Post #48284 by PinotPete on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (33)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 3

I don't know if they have any formal legal obligation to identify themselves as LEO's.

As a former employee of a local LEA, we were required to identify ourselves under the old Terry v. Ohio case (1968). The only exceptions were if this were to pose an immediate risk to us or there were a "crowd control" issue wherein we could delay identifying ourselves (big dignitary events, large protest situations, etc.), but only if we were the ones not involved in making the arrest or using the force or detention ourselves. Otherwise, those doing so still had to identify themselves.

I believe this was the case for those we had joint task force 'exercises' with such as state agencies and the FBI.

Pete

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (33)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.