• MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Well, I guess if someone calls and says you have kidnapped a little girl and that they have seen you with a gun, the police can’t take a chance that it’s hoax. All phone numbers that call the police should be logged and if it turns out to be a hoax, traced, so people who make hoax calls can be arrested and prosecuted.

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      If they enter his home, and there is no evidence of a crime, then what is the basis for the arrest?
      One thing is to investigate the truth of a call, another is to act on it as if it’s verbatim truth.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Was he arrested? I don’t see follow up. It only says he was handcuffed which would be standard until they know what’s going on.

        • orcrist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          In the US, the cops need RAS to handcuff you. The standard was never and is not “until they know what’s going on”. And RAS depends on the current cop knowledge. Even if they had legal grounds to break into your place, what they see in the next ten seconds is still relevant. For example, if someone said you attacked them with a knife, when the cops see no victim, knife, or blood, their legal authority ceases.

          Of course it’s all highly dependent on specific details.

          (On traffic stops, often they already have RAS. That’s why they pulled you over. So don’t be fooled by other comments about that topic.)