Lemmy Today

1,462 readers
84 users here now

Welcome to lemmy.today!

About us

🤗 Thanks for joining our little instance here, located in Oregon. The idea is to have a fast, stable instance and allow users to subscribe to whatever content they want from here.

😎 We dont block any other instances. We will keep it that way unless it becomes a moderation problem.

🤠 We will be around for a very long time, so you dont have to worry about us shutting down the instance anytime soon. We like performance and stability in our servers, and will upgrade the instance when its needed.

🥹 Make sure to join a lot of remote communities to get a good feed going. How to do that is explained here.

Lemmy mobile apps

You should start using one of these ASAP since the web browser user interface is quite ugly, even with themes.

Sync for Lemmy (Android)
Boost for Lemmy (Android)
Eternity (Android)
Liftoff (Android and IOS)
Voyager (IOS)
Voyager WebApp
Jerboa (Android)
Connect (Android)
Thunder (Android and IOS)
Mlem (IOS)
Memmy (IOS)

Optional Lemmy web browser user interfaces

Rules

Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
No Ads / Spamming, or creating communities to promote blogs or services.
No local pornography communities (but you are free to subscribe to them on other instances if you wish).
No local communities about software related to porn.
No local religious communities (use remote ones)

Contact the admin

@mrmanager

founded 1 year ago

ADMINS

mrmanager

Buelldozer

135

Eighth Circuit says cops can find probable cause for an arrest ☆after☆ the arrest (www.techdirt.com)

submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by DougHolland@lemmy.world to c/thepoliceproblem@lemmy.world

4 comments fedilink

Archived page

268

Eighth Circuit Says Cops Can Come With Probable Cause For An Arrest AFTER They’ve Already Arrested Someone (www.techdirt.com)

submitted 11 months ago by geosoco@kbin.social to c/politics@lemmy.world

27 comments fedilink

Well, this is a bit of a doozy. This case — via the Institute for Justice — involves a possible First Amendment violation but somehow ends with a judicial blessing of cops who make things up after the fact to justify an arrest that has already taken place.

That’s literally what happened here. Mason Murphy was walking down a Missouri road when he was accosted by Officer Michael Schmitt. From the opening of this very unfortunate decision [PDF]:

Schmitt stopped his car, approached Murphy, and asked Murphy to identify himself. Murphy refused to identify himself, and Schmitt put Murphy in handcuffs after nine minutes of argument. Murphy asked why Schmitt arrested him, and Schmitt refused to answer.

So far, it would appear no criminal act was committed and that the cuffing of Murphy by Schmitt was in retaliation for Murphy’s refusal to identify himself and, First Amendment-wise, his refusal to shut up.

...