Curtis Brinkley

[wfschrec]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...tercation-3-duty-police-officers-philadelphia

 

[44PRIDE]

..."along with former NFL running back Curtis Brinkley"

Damn. Hate to see it in writing.

 

[dasher]

off duty means they were civilians, right? The throwing in of police officers really changes the impact of the story.

 

[PAcuse]

off duty means they were civilians, right? The throwing in of police officers really changes the impact of the story.

Yes. The most they could do is place someone under "citizens arrest" until an on duty cop shows up. For example, an off-duty police officer attending a private party cannot pull a gun on a fellow guest or force an intoxicated party-goer to stop drinking.

 

[leftytg]

Yes. The most they could do is place someone under "citizens arrest" until an on duty cop shows up. For example, an off-duty police officer attending a private party cannot pull a gun on a fellow guest or force an intoxicated party-goer to stop drinking.

I was pretty sure this was wrong, but wanted to google it just in case.

One of the first hits was this website: http://www.wisegeek.com/does-an-off-duty-police-officer-have-authority.htm

And, right there in the second paragraph, was:

For example, an off-duty police officer attending a private party cannot pull a gun on a fellow guest or force an intoxicated party-goer to stop drinking. He or she can place a person under citizen's arrest until an on-duty police officer arrives

You should plagiarize from better sources


Title 42 of PA General Assembly Consolidated Statutes
§ 8952. Primary municipal police jurisdiction.

Any duly employed municipal police officer shall have the power and authority to enforce the laws of this Commonwealth or otherwise perform the functions of that office anywhere within his primary jurisdiction as to:

(1) Any offense which the officer views or otherwise has probable cause to believe was committed within his jurisdiction.

(2) Any other event that occurs within his primary jurisdiction and which reasonably requires action on the part of the police in order to preserve, protect or defend persons or property or to otherwise maintain the peace and dignity of this Commonwealth.


So long as an officer is "duly employed", they have the power to arrest. The on duty/off duty thing is not a legal consideration on the power to arrest. There are many practical reasons why an off duty police officer would not make an arrest, but from a purely legal standpoint, they do have the power to do so. They certainly don't have to place someone under "citizen's arrest" until an on duty officer shows. up

Now, if the off duty officer was outside of their municipal jurisdiction, then according to 8953(a)(6), the officer could only make an arrest if the officer "views an offense which is a felony, or has probable cause to believe that an offense which is a felony has been committed, and makes a reasonable effort to identify himself as a police officer."

 

[Ernj]

Yes. The most they could do is place someone under "citizens arrest" until an on duty cop shows up. For example, an off-duty police officer attending a private party cannot pull a gun on a fellow guest or force an intoxicated party-goer to stop drinking.

The bolded part tells me everything I need to know - the person who wrote this (not you PAcuse) does not know what they are talking about. There are even private citizens who are not off-duty officers who can legally carry a weapon and can "pull a gun on a fellow guest".

The reporter pointing out they were off-duty officers is one of the reasons I don't like some reporters. Reporting they are off-duty officers is not necessary for the article. All that needs to be reported is that McCoy and Brinklley fought with people and injured them.

 

[PAcuse]

I was pretty sure this was wrong, but wanted to google it just in case.

One of the first hits was this website: http://www.wisegeek.com/does-an-off-duty-police-officer-have-authority.htm

And, right there in the second paragraph, was:



You should plagiarize from better sources


Title 42 of PA General Assembly Consolidated Statutes
§ 8952. Primary municipal police jurisdiction.

Any duly employed municipal police officer shall have the power and authority to enforce the laws of this Commonwealth or otherwise perform the functions of that office anywhere within his primary jurisdiction as to:

(1) Any offense which the officer views or otherwise has probable cause to believe was committed within his jurisdiction.

(2) Any other event that occurs within his primary jurisdiction and which reasonably requires action on the part of the police in order to preserve, protect or defend persons or property or to otherwise maintain the peace and dignity of this Commonwealth.


So long as an officer is "duly employed", they have the power to arrest. The on duty/off duty thing is not a legal consideration on the power to arrest. There are many practical reasons why an off duty police officer would not make an arrest, but from a purely legal standpoint, they do have the power to do so. They certainly don't have to place someone under "citizen's arrest" until an on duty officer shows. up

Now, if the off duty officer was outside of their municipal jurisdiction, then according to 8953(a)(6), the officer could only make an arrest if the officer "views an offense which is a felony, or has probable cause to believe that an offense which is a felony has been committed, and makes a reasonable effort to identify himself as a police officer."

Thanks for looking further into this.

 

[jgeorge322]

so, now that we have that straightened out, what was curtis' involvement...