Chelly
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2013
- Messages
- 18,802
- Reaction score
- 66,884
Saw that police video of apprehension. The police did have probable cause. I think the commentator was mistaken. Just my opinion. I am not a legal expert.Could someone explain a legal issue with this case? The defense wanted to exclude the body cam footage during the stop of Roland's vehicle. A legal commentator on the case said the police officer who stopped Rowland's vehicle did so without probable cause. But, the judge allowed it despite the Fourth Amendment violation. How did the police officer not have probable cause? He had received a BOLO alert for a late model black Chevrolet Impala, which is what Roland is driving. Call me confused about this.