That makes me pretty mad. The big guy seems to have his head screwed on, I just wish he could have been a little better educated in the lawful/legal department, the copper says he is enforcing the law while clearly he is actually enforcing legislation. He also could have asked for the "officer" to produce reasonable articulable suspicion of a LAW being broken, and really shouldnt have accepted the paperwork.
One question though, I was under the impression that to get joinder one of the things youre meant to be asked as a suspect is "do you understand"... and that didnt happen in this case, does it make a difference? Just curious
And can anybody confirm the rule that says that you have to be charged with the same crime youre arrested for, otherwise the charge doesnt stand? I think the same sort of policy needs to be applied to roadside stops, IMO, they have to learn they cant just change their minds and bend the reason theyve stopped you to suit any further stuff they want to pin on you
BE the change YOU want to see