Based on your post ASTAC, I assume that you have no problem with the police throwing someone with tattoos or dirty clothes in jail "just in case" because they might be a criminal? After all, there's no need for actual evidence of a crime, shoot first and ask questions later, right?
In my posts, I kept saying 'maybe there's stuff we haven't heard yet that support the decision they make' but I followed that up with surprise that people on the message board just ASSUMED he must be guilty BECAUSE he was arrested. The mere act of being arrested should not be part of the decision making process for whether someone is guilty.
I would like to suggest you re-acquaint yourself with the standards of justice established by our forefathers, many who lived, fought and died within a few miles of where you live. What you describe is a sequence of logic more appropriate for the soviet union, not the United States.
If this guy did something more threatening then just stand there, then we'll hear about it in a little bit. But until then, stop yelling for blood. Remember the guard at the Olympic bombing in Atlanta? People applying the same standards of evidence as you ruined his life, cost him his career, and made him an enemy of the people.... until it eventually came out that he was innocent. whoops.
