Arrested for not showing licence when not driving (USA)
Discussion
slashdot said:
Michael Righi was arrested in Ohio over the weekend after refusing to show his receipt when leaving Circuit City.
When the manger and 'loss prevention' employee physically prevented the vehicle he was a passenger in from leaving the parking lot, he called the police, who arrived, searched his bag and found he hadn't stolen anything.
The officer then asked for Michael's driver's license, which he declined to provide since he wasn't operating a motor vehicle.
The officer then arrested him, and upon finding out Michael was legally right about not having to provide a license, went ahead and charged him with 'obstructing official business' anyways.
See, it's not just the UK! When the manger and 'loss prevention' employee physically prevented the vehicle he was a passenger in from leaving the parking lot, he called the police, who arrived, searched his bag and found he hadn't stolen anything.
The officer then asked for Michael's driver's license, which he declined to provide since he wasn't operating a motor vehicle.
The officer then arrested him, and upon finding out Michael was legally right about not having to provide a license, went ahead and charged him with 'obstructing official business' anyways.
Streaky
streaky said:
slashdot said:
Michael Righi was arrested in Ohio over the weekend after refusing to show his receipt when leaving Circuit City.
When the manger and 'loss prevention' employee physically prevented the vehicle he was a passenger in from leaving the parking lot, he called the police, who arrived, searched his bag and found he hadn't stolen anything.
The officer then asked for Michael's driver's license, which he declined to provide since he wasn't operating a motor vehicle.
The officer then arrested him, and upon finding out Michael was legally right about not having to provide a license, went ahead and charged him with 'obstructing official business' anyways.
See, it's not just the UK! When the manger and 'loss prevention' employee physically prevented the vehicle he was a passenger in from leaving the parking lot, he called the police, who arrived, searched his bag and found he hadn't stolen anything.
The officer then asked for Michael's driver's license, which he declined to provide since he wasn't operating a motor vehicle.
The officer then arrested him, and upon finding out Michael was legally right about not having to provide a license, went ahead and charged him with 'obstructing official business' anyways.
Streaky
Yet there's a little voice that says perhaps he proved the point that he insisted on making. Perhaps it would have all been different if he had shown the receipt when asked to do so (legally) on leaving the shop.
All he had to do was show it before exiting, but instead he said no to the employee, he refused to show his receipt, he walked out of the shop (even though he could hear the employee call out for the manager) got into the waiting car, and tried to leave (even though he could hear them both running up). Hmmm, I wonder how most people would interpret that.
Yes, he made his point, hopefully he will accept everything that goes with it.
BFF
Edited by Big Fat F'r on Tuesday 4th September 12:32
Big Fat F'r said:
Eliminator said:
How could he be "obstructing" if he did not do something that he did not have to do?
He needs a compnsation lawyer
Wouldn't it be a tad idiotic to do something solely to make a point, and then having made the point, complain about it.He needs a compnsation lawyer
BFF
Who knows if the bad attitude began with staff or customer? I can certainly recall personal anecdotes of shockingly rude treatment by store security due simply to my age and clothing. That never does anything for my desire to cooperate with what would otherwise be reasonable requests.
Big Fat F'r said:
Yet there's a little voice that says perhaps he proved the point that he insisted on making. Perhaps it would have all been different if he had shown the receipt when asked to do so (legally) on leaving the shop.
The shop had no right to search him, and the officer had no right to arrest him.Thank goodness for people who are principled enough to stand up for their rights, say I.
It's the erosion-by-inconvenience that you espouse that leads to national ID registers and mandatory identity cards being slid into the legislature by the back door.
CommanderJameson said:
Big Fat F'r said:
Yet there's a little voice that says perhaps he proved the point that he insisted on making. Perhaps it would have all been different if he had shown the receipt when asked to do so (legally) on leaving the shop.
The shop had no right to search him, and the officer had no right to arrest him.Thank goodness for people who are principled enough to stand up for their rights, say I.
It's the erosion-by-inconvenience that you espouse that leads to national ID registers and mandatory identity cards being slid into the legislature by the back door.
If you've never seen a genuine shoplifter react exactly as described then fair enough (running attracts attention, a slow walk can bluff it). I have. Guess what. Their refusal to show proof of purchase, and their refusal to stop, and their attempt to leave, gets a reaction. He got exactly what he wanted. I'm just surprised that he has fooled so many into supporting him.
BFF
s2art said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Behave like a child and you will be treated like one.
Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
Stick up for your rights? I am sure he will be compensated for the plods mistake.Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.
It may well be that when it goes to Court, the charge will be upheld, as he didn’t exactly make it easy for anyone to do their lawful duty, including the BiB.
