In the case of D.C.c vs. Wesby police had arrested twenty-one partygoers without probable cause. "Officers had received an anonymous tip from a surrounding neighbor that the party was going an at an unattended house with the actual owner being present." The officers did not have probable cause arrest the twenty-one partygoers that night, for they did not know that they were trespassing into the home. There was also not enough evidence to arrest the partygoers for probable cause. The police should not receive protection of qualified immunity because they detained people with no apparent evidence just by their intuition and
The night of the party a woman by the name Peaches invited people into a home that was not legally hers or under her name. She had talked to the…show more content… The partygoers at the party did not think that Peaches wasn’t the rightful homeowner. Typically if you are invited to a house party by a person one most likely believes that the home is the inviters. They did not know think to question Peaches about the home and whether it was hers. They just assumed if any other person would that it was hers. Later that evening Peaches had left the party at a local store to get more party items. Around the time she was gone a neighbor called the police informing them that a party was going on when the rightful owner was not present in the house. The officers then went to the house and looked inside for the owner. A partygoer told an officer that a woman by the name Peaches had invited them to the party. The officials were able to get a hold of Peaches by phone. She had explained that yes she had asked them to the party and that the owner and she had spoken to her possibly being able to rent the home. The home was not hers yet to live in. The police then decided to arrest all the people that were there for unlawful entry. The charges were later dropped because there was no probable cause to arrest them; the
