It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
wingsfan
Enough with semantics and legality. What about your own moral compass? What kind of person was the faculty to actually call cops for this? What kind of cop even addresses this yet alone takes it this serious?
This country has managed to raise a population where everyone is their own little emperor. Everyone in this country with a job uses that power to bust the balls of the person directly below them, because they technically can. There is no saving such a people like this, for as a whole, nobody thinks it's wrong. You all let our overlords come in and repeatedly lower our standards bars all while systematically weakening our moral resolve.
America, you no longer have the right to infer what's in anybody elses best interest.
Bedlam
There's an issue here that seems to be a problem.
In Utah, a peace officer cannot make a warrantless arrest for an unwitnessed class B misdemeanor. And this was one. Criminal mischief with a value less than $500 is a class B misdemeanor.
Arresting her without a warrant in this case is unlawful. They can't force her to the station under arrest for the charge, because to do so would be breaking Utah law. It is, in effect, kidnapping.
If the arrest being made was unlawful, and was in fact felonious, is it unlawful to resist it?
Bedlam
There's an issue here that seems to be a problem.
In Utah, a peace officer cannot make a warrantless arrest for an unwitnessed class B misdemeanor. And this was one. Criminal mischief with a value less than $500 is a class B misdemeanor.
Arresting her without a warrant in this case is unlawful. They can't force her to the station under arrest for the charge, because to do so would be breaking Utah law. It is, in effect, kidnapping.
If the arrest being made was unlawful, and was in fact felonious, is it unlawful to resist it?
Laykilla
No it's not. Not at all.
You know, the landlord collects a deposit for a reason right? It's so if any damage is done, or anything is not as it were when you entered the agreement, he can use YOUR MONEY that he's ALREADY HOLDING to fix said issue.
So in other words, you are paying for the right to deface the walls in your landlords home, if you choose NOT to deface the walls in your landlords home, he has to return your deposit.
First, last, AND SECURITY deposit.
Morons, the whole lot of you.