Thanks for the follow-up Larry B.

Sounds like this will likely come down to an unlawful detainment case??No force was used. Based on the factors needed for "qualified immunity" I still don't see how these officers and the agency (tribe)wouldn't be civilly liable if the hunters chose to go that route.

Irie, "reasonable suspicion" usually enters a situation when conducting searches, etc. Officers are granted power to intervene, using force if necessary, if the following factors are met a) the crime itself is severe enough to warrant it. b) if the suspects is of immediate threat to the officers or others, c)if they are actively resisting arrest, d) if they are actively avoiding arrest by fleeing. There are a few others that are less specific, but those came out of a case in the 90's Graham vs. Connor and expanded on earlier case law in TN vs. Gardner.

Of course most of this goes out the window without JD and I mentioned the factors needed to respond outside of JD above.

Silly as it may seem, drawing a weapon on someone, as far as I know, doesn't necessarily add to the severity of the wrong doing such as in this case as long as a reasonable officer can articulate the need to do so.

What other "laws" would these fellows have broken other than illegally detaining these folks for an unreasonable amount of time.