All because he refused to show his receipt when asked to do so, by someone who has a legal right to ask him, in performance of a duty that prevents theft, which is something that he (supposedly) feels so strongly about.
10 seconds to show the receipt would have ensured no problem – but then he wouldn’t have had his moment of glory as a victim I suppose.
BFF
Big Fat F'r said:
s2art said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Behave like a child and you will be treated like one.
Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
Stick up for your rights? I am sure he will be compensated for the plods mistake.Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.
It may well be that when it goes to Court, the charge will be upheld, as he didn’t exactly make it easy for anyone to do their lawful duty, including the BiB.
All because he refused to show his receipt when asked to do so, by someone who has a legal right to ask him, in performance of a duty that prevents theft, which is something that he (supposedly) feels so strongly about.
10 seconds to show the receipt would have ensured no problem – but then he wouldn’t have had his moment of glory as a victim I suppose.
BFF
s2art said:
Big Fat F'r said:
s2art said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Behave like a child and you will be treated like one.
Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
Stick up for your rights? I am sure he will be compensated for the plods mistake.Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.
It may well be that when it goes to Court, the charge will be upheld, as he didn’t exactly make it easy for anyone to do their lawful duty, including the BiB.
All because he refused to show his receipt when asked to do so, by someone who has a legal right to ask him, in performance of a duty that prevents theft, which is something that he (supposedly) feels so strongly about.
10 seconds to show the receipt would have ensured no problem – but then he wouldn’t have had his moment of glory as a victim I suppose.
BFF
s2art said:
Big Fat F'r said:
s2art said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Behave like a child and you will be treated like one.
Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
Stick up for your rights? I am sure he will be compensated for the plods mistake.Behave like an @rse and, well, you can guess the rest.
ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.
It may well be that when it goes to Court, the charge will be upheld, as he didn’t exactly make it easy for anyone to do their lawful duty, including the BiB.
All because he refused to show his receipt when asked to do so, by someone who has a legal right to ask him, in performance of a duty that prevents theft, which is something that he (supposedly) feels so strongly about.
10 seconds to show the receipt would have ensured no problem – but then he wouldn’t have had his moment of glory as a victim I suppose.
BFF
BFF
Edited by Big Fat F'r on Tuesday 4th September 15:28
As it is written in the original post, the police had already determined he had not stolen anything. At that point there was no more official business to conduct. And as is stated, he was under no obligation to provide his driver's license to the police officer.
I doubt this will result in any major monetary windfall, but I think the cop will get his ass handed to him in court.
I doubt this will result in any major monetary windfall, but I think the cop will get his ass handed to him in court.
Big Fat F'r said:
He had numerous chances to help the situation. He deliberately refused to do, and the result is that he has been charged with Obstucting Offical Business. He will get his day in Court, but he will have contributed absolutely nothing whatsoever to personal freedom issues. Unfortunately, he will have made other similar, but genuine, cases more difficult to resolve.
BFF
I think you have gotten the wrong end of the stick on this one. The issue is purely about the driving licence. The issue regarding potential stolen goods was already resolved.BFF
Edited by Big Fat F'r on Tuesday 4th September 15:28
It is surely the duty of a Police officer to uphold the rights of a citizen, not get all arsey when the MOP points out that there is no legal requirement for him to hand over a driving licence when he is not actually driving. Say you were a passenger in a car and the police tried to hand you a producer, what would you say and do?
s2art said:
Big Fat F'r said:
He had numerous chances to help the situation. He deliberately refused to do, and the result is that he has been charged with Obstucting Offical Business. He will get his day in Court, but he will have contributed absolutely nothing whatsoever to personal freedom issues. Unfortunately, he will have made other similar, but genuine, cases more difficult to resolve.
BFF
I think you have gotten the wrong end of the stick on this one. The issue is purely about the driving licence. The issue regarding potential stolen goods was already resolved.BFF
Edited by Big Fat F'r on Tuesday 4th September 15:28
It is surely the duty of a Police officer to uphold the rights of a citizen, not get all arsey when the MOP points out that there is no legal requirement for him to hand over a driving licence when he is not actually driving. Say you were a passenger in a car and the police tried to hand you a producer, what would you say and do?
You cannot ignore the fact that all of this simply started becausue he refused to show a receipt when someone legally asked him to do so. He then refused to stop. He then tried to leave.
The issue is not simply about the driving licence, although that is what he is trying to get everyone up in arms about. If the BiB had simply stopped his car and handed him a producer, then you have something for discussion.
This isn't like that, and you shouldn't try and make it so. When there is a genuine case of abuse of personal freedom, let's take up the banner. This isn't it.
However, if you wish to contribute to the costs of his day in Court, please go ahead, he accepts 'PayPal'.
Unbelievable.
BFF
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff