Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
My question involves criminal law for the state of: Texas
A cop pulls a person over for speeding. The evidence can prove that the person was not speeding and there was no probable cause for pulling over. The person hits gas for several seconds then hits break with no skid marks. Cop hits back of vehicle. They let the person go with accident report. Later they charge with evading and assault with vehicle. Lawyer says it does not matter that cop was pulling over for no reason. There is no prior convictions on the person. Does it matter they there is no probable cause?
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
The lawyer is correct. Even if the officer was mistaken about the person's speed, that doesn't give the person any legal right to drive like a complete idiot and endanger people's lives.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
There's a very basic rule of law here that your mother taught you (or should have) a long time ago: Two wrongs don't make a right.
Yes, the officer may have been wrong for following too close. That doesn't give you the right to try to instigate a collision by brake checking. The answer to tailgaters of any sort is almost always just to slow (smoothly) down. It gives them the maximum chance to pass you and if not increases the reaction time and decreases the severity of a possible collision.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
I agree with the two wrongs statement I am not the person they are my loved one.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
If they are going to freak out, they have no business being behind the wheel. Brake checking is not freaking out, it's a hostile and reckless act.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
Break check is when a person is right behind you and you hit your breaks. This was not the case. At the point of break hitting he was not directly behind.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
To answer the question, there seems to be plenty of "probable cause." First, the stop only takes a reasonable suspicion of an offense and the speed (let alone the erratic breaking) is all that is required. Even once the charges are filed, there's likely probable cause. That's a whole lot less than "beyond a reasonable doubt" necessary for conviction. She needs an attorney if she has these criminal charges.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
There was no reasonable suspicion for the officer to start in to the detention with the evidence it can be proven. There is more to the story but I think I have put too many details. I did not realize you could not delete. I am an idiot.
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
Speeding is plenty of reasonable suspicion. Driving erratically sufficient. It is not necessary that the reason for the stop be what ultimately gets charged. Drunk drivers are stopped on minor traffic violations all the time. Again, neither you who don't really know what happened or your girl who is not a reliable witness is going to be able to tell for sure. A LAWYER can make a dispassioned, neutral observation of the evidence and suggest the best way
Re: Assault With a Vehicle Charge After Brake-Checking a Police Officer
But that is the thing there was no reason actual reason for the stop. Even if things occurred afterwards that were arrestable there was no suspicious action to start with and its provable. So are cops allowed to detain you with no probable cause now?
Drunk drivers are actually suspicious when cops make the descion to detain. Speeders are actually breaking the law when cops go to detain. Do you not agree it is unlawful to make a detention without suspicion?