U.S. Supreme Court,
Criminal,
Civil Rights
Jun. 12, 2020
Facts are stubborn things
In reviewing uses of force, what law departments now consider as facts relevant to determining whether force is reasonable significantly diverge from Fourth Amendment doctrine. Indeed, there is plain cognitive dissonance between federal doctrine and these departments' new policies.
Robert L. Bastian Jr.
Partner
Bastian & Dini
Penthouse Suite 9025 Wilshire Blvd
Beverly Hills , CA 90211
Phone: (310) 789-1955
Fax: (310) 822-1989
Email: robbastian@aol.com
Whittier Law School
"Facts are stubborn things," attorney John Adams, also patriot, Founding Father, and second president, uttered in fraught circumstances. He was addressing a pre-revolutionary Boston jury in defense of a British captain accused of ordering redcoats under his command to fire on protesting colonists resulting in the Boston Massacre. Adams' emphasis on elevating facts lays one cornerstone.
Recently, a veto-proof plurality of the Minneapo...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In