Ruling For The Defendant
Here's one where, at least from what little I know, I'd be ruling for the defendant. One of a few cases I've seen over time where I'd side with the accused rather than the prosecution. Sad part is, I don't see why this even ended up in court.
Without going into all the details, and keeping in mind that all I know is what I've read in the paper, looks to me like the situation here got way out of hand.
Former sheriff's deputy, now Chief of Ferndale P.D., Lonnie Lawson, arrests a guy for child endangerment under some rather shaky circumstances. He also charges him for Interfering With An Officer- sometimes referred to as Contempt of Cop by those in the business.
From what I can see, defendant Sean Marsh, made an uncomfortable situation worse by ignoring Lawson. Lawson seized the moment and escalated it further by apparently getting his feathers ruffled and jacking the situation up even more.
This whole thing should have probably been dropped after the initial confrontation was over when cooler heads could have dealt with it.
A couple questions I have, though: Does the Marsh family live in Ferndale? Have they had dealings with Lawson before? Does Sean Marsh have a record of criminal activity or hostility towards law enforcement? Has Lawson has similar problems with others in Ferndale?
Somehow this smells like the result of a long- standing personal feud, or something along that line. But I don't know enough about it. I don't live in Ferndale.