Is it just me? Or did the somewhat credible mention of the cops not doing anything wrong just kill this thread?
What you think and what is reality may or may not be the same thing. The Supreme Court ruled in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004) that an officer in a state with a "stop-and-identify" statute may ask for name, address, etc. if the stop is "based on specific, objective facts establishing reasonable suspicion to believe the suspect was involved in criminal activity." Further, the court specifically noted that the statute in question did not require the suspect to produce any kind of documentation, just to answer the question.
So, I will ask the question again: does Oklahoma have a statute requiring a pedestrian (and I say that to distinguish him from a driver, who does have to produce a driver's license upon demand) to show his papers upon demand of a law enforcement officer? I'd also ask whether Oklahoma has any stop-and-identify statute (even one that doesn't require a showing of papers), and whether the officer had "specific, objective facts establishing reasonable suspicion" that the decedent was involved in criminal activity.
Enter your email address to join: