It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Florida Man Records Himself Getting Attacked by Cop for not Rolling Down Window all the way

page: 2
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

As it says in the second video, you can ask "Am i being detained/arrested?" if the answer is no, then you tell him that you are free to go. Simple as that. If they do have grounds to arrest you then you comply.

To add: The LEO need a reasonable cause for a traffic stop or search, not to ask the person to step out of the vehicle.
edit on 26-8-2014 by kicked because: to add




posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
You are required by law to step out of the car when told to do so by LE.

I have no idea if this guy was actually "assaulted". Maybe. Maybe not. I also have no idea how reasonable the officer was being up to this point. I'm kind of doubting he was. He seemed like a dick.

I would be a little suspicious and jumpy if I went to pull someone over and they didn't do so at the first opportunity. Driving a few extra blocks is a bad idea. Not rolling your window down when asked is a bad idea. Not getting out of the car is illegal, and a bad idea.



He had good reason not to step out of the car. The cops in his area are known for excessive force.

Getting out of the car was the only bad idea this guy had. With cops acting like Gestapo all over the place, I certainly wouldn't step out of the car. Cops are becoming as dangerous as criminals. The law be damned if it means exposing myself to assault and batter by a supposed "public servant".



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: 3u40r15m

I sort of doubt he charged the officer, I think that may unfortunately be some creative report writing. He was pretty darn collected throughout that stop, even when he was getting pulled out. He certainly might have, but I'm not going to make that call based on the video or the officer's statement. I'm also not going to say that he was assaulted or that the cop should be fired/jailed based on this guy's statement or the video.

The video is bad. It just shows two guys disagreeing on what happened before the video started. It doesn't show assault from the cop or from the guy. It does show someone disobeying a lawful command. People are going to jump up my butt for saying this but when you get pulled over just cooperate. Fight it later and record everything. This whole thing would have gone much differently if the guy had just rolled the stupid window down and been polite to the cop.

Yes, it's unfortunate that cops essentially have discretion on how they treat people. Use it to your advantage. Record and document anything that is done illegally. Protest once or twice calmly when asked to do something you are not comfortable with and then do it so you don't get ripped out of your car.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Not Authorized
I agree with you. Unfortunately the judges seem to take the testimony of a LEO more seriously than everyday citizens. Most LEO get reinstated with pay because the proceedure they're following allows for this behavior.

This is why I keep saying the system is failing. The system is protecting them. Not us.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80


A traffic stop is, for practical purposes, a Terry stop;[10] for the duration of a stop, driver and passengers are “seized” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.[11] Under federal law, drivers[12] and passengers[13] may be ordered out of the vehicle without additional justification by the officer, although such practices might not be authorized under state law depending on the jurisdiction. Drivers[14] and passengers[15] may be searched for weapons upon reasonable suspicion they are armed and dangerous. If police reasonably suspect the driver or any of the occupants may be dangerous and that the vehicle may contain a weapon to which an occupant may gain access, police may perform a protective search of the passenger compartment.[16][17]


So no, they don't need much of a reason.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
You are required by law to step out of the car when told to do so by LE.

I have no idea if this guy was actually "assaulted". Maybe. Maybe not. I also have no idea how reasonable the officer was being up to this point. I'm kind of doubting he was. He seemed like a dick.

I would be a little suspicious and jumpy if I went to pull someone over and they didn't do so at the first opportunity. Driving a few extra blocks is a bad idea. Not rolling your window down when asked is a bad idea. Not getting out of the car is illegal, and a bad idea.



Domo, with all due respect. You are obliged to follow the REASONABLE commands of a peace officer WHILE driving or pulled over operating a motor vehicle but the caveat to that which has been decided in multiple states based on case law says that the officers must establish "reasonable".

In essence, what that means is that it is perfectly acceptable to ask and receive a valid answer for the the commands you are being ordered to comply with. In other words...... Because I said so doesn't cut it, because I felt like it doesn't cut it, because I don't like your attitude doesn't cut it.

Respect works both ways and while I encourage people to respect law enforcement, they also need to respect not only the people they interact with but the rights granted to those people by the way of the document they swore to uphold upon attaining their position.

