US laws of arrest

[McNulty]

That is a much better description than the one offered that a "crime probably occurred." As mentioned earlier, ET109 noted that himself.

We all know that above all else the elements of a crime have to be present and articulated. Then we have to articulate the totality of circumstances that would lead a reasonable and prudent officer, not present, but in a similar scenario, to believe that the suspect, did in fact, commit the crime.

ps. I would have a major issue if I saw a report submitted by one of my officers that simply said he/she thought there was "probably" a crime committed, wouldn't you?

Sure, but it's nonetheless a serviceable defintion, especially when answering someone's question in Ask A Cop.

[McNulty]

To clarify, Tx is a longtime member, former LEO, and now a private security investigator. He's good people.

"Good people" don't troll forums.

[Cat_Doc]

Ours was something like: "A set of facts and circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the accused committed the crime."

You are correct, Greg.

In my earlier post I mentioned "reasonable and prudent officer in similar circumstances."

The courts have generally defined probable cause as articulated facts that would lead a "reasonable and prudent person" to believe the accused committed the crime.

I mixed in language from the SCOTUS caution regarding 20/20 vision of hindsight when evaluating the use of force by law enforcement which brings the standard to that of an reasonable officer as opposed to "person." (Graham vs Connor)

Thanks.

[Citicop]

"Good people" don't troll forums.

And with that, I am putting this to bed. If you have something to say to TX, take it to PM.

I don't believe his actions here (or ever on this site) constitute trolling, and personal attacks in public are not tolerated here.

Nothing to see here, folks, move along...