Legal Question in Criminal Law in Massachusetts
Held without bail based on accusation
I was arrested and held without bail based on an accusation that I violated a restraining order.
My accuser phoned the police saying I was on her property. Without any type of investigation, the police simply put a warrant out for my arrest. I was arrested at my job 2 days later, I was held without bail until I saw a judge (in fact I did not even learn why I had been arrested until 24 hours later.) Needless to say I wasn't anywhere near my accuser, I showed that in court, they simply let the matter drop instead of arresting my accuser on the spot for filing a false report.
It seems the police will investigate people accused of murder or other horrible crimes, but if there is an accusation of a violation of a restraining order, they immediately put a warrant out for your arrest without looking in to it.
I'm wondering why, or did they handle it wrong in my case?
Somehow this seems extremely wrong in many different ways, especially the conduct of the police in simply issuing a warrant without looking in to it.
2 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Held without bail based on accusation
The police have a legal leg to stand on in this case. The state of the law in Massachusetts is that police are under no obligation to fully investigate a case before making a determination to make an arrest. Massachusetts has held that a statement by a person that they saw someone commit a crime is enough to maintain "probable cause" to make an arrest as long as the police do not know that the statement is false. Investigations and evidence are for court, not for arrests. When an (alleged) eyewitness makes a statement, a person can be arested based on it so long as it alleges sufficient elements of a crime. The only reason Murders are investigated better is because they are higher profile and most police departments don't want a reputation for botching that type of case.
Unfortunatley, the newspapers probably will not cover your case (except to report that you were arrested) and will not care that you were acquitted.
District Attorney's are ELECTED, so it is genenrally better for them to appear to be "tough on crime" and play to the mob.
That being said, you have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to sue the person who filed a malicious lie and be compensated for the fact that you were arrested and held (denied liberty) for a period of time based on a false statement. Likewise, you could sue any person who made defamatory remarks about you in connection with this.
: Held without bail based on accusation
You have stated nothing that the police did or did not do that was fundamentally wrong. The police have a right to rely on the accuser's information. This is indeed unfair if the accusation was false.
If you have any other questions or need assistance, contact me.
Related Questions & Answers
-
Drug Testing For Pre Trial Diversion Hi i am in a pre-trial diversion program.... Asked 12/02/07, 3:34 pm in United States Massachusetts Criminal Law
-
Adding to harassment question does an adult witness to what's going on with the man... Asked 11/28/07, 12:23 pm in United States Massachusetts Criminal Law
-
Being more specific about harassment question a man living on our dead-end street... Asked 11/28/07, 11:03 am in United States Massachusetts Criminal Law