by Professor » Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:44 am
One of the things that was made a big deal of beforehand, and which I'm sure will be made a big deal of in the trial, is the 911 operator telling Z not to follow TM. I just don't get how that has any bearing on the case, other than a marginal aside.
First off, it's not a binding order. It's not the same as a police officer ordering a person behind a crowd control line. I've been advised the same thing by 911 operators (was following a car driven by a guy I suspected of being drunk), but kept following the person so that I could tell her exactly where the person was until the police arrived. They tell you that for your safety, but it's not an order. Was I initiating a situation by following a drunk driver (he was drunk, BTW), or was I simply doing my civic duty?