Originally Posted by
ralfp
Rosa Parks
Heh. I know you're not making the comparison, but I'll bet Mr. Orsak thinks he's picking up right where she left off.
Originally Posted by
ralfp
- An order to do something in violation of the law.
- An order to do something stupid, random, but not illegal (hop on one foot).
- An order to stop doing something legal, such as walking down the sidewalk, absent any justifiable law enforcement or other public safety interest in clearing the sidewalk (such as a sidewalk in front of a burning building).
- An order (through a megaphone) to drive faster when doing 50mph in a 55mph zone and not obstructing traffic.
- An order to stop doing something illegal.
1. No, by definition that's not a lawful order. Keep in mind that some acts that might be ordinarily unlawful can be lawful under some circumstances (e.g., a cop directs you to make an otherwise illegal U-turn to avoid a road blockage).
2. It depends on state/local law, but this is probably not a lawful order in that the cop is using his authority to demand things that are really just for his personal kicks, with no connection to law enforcement. I can't believe you would ever face prosecution for refusing a request like this. And, of course, a cop is looking at discipline and maybe dismissal for such conduct.
3. This is getting close to the facts of the Orsak case. Yes, "stay clear of this sidewalk" is a classic lawful order. Maybe the cop is making a bad judgment, and you really should be able to walk on that sidewalk. Here we have to ask ourselves what as a society we want in this situation: i) let people disregard the cop's order or ii) force them to comply with it (under the penalty Mr. Orsak faced), and have meaningful citizen grievance procedures available to deal with unreasonable or abusive cops. I think ii) is by far the way to go.
4. Same as 3. If the cop demands that you travel at an unsafe speed, the order might cease to be lawful.
5. That's almost certainly a lawful order. Maybe there are some very odd situations where doing something illegal is necessary to prevent some grave bodily harm to another.
Let's see...how about a diabetic sees another diabetic in hypoglycemic shock. She is about to inject the victim with life-saving insulin. Doing so, however, would violate drug dispensing laws. A stickler for enforcing these laws, Officer orders the Good Samaritan not to inject. She does, regardless. Sounds like a Criminal Law exam, which sometimes present some really, really unlikely situations.