Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Monkey
He wasn't arrested for not belonging there; he was arrested for being tumultuous in his own home. Arresting someone for attitude is losing control, not maintaining it.
|
He was arrested for "being tumultuous" during a police investigation of a reported crime, where he was the prime suspect. Whether he showed sufficient evidence of his right to be there is not clear. But even if he did that doesn't end the investigation. The cop should still try to find out if the person that reported the break in, saw someone else, before the professor got there. If there was someone hiding in the house, unknown to either of them. What if the cop left and the prof was murdered?
But anyway, verbal assault on a working cop is sufficient reason for arrest, obstructing justice, interfering with a criminal investigation, and clearly racism.
He wasn't arrested for his attitude, he was arrested for his actions, and the fact that he was arrested proves the cop was in control of the situation, if not his temper.
"Being tumultuous" in the real world is risking escalated retaliation, often massive.
I still maintain they were both wrong.