Constitution Law

 A person is considered "under arrest" when the police officer has a reasonable suspicion of a crime and takes the suspect into custody where he awaits prosecution or interrogation.   While in the custody, it is the role of the duty officer to investigate the cause of arrest and conclude whether there is sufficient evidence or not. When the person is ‘under arrest' he or she cannot walk away from the custody. Another important point to understand is that for a police to put someone ‘under arrest' he must have an evidence to show that the suspect has committed a crime.  Before the arrest, the police is supposed to view and understand the incident and the suspect should know the reason as to why he is denied the freedom of movement (Harr, Hess, & Orthmann, 2011). Under arrest also guarantees the suspect fair treatment, access to human rights such as the right to remain silent, right to use an attorney among other Miranda rights. 

 It is important to understand the difference between a stop and an arrest. The above research has shown that an arrest is an act of taking a suspect to custody following a reasonable belief that the suspect was involved in a crime. While in the custody, the suspect does not have the freedom to leave but rather he stays in the custody awaiting for investigations to be done.  While the investigation is going on, the suspect may be released on bail and after the investigation is completed with sufficient evidence, the suspect should appear before the Magistrate (Harr, Hess, & Orthmann, 2011). On the other hand, a police stop is a process where a police officer may witness a person committing a crime and then he may stop the criminal to question him and engage in conversation. The difference between stop and arrest is that when the police stop a suspect, the criminal may refuse to answer the questions, may end the conversation and may also walk away. On the other hand, a person who is under arrest does not have the freedom to leave the custody.

States may authorize probable cause arrest for a certain unwitnessed misdemeanor to examine whether the police officer viewed the facts and circumstances before arresting the suspect. Many states require a probable cause arrest because the law wants the police to examine the objective circumstances and have an adequate reason to put a suspect in the custody (Harr, Hess, & Orthmann, 2011). The probable cause arrest is under the Fourth Amendment and the law play a significant role in protecting the citizen and ensure that there are facts and evidence for a suspect to be put into custody. In most cases, the courts require a probable cause when there is an arrest without a warrant. Note that when an arrest is associated with a warrant, it means that the magistrate already has a sufficient probable cause for the crime. On the other hand, 95% of arrest is made without a warrant and in this case, the police officer should provide a problem cause to support the felony (Harr, Hess, & Orthmann, 2011). In general, for the court to proceed with certain unwitnessed behaviors, the police officers who suspected the criminal and put him into custody should provide a reasonably trustworthy information. The police officers may find evidence by using their five sense, from secondhand information, from informants, and from witnesses.

 Focusing on the power to arrest, it is important to understand that a police officer receives the power or the authority to arrest from the statutes. The latter gives them the power to apply in enforcing laws in their jurisdictions, making an arrest, presenting evidence among other roles (Levinson, 2002).  When executing an arresting, police officers should use a reasonable force and they should desist from using deadly forces.  Even when the suspect is resisting the arrest, the police officer should not use an excessive power to cause death. Police officer thinks that enforcing laws entails using power and strength.  It is important to understand using excessive power and strength is violating the morality of enforcement and violating the laws. Thus, police officers are supposed to promote morality and adhere to the moral principles of law enforcement (Levinson, 2002). However, it is important to understand that there are factors that determine the amount of force that a police officer can use. The first factor is the severity of the crime, the threat posed by a suspect and an attempt by the suspect to flee. In general, the police officer should use a reasonable force on a case-by-case basis.

I can remember a situation where a police officer used an excessive force or in other words unreasonable force. This happened in the U.S when there was a mass shooting of African Americans.  Police officers used deadly force due to institutional racism in police departments.  The African Americans expressed their grievances the movement influence the minority perceptions that there is a huge racial disparity in police forces. Minority demanded proactive policing where police and public needed interaction and work together I to reduce racial disparity.  Minorities believe that police have negative attitudes toward them and they rely on misperceptions and misunderstanding while enforcing the law and executing arrest in minority population.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference

Levinson, D. (2002). Encyclopedia of crime and punishment. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

Harr J. Scott, Hess M. Karen., & Orthmann H.M. Christine. (2011). Constitutional Law and the Criminal

Justice System. Cengage Learning