Police officers were called to break up an unruly group of people notices a bulge resembling a gun inside a mans jacket. The officer detains the man, frisks him, and finds out that it was a camcorder. Did this officer violate the mans rights by frisking him? What legal issues are involved here? PLEASE HELP
2007-02-05 05:17:06 · 10 answers · asked by circusgirl322 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
No. If he had reason to think the person might be holding a gun he was justified in frisking the person.
2007-02-05 05:23:07 · answer #1 · answered by Behaviorist 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
This was a legal search and it's commonly referred to as a “Terry frisk”.
In 1968, the U.S Supreme Court in Terry v. Ohio found that, due to the inherent risk of Police, Police can conduct a cursory search of an individual for weapons based on reasonable suspicion.
In this case, the Police observed what could have been a firearm and reacted appropriately by identifying the item. This can also be applied to vehicles bases on reasonable suspicion.
2007-02-05 13:50:07 · answer #2 · answered by Jim 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You didn't state if the person was arrested, which I take to mean that he was not. In this case, the person's rights were not violated, as the officer had "PROBABLE CAUSE" to conduct the stop&frisk, as the only relevent concern here was the officer's in protecting himself and all others present from a possible assault by a person with what possibly might be a deadly weapon.
2007-02-05 13:37:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED. THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO SEARCH YOU IF YOU'RE INVOLVED IN A VOLATILE SITUATION THAT MAY CAUSE HARM TO SOMEONE. HE HAD A LEGITIMATE RIGHT TO SEARCH HIM DUE TO PROBABLE CAUSE. HE THOUGHT HE HAD A GUN. AS LONG AS THE OFFICER LET HIM GO AFTER HE WAS FRISKED AND FOUND TO CARRY ONLY A CAMCORDER THEIR IS NO WRONG. BEING INVOLVED IN THE UNRULY GROUP OF PEOPLE ALONE IS ENOUGH TO GET YOU SEARCHED.
2007-02-05 13:30:44 · answer #4 · answered by strike_eagle29 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No violation of the man's rights occurred. The officer had "reasonable cause to believe" that the man had a weapon.
2007-02-05 13:25:52 · answer #5 · answered by Nancy W 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is no legal violation in a weapons check
2007-02-05 13:25:56 · answer #6 · answered by Chief BaggageSmasher 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, it would have been neglience for him NOT to frisk the guy if he saw something possibly suspicious.
2007-02-05 13:26:01 · answer #7 · answered by setemyr 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
the officer did the right thing and there is nothing the guy can do
2007-02-05 15:19:02 · answer #8 · answered by mountainchowpurple 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, he did the right thing, he thought it was a gun, so he had to detain him.
2007-02-05 13:25:34 · answer #9 · answered by graciegirl 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Do your own homework, please.
2007-02-05 15:31:20 · answer #10 · answered by gunsandammoatwork 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