Quote:
Originally Posted by vanisleflamesfan
Yes, he was unlawfully detained. I believe that the fact that there were three officers there, making bizarre demands "TOLD him to keep his arms out front", as well as demanding identification and answers to questions, would indicate what is called "psychological compulsion". Basically, the suspect is made to believe that he has no choice but to comply with the officers (whereas he in fact DID have a choice). In the case of psychological compulsion, detention is not predicated on a spoken threat or physical restraint. So yes... he legally COULD have walked away at any time, but the officers made him feel or believe that he could not. Psychological compusion is in the laws protecting both self-incrimination and search and seizure. The (gun) evidence was gathered in an way that violates the charter. He consented to the search or the questions because he felt that he had no other choice.
I would imagine that the trial judge excluded the evidence.
|
Boy based on that, we really need to change the charter, way to handcuff the police.