if you are being charged with resisting arrest, that would imply you were being arrested for something else, right? So, how the hell can someone ONLY be charged with resisting arrest? I mean, wouldn't a cop have to be in the process of arresting you for some other crime, and wouldn't you have to resist THAT arrest? I don't see how they can charge someone with resisting if they didn't have any reason to arrest you in the first place. Any thoughts, other than cops suck and the system is corrupt?
maybe "arrest" simply means resisting being stopped/held/questioned by the cops, without being charged with anything, like getting a traffic ticket. i'm not sure. i mean, it could. you know how those technicality things are.
maybe the reason why the arrest was taking place was such a low charge that they would rather charge with resisting arrest who knows
I'm not a lawyer but by most states definitions of it, as a crime, the police officer has to be in the process of arresting the person, in order to resist it. Being detained, such as for questioning, I believe is different then being arrested, which requires an amount of probably cause for police to believe there is enough evidence to charge a person with some crime.
oh I'm okay, I just brought this up because the newspaper gives a list of the week's arrests and what-not, and among the list of drunk drivers and other offences, there was a woman who had been arrested for resisting arrest....and ONLY for resisting arrest, there was no accompanying crime she had committed. And apparently this isn't uncommon....I was just wondering how this is possible, and how it's allowed to happen.
Thats a good question.. I'm not sure if being detained can be classified as an arrest, if so thats probably what happened. Someone "suspicous" "resisted" being detained in some way, which gave them something to actually charge the person with.
bump because I would like to know to anyone? I see it a lot. People are not read their rights, aren't told what they are being arrested for. so they obviously try to walk a way in as peaceful and defensive as they can. and it is resisting arrest...right, an unlawful one.
miranda rights only have to be read prior to interrogation, not during arrest. that's a tv myth, wikipedia: Due to the prevalence of American television programs and motion pictures in which the police characters frequently read suspects their rights, it has become an expected element of arrest procedure. In the 2000 Dickerson decision, Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that Miranda warnings had "become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture." Dickerson v. United States 530 U.S. 428 (2000). However, police are only required to warn an individual whom they intend to subject to custodial interrogation at the police station, in a police vehicle or when detained. Arrests can occur without questioning and without the Miranda warning — although if the police do change their mind and decide to interrogate the suspect, the warning must then be given. Furthermore, if public safety (see New York v. Quarles) warrants such action, the police may ask questions prior to a reading of the Miranda warning, and the evidence thus obtained can sometimes still be used against the defendant. Because Miranda only applies to custodial interrogations, it does not protect detainees from standard booking questions: name, date of birth, address, and the like. Because it is a prophylactic measure intended to safeguard the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, it does not prevent the police from taking blood from persons suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol without a warrant.[vague] Currently there is a question about corrections and Miranda. If an inmate is in jail and invoked Miranda on one case, it is unclear whether this extends to any other cases that he or she may be charged with while in custody.
resisting arrest, wikipedia: Resisting arrest is a term used in the United States and elsewhere to describe a criminal charge against an individual who has committed at least one of the following acts: Eluding a police officer who is attempting to arrest the individual Using or threatening to use force against an officer during an arrest Providing an officer with false identification (either verbally or by presentation of a false official document, i.e. a fake ID) Eluding is defined very differently in various countries. It pays to study the penal code in a country if one decides to travel there. Penal codes are often defined by the cultural background of the specific country. so most likely this person provided a false id and got caught for it, thus leading to the charge of resisting arrest.
