[LT. Ox]

"And you would have good reason to do all of that." Ok that is nice and you both agree, how wonderful.

"But if you didn't see him hit a vehicle and then run (drive away) from the accident but you thought that he did even though he didn't, or you just didn't like the look of the guy for whatever reason what then? And then after you did all of the following where would that leave you and the guy you did all that to if it ended up in court. Would the judge just convict the guy on your word or would the case against guy be dismissed and how would you be punished? And do you think that you would deserve to be punished or that the guy should be convicted on the basis of your word?"

Now I have to wonder what this is for. Are you implying that CDAT would take such action?

Perhaps you see Law enforcement Officers as a whole taking such actions or only Officers in the US?

Or just maybe that ending is just trolling? Well ye caught me.

You are well spoken and it seems enjoy debate, but to what end?

Where this thread started and where you have managed to transport it seem (albeit with help) to me, much different than was intended by the author of the original post.
I bow to your vast knowledge of jurisprudence of American Law in the 21st century and how it has developed. My degree and experience of a couple of decades was in the last.

I will however add that I never lost a case in court, I was sued a number of times or at least I had the intent papers filed by attorneys for those I had brought charges against, none went so far as to be heard and I never dropped or lowered the proffered charges to have that done.

One of the requirements used for the past thirty years or so for an officer to take action is called reasonableness. It is a broad area to explain in a short post and is the subject for Law enforcement Officer while in academy and as refresher classes later. I taught those classes for five years
.
Did and do officers get it wrong sometimes? Oh yes and with varying degrees of resultant effects for them and for the unfortunate persons they dealt with inappropriately. I also had the distasteful duty to investigate such incidents when they involved my department.

It is not the best idea for the average person to get into a debate with an on duty Officer that is attempting to perform his sworn duty; there will always be a time and a place to do so.

The people and the reasons for their arguments that this thread was started to discuss about gaming ideas have little to do with keeping our streets safe and much to do to effect what you have perpetuated, debate and confusion, perhaps not for you but I am sure for many that read this thread.

I am done and will let the hook go now.