|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I've heard that the US Supreme Court has said that resisting arrest charges can only be pressed if another charge is as well... For example, if someone is arrested for throwing a brick through a store window and they resist arrest (say by running away from the cop), but then the prosecutor decides not to press charges on the vandalism (due to insufficient evidence or whatever), then the resisting arrest charge has to be dropped as well. Does anyone know if that's the case? I've been unable to find any info either way... 18.104.22.168 02:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Currently from my understanding, resisting arrest can be applied alone depending on the state you are in. See Miller “Retail Rebellion and the Second Amendment” page 953Collinkavanaugh (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Danish public opinion regarding guilt in criminal cases
"In Denmark it means guilt in the eyes of the population regardless of the verdict in the trial, if the suspect does not loudly protest his or her innocence if the arrest is made publicly."
There seems to be some problems in this statement:
1) It is an unverified generalization. One might argue that it seems to be a very misleading description of public opinion in Denmark. 2) It is not very relevant in the context. Protests againtst arrest is not resisting arrest.
- I worked in some countries in Africa as a volunteer. I don't know with Denmark but anything but total silence was considered resisting arrest. I also have to point out that protests can be considered resisting arrest in the States
Resisting arrest and freedom of speech, Pleadnotguilty.com
I think that this comment is very relevant because the protest the Danish supermodel made in Florida would not have brought her even near a conviction and it can explain why the case is listed as an act of xenophobia on the webpage for Danes who had been exposed for that. AngelaBurns (talk) 20:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
www.pleadnotguilty.com doesn't say that merely vebal protests can rightfully be considered resisting arrest. On the contrary it says that "such conduct is protected by the First Amendment". As a dane and a lifelong resident of the country (and a member of the danish population) I can assure you that the statement "In Denmark it means guilt in the eyes of the population regardless of the verdict in the trial, if the suspect does not loudly protest his or her innocence if the arrest is made publicly." simply isn't true. It is unverified, wrong and offensive to danes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 06:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- I work in Denmark and are often in Elsinore. The police does often refrain from arresting people if they protest loudly but polite because loud, public arrests will end up in newspapers. It is not insulting against the Danes. I respect that police officers are able to adjust their behavior to the situation at hand. I only see the use of zero-tolerance used against foreign fans of soccer teams visiting Denmark where it is justified because as a guest in a country, you have to be humble towards local authority. I believe that the Danish police is both highly educated and very motivated in their jobs so they do know when it is a waste of time to arrest people.
As for May Andersen it is an old case and it is recorded among the cases where it is fact that Danes have been exposed of xenophobia abroad. I think that the section should be in this article to illustrate how different the various justice systems are.
In some places "resisting" arrest is just a rubberstamp used when the other charges vanish because they were false from the very start and it is used to protect the county against claims for wrongful arrest. Clearly it was the case against May Andersen and the poor attitude against customers made the Danish part-owner of the airline company sell his shares shortly after in order to avoid being connected to such treatment of customers. OscarPetterson (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
1)The reason why I find this section to be somewhat offensive is that it suggests that the danish public judge the matter of guilt in criminal cases un how loudly people protest during an arrest and disregard the results of a subsequent trial. It gives an impression of a country where the general public has no confidence in the justice system - which in my opinion is far from the truth - and an impression of a population who judge the truth of a statement on how loud it is verbally expressed - which seems to imply that the danes are an ignorant and/or uneducated people. 2)I wouldn't doubt that you have met one or more danes who have actually expressed such opinions, but personal experience derived from conversations is not a very good basis for making neutral conclusions regarding the general public opinion in Denmark. You need extensive studies of newspapers or other media or mayby some kind of statistical survey to do that. 3)Even if you - in some way or another - have researched the matter thoroughly yourself and reached such a conclusion, you can't write it in Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. 4)Much the same considerations apply to the May Andersen-case. That the difference between danish and american penal-codes might be decisive in the May Anderson case seems to be an unverified statement. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. 5)xenophobia.mono.net is a questionable source. First of all it's a polemical site expressing extremist views. Secondly it doesn't state that differences between danish and american legal concepts of resisting arrest was decisive in the case. It claims instead that "upper-class" danes (such as super-models) in Denmark enjoy some kind of immunity from prosecution up to and including cases of rape and murder. Therefore - according to xenophobia.mono.net - May Andersens actions "would not be regarded as violence in Denmark because of her status". 6)See Wikipedia:OR and Wikipedia:V Thomas Malthe (talk) 16:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- I have not included this section on Wikipedia in the first place. The entry is years old. However I can prove that at least the courts judge cases based on reputation. Remember when a farmer girl tried to extort a fine young man into marriage by claiming that their relationship was rape? He was aquitted and I was happy that the work I do to improve the status of my children might benefit them in the future if they should be facing false accusations like this poor boy did.
Money and social status does matter - also in Danish courts. We are not a communist country - thanks God. I do not think that xenophobia.mono.net is a questionable source. I have seen it quoted many times on Danish and foreign message boards with a great respect.
As for the respect of the courts. We have a minister of justice who actively tries to influence matters in our supreme court regarding the new weapon law. We have politicians who is critisizing the courts because they rule according to the very letter of the law they themselves put into action. Where is the respect of the Danish courts when not even the members of the parliament don't?
As for protesting loadly in public. Do you watch the TV program "Station 2" from TV2. When you followed the police patrols around in town there are a lot of protesting. Only when it extend to name calling of the specific policemen the citizens are arrested.
Beside Denmark, which country allows the defendant to hold a press conference as it was the case against Camilla Broe? This press conference did clearly have the purpose to influence the final sentence she will get once she return to Denmark when the show trial in Florida is over and the American sentence will be annulled according to the extradition agreement. But I have to work now, so I will not revert your vandalism now. OscarPetterson (talk) 17:41, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
The question at hand is not whether we should trust the danish legal system or not, but whether there is any evidence that the danish public doesn't. Deleting statements that are both controversial and unsourced is not vandalism. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. It means that if you think the material should stay then you have to find a source that a) Is supporting the material (which none of the proposed sources until now does) and b) Is reliabel. (See Wikipedia:V). Thomas Malthe (talk) 23:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
OscarPetterson and Thomasmalthe
Gentlemen, you seem to be getting way off the point of the article to the point where the discussion far exceeds the content of the article.There is a huge amount of talk here about Danish Law and even then it's relevance appears doubtful. It seem to me that this articles subject is so dependent on local law that its' usefulness without being expanded greatly is, to me, doubtful. Are there any international laws(or 'standard' practices) that apply to resisting arrest? Should this article even exist, or be merged into a larger article? ie It could be part of an article on "Arrest" or "Rights" if such exist.
I have added on a state by state basis more local level statutes for resisting arrest in the united states. As well as some general guidelines still under U.S section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collinkavanaugh (talk • contribs) 23:24, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Oscar Grant Case
Is this meant to be like this?
second paragraph, third dot point
- Acting a police officer as he/she is trying to arrest you
what is meant by "Acting a police officer..."?
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Resisting arrest. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070318172727/http://www.rigsadvokaten.dk/media/rm_9-1994.pdf to http://www.rigsadvokaten.dk/media/rm_9-1994.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.