Reference no: EM133484225
Purpose: Terry v. Ohio allows officers to stop (seize) a person based solely on reasonable suspicion. Understand that reasonable suspicion is less than probable cause; the standard to make an arrest. Understanding the elements of this case will allow you to concur or dissent with this level of authority for police officers.
Post: After reading Cleveland Police Detective Martin McFadden's account (p. 110) about his encounter with Terry and his associates, you will see how detailed of an account he provides. Often, police officers know their area of patrol at this same level and they provide the proactive police work that their area requires.
However, in the time since Terry v. Ohio was decided, critics of the decision argue that it disproportionately targets minority groups. Using what you have learned from this case, consider both sides of this issue when answering the questions below in your post.
If modern-day police officers are able to recount a similar description of events as Police Detective McFadden:
In what ways or situations are Terry Stops (and frisks) considered to be effective, proactive police tactics?
In what ways or situations could placing limitations on police officers during investigations be beneficial for the officer and those being investigated?