Terry V. Ohio Case Study

The contact with Ken is lawful because the cop who went after him could have been passing by and not even acknowledging Ken for any reason. When someone is trying to avoid contact with you it does not take training from the police academy to tell so there is suspicion already then when she gets passed him he runs suspicion is even higher at this time. It is not illegal for someone to run in public but when you are acting suspiciously as Ken was then it does call attention to yourself. Since he fit the description of a robbery in the vicinity the cop is lawfully able to stop and question him since there is reasonable suspicion that Ken did fit the description of a possible suspect who may have committed a crime. This is not like the Terry v. Ohio case were the officer had no information that the men that were walking back and forth were matching the description of a possible suspect for a crime as Ken was. …show more content…
The fact that the officer had enough information gave reasonable suspicion, however if that call had not came in to the officer then she would have had no reason to suspect Ken. Let’s be honest most people try to avoid police interaction or try to act like law abiding citizens that it makes them look suspicious, by Ken running that necessarily does not mean he has committed a crime. He may have received a call or a text that there was an emergency, or he had to go to the restroom really bad I could list many what if scenarios, the fact is the officer would not have had reasonable suspicion to be able to pursue Ken if that call had not came