ICE told to get the eff out

[MNW67]

What other goal did she have for parking her car across the road?

I have no idea. And it is completely irrelevant. The only issue is whether she was doing to obstruct the agents. And she was obviously wasn't, because she wasn't obstructing anybody. Traffic was flowing freely.

 

[Highway Man]

The wife is actually irrelevant. She wasn't in the car.

Let's just clarify where we are.

You have accepted that Renee wasn't actually obstructing the agents.

And you are now saying that they were arresting her because they had probable cause to believe that she was attempting to obstruct them. I am happy to discuss that further.

Why are you twisting his words, you are not understanding at all.

 

[MNW67]

Imagine it was in the U.K. and police were doing a road check, imagine you parked your car sideways across the street and waved people to go around you. Plod come up to you and say any reason you are stopped like this and you say, no.

Do you think they’d tell you to move and if you refunded do you think they’d have grounds to do you for obstructing the highway or worse?

Come on, stop being daft.

Laughably irrelevant and pointless analogy.

 

[Highway Man]

I have no idea. And it is completely irrelevant. The only issue is whether she was doing to obstruct the agents. And she was obviously wasn't, because she wasn't obstructing anybody. Traffic was flowing freely.

Could you explain traffic flowing freely whilst having to slow down and go around her car?

 

[noseall]

Imagine it was in the U.K. and police were doing a road check, imagine you parked your car sideways across the street and waved people to go around you. Plod come up to you and say any reason you are stopped like this and you say, no.

Do you think they’d tell you to move and if you refunded do you think they’d have grounds to do you for obstructing the highway or worse?

Those straws are truly being strangled now.

Come on, stop being daft.

 

[MNW67]

Why are you twisting his words, you are not understanding at all.

I am using MBK's own words. He had admitted that there was no actual obstruction of the agents. Now he is making a complex legal argument about what was going on in Renee's mind and whether the agents were right to suspect that she might be attempting to obstruct them.

 

[motorbiking]

I have no idea. And it is completely irrelevant. The only issue is whether she was doing to obstruct the agents. And she was obviously wasn't, because she wasn't obstructing anybody. Traffic was flowing freely.

The only issue is whether [a reasinable person] would think she was they were attempting to obstruct the agents.

You've stated in your own words that you've no idea what she was doing, but at the same time you are certain she was not attempting to cause an obstruction. Not really passing the reasonable person test are you?

 

[MNW67]

The only issue is whether [a reasinable person] would think she was they were attempting to obstruct the agents.

I am happy to discuss that. It is an interesting angle.

Just let me clarify what you are saying.

You have accepted that Renee hadn't actually obstructed the agents.

And you are arguing that what it comes down to is whether a reasonable person would think that a woman, parked across one lane of a two lane street, pipping her horn, was attempting to obstruct an operation being carried out more than a hundred yards away.

 

[motorbiking]

I am happy to discuss that. It is an interesting angle.

are you sure?

Just let me clarify what you are saying.

You have accepted that she hadn't actually obstructed the agents.

We do not know from the short videos available. The Agent certainly felt the pair of them were interfering and causing an obstruction. He put his lights and sirens on and approached.

And you are arguing that what it comes down to is whether a reasonable person would think that a woman, parked across one lane of a two lane street, pipping her horn, was attempting to obstruct an operation being carried out more than a hundred yards away.

what else could you reasonably argue she was doing?

 

[MNW67]

what else could you reasonably argue she was doing?

I have no idea. Maybe she wanted a better view. Maybe she just wanted to make it obvious to them that she was observing them. But you are trying to reverse the burden of proof.

We do not know from the short videos available. The Agent certainly felt the pair of them were interfering and causing an obstruction. He put his lights and sirens on and approached.

We do not know that at all. ICE agents have made hundreds of illegal arrests. Maybe he was just peed off at her for pipping her horn and wanted to teach her a lesson.

At least you have accepted that there is no evidence so far that she was actually obstructing them.

 

[motorbiking]

I have no idea.

apparently

Maybe she wanted a better view.

this is not a reasonable assessment

Maybe she just wanted to make it obvious that she was observing them.

this is not a reasonable assessment

But you are trying to reverse the burden of proof.

You need to read up on Probable Cause, its more than reasonable suspicion, but substantially less than you pretend.

We do not know that at all. ICE have made hundreds of illegal arrests. Maybe he was just peed off at her pipping her horn and wanted to teach her a lesson.

by doing what?

 

[MNW67]

by doing what?

Arresting her illegally.

 

[MNW67]

Despite all the waffle and deflections, what it still comes down to is how a woman in a car, pipping her horn, could be attempting to obstruct an ICE operation being carried out more than a hundred yards away.

 

[motorbiking]

Despite all the waffle and deflections, what it still comes down to is how a woman in a car, pipping her horn, could be attempting to obstruct an ICE operation being carried out more than a hundred yards away.

Earlier in the thread you felt the first shot was lawful, how did you conclude that the shooting was lawful, but the attempt to stop and question the pair was not?

 

[MNW67]

Earlier in the thread you felt the first shot was lawful, how did you conclude that the shooting was lawful, but the attempt to stop and question the pair was not?

I said I was undecided on whether the first shot was lawful. We still don't have enough information.

It doesn't matter in the USA whether law enforcement are acting illegally. They still have a right to defend themselves e.g. if they are conducting an illegal search.