A man has sued a police officer, alleging that the officer violated the man's civil rights by using excessive force while arresting him. At trial, the officer admits having hit the man in the head with the butt of his gun, but contends that the force was necessary, because the man was resisting arrest. In support of his contention, the officer seeks to introduce evidence that the man had resisted arrest on three prior occasions during the last 10 years. Is this testimony regarding the man's conduct during the three prior arrestsadmissible?

Question

Timmy

Social Studies

7 June, 15:54

A man has sued a police officer, alleging that the officer violated the man's civil rights by using excessive force while arresting him. At trial, the officer admits having hit the man in the head with the butt of his gun, but contends that the force was necessary, because the man was resisting arrest. In support of his contention, the officer seeks to introduce evidence that the man had resisted arrest on three prior occasions during the last 10 years. Is this testimony regarding the man's conduct during the three prior arrestsadmissible?

+1

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Justine Murphy · Answer 1

This argument will only be admissible if he has strong evidence that this actually happened, such as videos and witnesses. In fact, having all this time of resistance to prison and something that will weigh against him, and normally police officers are always seen as victims even if they are not, but he still needs hard evidence that there was resistance during the arrest.