This Black WAS abused by cops.. Sandra Bland

[fool]

Has it happened to you?

I've been frisked but never worn the braclets.

Do you think it's right that a cop can just slap the cuffs on and frisk you no matter what?

That's the law, it's for their safety.

I know that America is different to the UK but unless there's a serious incident/suspicion going on the cops don't go for the cuffs and frisking automatically and nor should that be allowed IMO.

They are allowed. That's how it is.

The only time I was stopped by cops was a few years ago while jogging home at about 2AM. The cop car siren went and the guy shouted in my direction so I stopped. I fitted the description of someone who'd stolen a valuable ornament within the past half hour and the guy asked me my permission before frisking me along with why I was jogging so late and I complied. He was completely polite before, after and during a very brief pat down and asked whether I understood why he needed to do it. I just said "yes" and was allowed to go on my way.

Did you guys have tea?

I can't say I'd have appreciated it if after stopping the cop just cuffed me regardless.

They get to cuff and search you for their safety. Arguing about gets you tased.
Remember; argue with the cops in court, not on the street.

 

[fool]

Is she legally obligated to be polite? Rudeness isn't a crime.

Failure to signal is the crime, which she could be arrested for. She could have just got a warning but she didn't want to do it that way.

The officer is an armed agent of state authority, entrusted to enforce the laws, not his own personal preferences. It's illegitimate for him to escalate a situation just because he doesn't like how a person responds to him.

For the ten thousandth time she can be arrested for failure to signal!
She was getting a pass at the officers discretion until she blew it.

He's the one who turned the situation into an arrest, literally it was his choice. He had no need to do so, and no legal authority that I can see.

You need to get glasses and understand the law before you spout this stuff.

 

[The Barbarian]

You need to get glasses and understand the law before you spout this stuff.

Bottom line? The officer violated the law and department policies, and now he's in trouble. Whether or not his behavior caused or contributed to a death is still to be determined. But it's irrelevant to the fact that he caused his own problems.

Dash cams save good cops and hang bad ones.

 

[fool]

He did. He issued what he called a "lawful order" to get out of her car, which seems to be without legal basis. I certainly can't see what valid reason he would have for it. Personally, I think that when armed agents of the state issue orders and enact them by force, they should have specific legal authority to do so, preferably including a court order.

They can get you out of the car, cuff you, frisk you, and take you to jail, hold you for 48 hours and then let you go without charges.
Learn it before you do something stupid.

Perhaps there is some legal basis for this under Texas law. But I can't figure out what it would be.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...23/sandra-bland-and-the-lawful-order-problem/

She can be arrested for the moving violation.
Period, end of story.

Generally, the police are only allowed to detain a person long enough to conduct their investigation. In this case, the investigation was concerning a failure to signal a turn, which didn't yield any evidence of any other crime or cause to investigate further, which therefore should not have required much investigation. I'm not sure why he would have needed to force Bland out of her car, let alone frisk her, for that, and he certainly didn't need her to put out a cigarette. He could have handed her the warning and walked away. He may not have liked her attitude, but that's well within her rights, especially when he asked her specifically about it.

He could have cuffed her at the beginning of the encounter if he wanted to.

 

[fool]

Bottom line? The officer violated the law and department policies, and now he's in trouble.

What law did he violate?
He didn't.
People may be shocked to know that but they need to understand.

Whether or not his behavior caused or contributed to a death is still to be determined.

How she came to be hanging by a trash bag is another story which we will explore as it unfolds.

But it's irrelevant to the fact that he caused his own problems.

He was doing his job. Cops have alot of discretion in how they enforce the law as evidenced by him writing her a warning instead of arresting her which is where she took it.

Dash cams save good cops and hang bad ones.

They should all have two body cameras, no excuses for them not working.

 

[MarcATL]

Once again, I renew my exhortation to black people:

Do not break the law. Do not congregate with known lawbreakers. Do not congregate in known hotspots for crime. Follow police instructions. Do not resist arrest.

Otherwise, I have no sympathy for you. My words about you will always be the same:

"They broke the law. They paid the price. What's your point" (From Judge Dredd, "Cadet"). :idunno:

What law did she break?

 

[fool]

What law did she break?

Failure to signal a lane change.

 

[GFR7]

NO! YOU FLAMING MORON!
She's "entitled" to be frisked and cuffed.
You need to stop spreading this misinformation.

Sorry, you're the flaming moron: The Texas Department of Public Safety rebuked this cop for violating state procedure and protocol during a traffic stop, and yanked him off the streets. Stop spreading disinformation, idiot. :wave2:

 

[fool]

Sorry, you're the flaming moron: The Texas Department of Public Safety rebuked this cop for violating state procedure and protocol during a traffic stop, and yanked him off the streets. Stop spreading disinformation, idiot. :wave2:

But they didn't arrest him did they?
Right.
Because he didn't break the law.
That's what you need to understand.

 

[GFR7]

But they didn't arrest him did they?
Right.
Because he didn't break the law.
That's what you need to understand.

Well, it's too early to tell. That's why they said he is on adm. leave "pending investigation". Obviously the family's attorney is suing for false arrest and false imprisonment, so we need to see the outcome of this to know whether he will ultimately be charged with any crime.

It's a shame this woman chose to kill herself right when she stood a good chance of winning a case and a settlement. :nono: Had the jail followed proper procedure, she would not have been able to.

What is needed is not "Black Lives Matter": What is needed is a thinning out of police forces at the national level. These can be replaced with community self-policing and neighborhood watches. The states can't afford to support these police forces and pay their pensions anymore, so it is the inevitable trend in the next 15 years. This will include swollen departments like animal control and traffic cops.