An officer's response to a situation should be professionally measured with the utmost restraint to their own personal feelings and instead take on a manager / employee type of roll. If after that exchange has been exhausted or if the officer feels he or she is genuine danger, anything goes but it must be justified. It's a dangerous job and use of force, sometimes deadly is needed and also warranted.

That is not what we see however in this video. What we see is an overzealous authoritarian slightly punch drunk on misguided power who thinks he has the authority to do whatever he wants whenever he wants and does not need to explain himself even when there is ZERO threat of danger. Guess what.....? He's wrong.

Having a badge may win you the short term battle but it will cost your department, your community and the taxpayers within it, millions of dollars because the morons they hire have an ego too big for the job. Cops like this in the video need to go away and better policies need to be put in place to make sure these types of people are not hired in the first place.

There are many good cops and just as many bad cops. Police officers are obviously needed so maybe the solution is to address the hiring process that puts SO many bad people in key positions to begin with.
edit on 26-8-2014 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Domo1

Don't they need a reason to pull you out of your car?
Not just cause they want to?


Probable cause can be creatively worded too. And when the LEO is proven wrong the system says oh well.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf




Getting out of the car was the only bad idea this guy had. With cops acting like Gestapo all over the place, I certainly wouldn't step out of the car. Cops are becoming as dangerous as criminals. The law be damned if it means exposing myself to assault and batter by a supposed "public servant".


I appreciate what you're saying but perhaps I can explain why that is an awful idea.

You're getting out of that car one of two ways. By opening the door and stepping out, or getting tazed/maced/your window broken and hauled out by force.

You're protecting yourself more by complying than resisting lawful orders. If you do not open the door the cop will get you out and at that point IS allowed to use force. If you just hop out if any force is used sue 'em.

Your refusal looks bad to a jury/judge. It makes the cops actions appear justified. Compliance does not.

I know everyone here has a huge problem with authority and what I'm saying is anathema to your ideals, but it's the truth like it or not. I'm not saying just take abuse. I'm saying pick your battles. You're not going to reason your way out by vomiting talking points, even if you're right. Document everything and fight the battle on even footing (or at least more even).



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:18 PM
link   
I'll tell you what this is. This is typical Florida for profit police BS. Florida has a 98% conviction rating, and even the attorney general brags on her webpage about how much profit that they have generated for the state coffers. They use DUI as a major source of income as we have no city or state taxes here. The reason why the officer says “you were driving erratically” is that is the standard line for “we're going to give you a field sobriety test”, and is based solely on the officers opinion. They pulled this exact same crap on my brother, and when the dash cam was pulled, they found the officer was lying and had falsified his police report. Their way to get around this is to threaten the defendant and get them to plea to a lesser charge, or face expensive and lengthy prosecution, then finally win via economic attrition which they know most don't have the resources to fight. Hence the unheard of 98% win rate around here.

With that said, this guy was in the wrong for not getting out of his car, and that BS about not opening the window is from an internet “law” course that has been posted here on ATS over the years. That is what you get when you listen to an internet lawyer though... There is a reason why real lawyers go to schools for years. A 10 minutes internet video does not teach all the nuances of dealing with the police, and will get you into more trouble 99% of the time.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Domo1

To be fair, the situation never should have gotten to the point of him being asked to step out, had he asked the right questions. He screwed that up for himself and at that point, only an idiot is going to resist. If you're innocent you're protected.

For anyone looking for clarification:


The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.

Whether a particular type of search is considered reasonable in the eyes of the law, is determined by balancing two important interests. On one side of the scale is the intrusion on an individual's Fourth Amendment rights. On the other side of the scale are legitimate government interests, such as public safety.

The extent to which an individual is protected by the Fourth Amendment depends, in part, on the location of the search or seizure. Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998).



Cars

Where there is probable cause to believe that a vehicle contains evidence of a criminal activity, an officer may lawfully search any area of the vehicle in which the evidence might be found.
Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009),
An officer may conduct a traffic stop if he has reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred or that criminal activity is afoot.
Berekmer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984),
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002).
An officer may conduct a pat-down of the driver and passengers during a lawful traffic stop; the police need not believe that any occupant of the vehicle is involved in a criminal activity.
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009).



