Doesn’t it imply that the police lacked probable cause for the initial arrest if the only charge against the detained individual is resisting arrest?
1 Like
The matter is left solely for the courts to decide, assuming it gets that far.
In case you are supposed to be arrested, then you are supposed to go quietly and let the lawyers sort it out. After all, somebody who was guilty would also likely resist arrest, so you can’t just say somebody resisting arrest means he/she is not guilty.
Police can arrest someone solely for resisting arrest if the person obstructs or interferes with law enforcement duties. Even if no initial crime led to the arrest, actions like physically resisting, fleeing, or obstructing an officer’s duties can result in charges under “resisting arrest” laws. The focus is on hindering police actions, not on an underlying crime.
You are very right @LawyerLounge 
The only chargs can never be “resisting arrest” There’s usually a reason someone gets arrested and when the “resisting arrest” gets added on their charge sheet, it’s because they delayed arrest or obstructed an officer from doing their work, which was to arrest for a certain reason.