 

[Rusha]

What is needed is a thinning out of police forces at the national level. These can be replaced with community self-policing and neighborhood watches. The states can't afford to support these police forces and pay their pensions anymore, so it is the inevitable trend in the next 15 years. This will include swollen departments like animal control and traffic cops.

Oh, so prior to this story, you were already of this mindset ...

 

[GFR7]

Oh, so prior to this story, you were already of this mindset ...

Of course. Duh. This story was one more tragedy which comes of things being long past their time.

 

[Rusha]

Of course. Duh.

Duh, indeed. You would have no clue as to how *police* your own neighborhood.

 

[GFR7]

Duh, indeed. You would have no clue as to how *police* your own neighborhood.

There are people who do know, and there have been many texts written about the benefits of a return to localism and regionalism and neighborhood watches. For both the police and the courts of justice.

I haven't used the police in ages, in any case. The last time I encountered them, they were harassing and verbally abusing my autistic son, for which I reported them, and there were repurcussions. But then, I have relatives with the Governor's office and with the state Attorney General's office :mock:

 

[Rusha]

There are people who do know,

So admittedly, you are spouting off about something you have no personal knowledge of. Again.

and there have been many texts written about the benefits of a return to localism and regionalism and neighborhood watches. For both the police and the courts of justice.

Neighborhood watches would *make* the rules. What happens when the neighborhood you are in makes a rule you cannot live with? Will there be a directory to inform you of what neighborhood will accommodate you?

I haven't used the police in ages, in any case.

That's nice ... so if someone ever begins to harass and threaten you or anyone in your family, you will handle the matter on your own. Got it.

The last time I encountered them, they were harassing and verbally abusing my autistic son, for which I reported them, and there were repurcussions.

Having not been there and knowing the whole story from both sides, you can't seriously believe that would be a compelling argument for disbanding the police department.

But then, I have relatives with the Governor's office and with the state Attorney General's office :mock:

So you yourself abused the system by virtue of tattling to a higher up who just happened to be a relative and the boss. Somehow you don't believe what you did was hypocritical and corrupt. No surprise there.

 

[GFR7]

So admittedly, you are spouting off about something you have no personal knowledge of. Again.



Neighborhood watches would *make* the rules. What happens when the neighborhood you are in makes a rule you cannot live with? Will there be a directory to inform you of what neighborhood will accommodate you?



That's nice ... so if someone ever begins to harass and threaten you or anyone in your family, you will handle the matter on your own. Got it.



Having not been there and knowing the whole story from both sides, you can't seriously believe that would be a compelling argument for disbanding the police department.



So you yourself abused the system by virtue of tattling to a higher up who just happened to be a relative and the boss. Somehow you don't believe what you did was hypocritical and corrupt. No surprise there.

:wave2:

 

[Rusha]

I agree ... it sums up your whole *argument* quite nicely.

 

[rexlunae]

Failure to signal is the crime, which she could be arrested for. She could have just got a warning but she didn't want to do it that way.

He didn't arrest her for failure to signal. He arrested her for having a bad attitude and for failing to put out a cigarette, which as far as I can tell aren't crimes.

For the ten thousandth time she can be arrested for failure to signal!
She was getting a pass at the officers discretion until she blew it.

The officer had written a warning citation prior to the interaction that lead to her arrest. Clearly, he wasn't going to arrest her for failure to signal, and nothing that she did after that justified an arrest.

You need to get glasses and understand the law before you spout this stuff.

Great.

They can get you out of the car, cuff you, frisk you, and take you to jail, hold you for 48 hours and then let you go without charges.
Learn it before you do something stupid.

Speaking of needing to know the law...

It's true that they can arrest you and then release you without charge in a reasonable amount of time. However, that doesn't mean that you can be arrested arbitrarily. Police need probable cause to make an arrest, and lacking that, the arrest is illegal. If there was anything like probable cause for an arrest in this case, I can't see what it was. Rudeness is not a crime. Nor is smoking in your own car. Nor is refusing to follow a "lawful" order lacking lawful basis, which I don't see. Since these are non-crimes, they can't be probable cause.

She can be arrested for the moving violation.
Period, end of story.

It's not the end of the story. While technically it is possible to be arrested for a moving violation, it is generally quite rare, and since that isn't really what lead to the arrest, I have a hard time believing that courts would really honor that action as legal. The officer had a bruised ego and went on a power trip and he didn't like how she responded to him. If the arrest was about the moving violation, he would have arrested her at the outset.

He could have cuffed her at the beginning of the encounter if he wanted to.

And he could potentially have been in the right if he'd done that.

 

[GFR7]

She can be arrested for the moving violation.
Period, end of story.

He could have cuffed her at the beginning of the encounter if he wanted to.

If you can now be arrested and handcuffed for failing to use your turn signal, then I think it's time to figure out how to do without the use of police forces, and perhaps get better public transportation while we're at it. :wave2:

 

[Angel4Truth]

Why do you suppose he told her to put out her cigarette?

Bump.

That was answered well before you asked and bumped it to ask again:

Not unreasonable at all.

1) maybe he didnt want to have smoke blown on him while he was explaining the warning
2) maybe with her bad attitude he assumed she might toss the cigarette at him or burn him with it

3) if he was just out to get her, he wouldn't have given a warning, he would have given a citation, which he certainly could give.

Face it, she performed the "arrest me" dance basically. Attitude, belligerence.