Fourth Amendment



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Iamthatbish

Look into Grand Juries. It will be the only way. Policy does not overrule the US Constitution, nor State Constitutions. You describe felony rescue, also a crime.
edit on 26-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:33 PM
link   


The video is bad. It just shows two guys disagreeing on what happened before the video started. It doesn't show assault from the cop or from the guy. It does show someone disobeying a lawful command. People are going to jump up my butt for saying this but when you get pulled over just cooperate. Fight it later and record everything. This whole thing would have gone much differently if the guy had just rolled the stupid window down and been polite to the cop.

Yes, it's unfortunate that cops essentially have discretion on how they treat people. Use it to your advantage. Record and document anything that is done illegally. Protest once or twice calmly when asked to do something you are not comfortable with and then do it so you don't get ripped out of your car.

a reply to: Domo1

I have to agree with your assessment. It seems like some of these people want to give these police officers a poor attitude. Heck, I don't see a problem with complying and being polite if the police pull you over. Like you said, if you want to protect yourself record it. If the police start giving you an attitude and they end up beating you or arresting you for trumped up charges, file a law suit!

If your rights were violated, I'm sure any honest attorney would be happy to take your case. "Ca-ching," it may end-up costing the city a pretty penny. If enough people filed law suits, maybe the city would be forced to put pressure upon the police department to clean-up their act!



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: thirdcoast

Dang.. If you don't want to get shot or tased just do what I tell you.. I will beat your ass and just lie about in my report.

He was staring at me so I was scared. LMFAO.. That cant be real ,he did not really put that in his report did he?

Don't you eyeball me boy.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Let me tell you about one of the airport police officers that I knew when I worked out there. There was this one officer that used to sit on the emergency bypass road between the in and out roads into the airport, and every night I would know when my shift was almost over because I would see him out there giving a ticket to someone he had pulled over. Didn't matter if they hadn't done anything, he would always get one at almost exactly the same time every night in the same spot.

One night I got out of work early, was in the car on the way home. Sure enough I passed him sitting in his spot, and he pulls out to start following me. Now, I saw him in my rear view mirror, knew what he was up to, and had been in a few arguments with this guy for harassing my tuggers over the years on the ramp. (He had caused so much trouble that the airlines manager had told the aviation authority they wanted him fired if he held up any of our baggage again, and the airlines have a lot of pull due to the money they generate for the airport authority). He, on the other hand, didn't know what kind of car I drove. So I'm watching him in my rear view mirror, going a bit less then the speed limit. I'm almost off the property, out of his jurisdiction, and I decide to take a swig off the can of coke I had with me. As soon as that can hit my lips, on came the lights...

Now this is like 20 minutes to midnight, so its pretty dark out there, and he obviously didn't see who I was at first. So he comes up to the window, starts with the “I’m pulling you over because you were driving kind of erratically” crap. To which I answered him back, “If by erratically you mean I was driving the speed limit because I knew you were behind me and I know you pull someone over every night at this time, and oh, by the way this is a can of soda”. At that same instant his light hits me, he sees who I am, that I'm in my uniform, just got off shift, and have a can of coke. He turns about five shades of red, followed by a somewhat startled “oh, #, its you”, then “oh, okay, you can go”...

Another words, the cops down here “make crap up”, and know how to “game the system”, to harass, pull over, arrest, and fine otherwise innocent people to fill their “quota” (know locally as “logging a 'busy' day” as Florida doesn't have “quota's”).



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: Iamthatbish

Look into Grand Juries. It will be the only way. Policy does not overrule the US Constitution, nor State Constitutions. You describe felony rescue, also a crime.

More internet law...
Not going to do anything or get anywhere, just "wishful thinking".



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I haven't been in St. Pete for over twenty years or so....back when I was there it seemed a quiet town, at least in the area I was staying. A shame to see things have taken the hard line all of a sudden. Part of me wonders if any of this heavy handed treatment is due to the fact that there's a high level military base nearby...



