of a free republic should be treated that way.

It's up to you how you want to pursue the incident.

- Jim

P.S.: I'm not trying to be humorous. I'm as serious as a stroke.

- Jim

KRM45 wrote:You would have gone to jail...

If not the morgue.

Sorry, flb_78, but resisting arrest usually gets you tazed or "lit up" these days. If that does not produce the level of compliance that the cops want, it will be clubs or pistols.

I am going to hope that you were trying to be humorous.

The place to fight the cops is in court, not on the street. If you win in court, you might take home a nice big check. If you lose on the street, you might take a nice cold dirt nap.

Do the math.

- Jim

What would you have done when the LEO said, "Put your hands behind your back"?

- Jim

Pay a lawyer how much to do what? There are no money damages in this case. As a civil right violation, it seems pretty minor. Still wrong, but minor.

I would be surprised if you could get anything more than an oral apology in this case.

- Jim

Reporting this incident is the moral high road.

However, there's an unfortunate history of harassment of people who file complaints. Several years ago, in Santa Fe, Texas, a man asked at the police station about how to file a complaint. He just asked; he didn't file one. He was charged with jaywalking after leaving the police station.

I suggest enlisting some ally before taking action. My first thought is the ACLU of Texas. They are based in Austin.

Ste 320
611 S Congress Ave, Austin, TX 78704
(512) 478-7300

The TSRA might also be interested.

- Jim

IMHO, this was an illegal stop without probable cause. Even if you resembed like a suspect that the police were looking for, your CHL should have assured the officer that you were a good guy. So much for Austin being "liberal."

I have to ask, though, do you fit any profile in terms of appearance?

- Jim