Hello again:

If the person I described in my previous question hasn't committed a crime, and I believe they haven't, I presume that the police force on those TV shows know that too.

Therefore, when they throw one of those people on the ground and arrest them on national TV, can that person sue for false arrest, and collect a bundle?

I think they could!

excon

Are you sure you didn't drink the koolaid ?

I would think that since it is done on national TV everything is on the up and up. I don't think suing is the option.

If you've ever seen the police "harass" someone, I think it is clear that they can arrest anyone at anytime. All they need is "something" as the basis - It doesn't matter how flimsy or BS it might be, they might even go so far as to make something up...

Citizens can't sue as long as there is some basis for the police to act on.

On the plus side though - Citizens arrested in these situations can't really be prosecuted successfully...

Hello again, philly:

If this were a thing of the moment, I would agree. Or at least I could see how they could form the basis you speak of. However, these arrests are not just happenstance. They are well planned and well executed. I promise you, that some prosecutor has signed off on them.

Be that as it may, I don't necessarily agree with them. I maintain that if a police force knowingly arrests somebody falsely, they absolutely can be held liable. And, I maintain that's exactly what happens here.

Does it bother me that I'm the only one in America that thinks so? Well, if was the ONLY one, but I don't think I am.

I have not mentioned the word "entrapment", because entrapment indicates that the cops induced somebody into committing a crime. My position is that since no crime would have, or even could have been committed, entrapment isn't an issue.

In my view, that even makes the cops MORE culpable. Can they sue the TV network too?? I certainly think they can. In fact, it's the network and maybe even the cops who conspired to take THEIR civil rights away.

excon

PS> Don't get me wrong, folks, I think child molesters are bad people. I just believe in the law.

Most of the people arrested eventually got charged with something but if the case was dropped due to whatever reason it's possible. My guess is no, most of the time when one of these "to catch a predator" cases gets dropped in court its due to insufficient evidence or interference by the camera crew.

I don't really understand it all, apparently they should all face criminal charges for sexually explicit chats with teens but some cases get dropped.

I promise you, that some prosecutor has signed off on them.
If anything, doesn't this further insulate the police from making a "false arrest" ?