An eye-witness to the tasering incident was arrested yesterday (Tuesday MAy 24, 2005) when he went to file a complaint at the police office.
The man asserted that he was assaulted on the night of the taser incident.
Upon going to the Arcata Police Department office, was told that he could file a complaint if he waited in the office. Two cops came into the office to talk to him, but refused to fill out a complaint form. They then asked him to go into a backroom for further questioning, which the man refused to do. The man was then told that he was under arrest by Officer Sligh, and several more cops suddenly burst into the room from where they had been waiting in ambush. The man was not allowed to pass on his possessions to witnesses who were accompanying him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Gosh, your report mysteriously fails to mention the reason for the arrest. People get told why they are being arrested.
Mysterious indeed. The eye-witness had two witnesses with him during the incident, and the Arcata police REFUSED to disclose what the arrest was for, only that he had an out-of-town warrant. The police refused to produce the warrant or any evidence that there was an uncleared warrant and forcefully removed the man, leaving marks on at least one wrist.
The eye-witness got out of jail that night and says that the warrant was an 8 year old bogus charge.
Go ahead and pat yourself on the back, Capt. Ottinger, but WRONG is WRONG, and cops are NOT ABOVE THE LAW.
The eye-witness went to the police office to file a complaint form, as per legal procedure. The (po)'lice prevented him from doing that, detained him and his possessions, and committed further assaults. The LEGAL TERM for this misconduct is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
I don't know the law, but it sounds like the police had a right to arrest him. Your wrong to say, "...the Arcata police REFUSED to disclose what the arrest was for..." A warrant is a reason for arrest. I don't know if the police have to produce the warrant at the time of the arrest. To state that it was a bogus charge doesn't mean that the warrant had been cleared up. What is the status of the warrant?
It doesn't sound like they had the right to refuse to fill out the complaint. Do you know if he filled out a complaint after he was released?
The warrant turned out to be an 8-year old warrant that wasn't enough to even hold the eye-witness overnight in jail.
It is interesting that the FIRST thing that the police did when the citizen came into their office to fill out a complaint form alleging SERIOUS misconduct on the part of the police was to run his ID for warrants, then physically prevent him from fillin out the complaint form by taking him into custody.
He went back to the police ofiice the next day to get his stuff and to pick up a complaint form to fill out later. I do not know what has become of it all at this point.
Post a Comment