No argument, but it’s not probable cause to detain, search, or arrest. By the way, who was “running to hide”?
There was no distinction in 1963. Frisking on a reasonable suspicion wasn’t a thing until 1968. But there wasn’t a reasonable suspicion, either.
He was arrested for murder. There is nothing on the arrest report about punching anyone or “pulling out a pistol and trying to shoot” someone (of which there is no evidence whatsoever, anyway).
There was no distinction in 1963. Frisking on a reasonable suspicion wasn’t a thing until 1968. But there wasn’t a reasonable suspicion, either.It's a very old tactic — patrolmen had always stopped and searched persons they deemed suspicious.
The civil rights movement brought about rebellions and challenges:
The street-level challenge to stop-and-search policing made its way to the US Supreme Court in June 1968. In Terry v. Ohio, the Court upheld the principles underlying stop-and-search policing, and determined that the threshold for a “stop-and-frisk” was an officer’s reasonable and articulable suspicion— not probable cause— that a person was involved in crime and was armed.Warren wrote the majority opinion. Stop-and-frisk became official federal policy and the strategic cornerstone of the “war on crime” that followed.He was arrested for murder. There is nothing on the arrest report about punching anyone or “pulling out a pistol and trying to shoot” someone (of which there is no evidence whatsoever, anyway).The point is that the scuffle and gun were the reasonable cause for the arrest.
Words of Captain Westbrook, DPD from his interview by Larry Sneed in "No more Silence":
An officer by the name of McDonald came in from the other side got to him first. As I recall, Oswald said something like, "This is it!" as he came up with the pistol. McDonald then grabbed it.
