@freemo are you pointing at the concept of being arrested "for" something in general or that an original reason for arrest would still be valid if it was valid initially?
@freemo oh, do you have references? I thought that resisting a _legal_ arrest in the US could be reasonable grounds for an arrest, which would be valid iff there was a valid reason for the arrest that was being resisted.
@robryk If you are resisting a legal arrest then they can charge youw ith resisting **on top of** the reason they were originally arresting you. But the reason for the original arrest can not be resistance of arrest itself as you cant resist an arrest before being arrested and you need a reason to arrest therefore it cant be the reason.
Its well established case law, but no, off hand I dont know the specific case that would address this. I also dont really have the time and bandwidth to search for it for you.
@freemo ah, ok, then we agree completely but phrase it differently
@robryk im ok with that :)
@robryk the law is quite clear that you cant arrest someone for resisting arrest, but yes you need a reason to arrest someone. What those reasons are is quite specific though.