One of the arguments being made by Ramsey's attorney is that there was no legal basis for Brockman to stop the car.

 

Is he correct?

 

Trespassing on private property isn't a reason?

Trespassing on private property isn't a reason?

 

It is not that simple. Maybe they made a wrong turn. But forget that, how many people were cited for trespassing?

It is not that simple. Maybe they made a wrong turn. But forget that, how many people were cited for trespassing?

 

I think that selling this as a sobriety check point after kids were leaving a field party may be enough to insulate him. They had probable cause to believe that anyone leaving that party was intoxicated.

I think that selling this as a sobriety check point after kids were leaving a field party may be enough to insulate him. They had probable cause to believe that anyone leaving that party was intoxicated.

 

Just playing devil's advocate, if that is the rationale then police officers everywhere should be setting up checkpoints outside of every bar.

Just playing devil's advocate, if that is the rationale then police officers everywhere should be setting up checkpoints outside of every bar.

 

What is stopping them, outside of killing local businesses? This is different. This is a party where kids trespassed, are being FORCED to evacuate quickly. It isn't like they could call a cab. While this lends weight to your Devil's Advocate point of view, and these kids were in a much weaker position, free choice speaking, in terms of mode of transportation to leave b/c of the rush to get them off of the property, I could see him saying that they were stopping drivers from driving drunk b/c releasing 30+ impaired drivers onto Rt. 8 was a public safety hazard.

What is stopping them, outside of killing local businesses? This is different. This is a party where kids trespassed, are being FORCED to evacuate quickly. It isn't like they could call a cab. While this lends weight to your Devil's Advocate point of view, and these kids were in a much weaker position, free choice speaking, in terms of mode of transportation to leave b/c of the rush to get them off of the property, I could see him saying that they were stopping drivers from driving drunk b/c releasing 30+ impaired drivers onto Rt. 8 was a public safety hazard.

 

My point is the law is deficient in this area.

 

And before anyone get's too worked up, I think Brockman should have stopped the vehicle (and I would have stopped the vehicle too) but I don't believe the law supports it.

 

Like I said, it is a no win situation that drives law enforcement officers crazy. At least the officers smart enough to know they are pawns in society.

Just read the complaint.

This is the same argument that the Grand Jury turned away. Smart bringing the 1983 action into it so that it would go to a Federal Court and cast a wider net in jury selection.

Just read the complaint.

This is the same argument that the Grand Jury turned away. Smart bringing the 1983 action into it so that it would go to a Federal Court and cast a wider net in jury selection.

 

I would assume this will go Federal court in Covington?

I would assume this will go Federal court in Covington?

 

Yes, at least that is where it is filed.

My point is the law is deficient in this area.

 

And before anyone get's too worked up, I think Brockman should have stopped the vehicle (and I would have stopped the vehicle too) but I don't believe the law supports it.

 

Like I said, it is a no win situation that drives law enforcement officers crazy. At least the officers smart enough to know they are pawns in society.

 

What really is going to come into play is, was the officer taking the correct dosage of his medication? Was his anxiety under control that night? If he did not take his medicine, then he COULD BE seen as GROSSLY NEGLIGENT and that could be enough for wrongful death. COULD BE, depends on a lot of other factors.

What really is going to come into play is, was the officer taking the correct dosage of his medication? Was his anxiety under control that night? If he did not take his medicine, then he COULD BE seen as GROSSLY NEGLIGENT and that could be enough for wrongful death. COULD BE, depends on a lot of other factors.

 

He looked fine in the video.

 

I agree the people wanting money will make the medication an issue but in reality I doubt that is much (if any) of a factor.

He looked fine in the video.

 

I agree the people wanting money will make the medication an issue but in reality I doubt that is much (if any) of a factor.

 

He looked like he was swaying or anything. I'm talking about anxiety and his ability to deal with it w/out medication if in fact he did not take it that day. An expert will be called in to go over his toxicology report and see by the amount in his system whether he took the correct dosage, too much, missed his dosage and what affect, if any, that would have on his ability to handle a high pressure situation.

He looked like he was swaying or anything. I'm talking about anxiety and his ability to deal with it w/out medication if in fact he did not take it that day. An expert will be called in to go over his toxicology report and see by the amount in his system whether he took the correct dosage, too much, missed his dosage and what affect, if any, that would have on his ability to handle a high pressure situation.

 

I get all that but to his co-workers that kind of thing would stick out like a turd in a punch bowl.

 

Perception and reality stuff from my seat but who knows.

Wasn't he solo? It would be possible for no symptoms of anxiety to surface until a tense situation, right? I don't know enough about anxiety.

I get all that but to his co-workers that kind of thing would stick out like a turd in a punch bowl.

 

Perception and reality stuff from my seat but who knows.

 

Sorry, I meant that he didn't look like he was swaying. I had that in incorrectly, sorry.