Another way to phrase that first sentence is "assumption of innocence". And while random commentators on the internet are not obligated to honor it, law enforcement is supposed to.
This document is seemingly targeted on the investigation phase, before a charge has been filed, to distinguish what characteristics legitimate LARPing may have vs militia claims-of-LARPing.
Presumption of innocence does not extend to the initiation of an investigation, but comes into play with increasingly invasive methods (and ultimately, charges).
US law enforcement is empowered to initiate duck investigations on things that quack pretty liberally.
Yea, this entire thread really tells me that most people on HN have absolutely zero experience with the investigation phase of law enforcement.
If your in some group that reenacts pointing weapons at each other, or coming up with idea on how to blow up buildings and you have someone overhear this and report it, law enforcement themselves have no idea if you're the real thing our not (statistically, no your not, but investigators deal with outliers all day every day). If there is some kind of audio or video evidence saying something actionable (even though it may be pretend) and that gets in front of a judge, expect a warrant to get issued to tap into just about every part of your life.
Really? I don't think due process and law enforcement have anything to do with one another. Law enforcement arrests people on made up laws all the time just because they are doing something the law enforcement officer doesn't like, there is no consideration of presumption of innocence. Law enforcement's job is to enforce "the law" as they interpenetrate it -unlike civilians where "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" in law enforcement they certainly an go with ignorance of the law as long as the judge thinks it's "reasonable". Let's not forget the police have been embedding themselves in peaceful protest groups for the last 100 years.
>And while random commentators on the internet are not obligated to honor it, law enforcement is supposed to.
This is not the standard actually applied to law enforcement in the US. You can be convicted of nothing other than resisting arrest. Resisting arrest for what? Literally does not matter.
Also if you are arrested and found innocent, you are not compensated in any way for that arrest, which was clearly wrongful. Police in general are simply exempt from unlawful detention, except in cases of a well connected individual.
Assumption of innocence is for the court. The prosecution and law enforcement are not supposed to assume innocence, they are supposed to do everything in their legal power to prove guilt. There are things they can't do without reasonable suspicion, or probable cause, but these are vastly lower thresholds.