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: kicked
a reply to: Domo1

To be fair, the situation never should have gotten to the point of him being asked to step out, had he asked the right questions. He screwed that up for himself and at that point, only an idiot is going to resist. If you're innocent you're protected.

For anyone looking for clarification:


The Constitution, through the Fourth Amendment, protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. The Fourth Amendment, however, is not a guarantee against all searches and seizures, but only those that are deemed unreasonable under the law.

Whether a particular type of search is considered reasonable in the eyes of the law, is determined by balancing two important interests. On one side of the scale is the intrusion on an individual's Fourth Amendment rights. On the other side of the scale are legitimate government interests, such as public safety.

The extent to which an individual is protected by the Fourth Amendment depends, in part, on the location of the search or seizure. Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998).



Cars

Where there is probable cause to believe that a vehicle contains evidence of a criminal activity, an officer may lawfully search any area of the vehicle in which the evidence might be found.
Arizona v. Gant, 129 S. Ct. 1710 (2009),
An officer may conduct a traffic stop if he has reasonable suspicion that a traffic violation has occurred or that criminal activity is afoot.
Berekmer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984),
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002).
An officer may conduct a pat-down of the driver and passengers during a lawful traffic stop; the police need not believe that any occupant of the vehicle is involved in a criminal activity.
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009).



Fourth Amendment


The logic in your post is flawed slightly. First, you may not search a vehicle unless you have substantiated reasonable cause which in most cases involves canines. Police officers have a notoriously hard time convincing juries and judges should that situation end up in court.

The thought that police can pull you over and pat you down without verbally explaining their reasonable cause to you is complete bunk. If you happen to be latino, black or any other minority and they find nothing the department is sued. Statutory code does not, cannot and will not ever supercede the Constitution. While it may be upheld in backwards counties and states, it never holds up in civil liability court.

Keep doing it though, keep bankrupting your county and keep paying out millions to douche bags that don't work and just wait for this type of thing. Totally worth it to display just how manly your gun and badge are when somebody has the audacity to ask a question and it bothers you.........
edit on 26-8-2014 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Those of you looking at videos and never having experienced police harassment are not accounting for the hurt, anger and frustration a person goes through when they decide that they won't make it easy for an LEO to walk over their rights.

The bottom line is the person interacting with the LEO doesn't having the training in regards to interacting with the public. Most people respond to being yelled at by yelling back. Have you ever asked an officer why they were yelling at you? I have, they replied they were not yelling they were being assertive. So, I can't yell at an LEO or I'm doing something illegal ... yet they rename it and its alright?

You may not have to speak to an LEO, they certainly don't like it when you choose not to. I personally live in an area where they have nothing better to do. I just saw two people get caught in a speed trap at the bottom of a hill. Until quotas are eliminated and people need to be pulled over for documented reasons. This won't stop.

Another thing you can do as a female is request a female officer. That really get the men angry though. Sometimes there may not even be a female officer on duty.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Helious

I always appreciate your posts, very measured and thoughtful.

I agree with almost everything that you said but I don't think they need to give you a reason why if they are just asking you out of the car. I'm not anywhere sure about that, having trouble coming up with anything too. I know they have to when they arrest you, or so says the ACLU.

Now should they? Yes of course. They also shouldn't act like power tripping little poops either.

Respect is very much a two way street. I do sort of wonder what all was said before the video started, after a certain point even the best of us lose our cool. While that's no excuse for police dickishness or brutality, it's something to remember when you're dealing with someone who's got a gun and is usually seen (right or wrong) as more reliable.

Either way I think just doing what you're asked calmly and respectfully is going to almost always be the best option. Like I said earlier, you're getting out of that car one way or another. Better to do so in the least confrontational manner and deal with the legality later when cooler heads prevail and you have legal counsel.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: thirdcoast

It is quite impressive how our Law Enforcement Agencies (lol, they still call themselves that!?!?!) can find SO MANY retarded, oh sorry I mean "Mentally Disabled" men to fill the shoes of the police force in America.

I don't believe there is any other agency in the country or world, that can take as many useless good for nothing child-minded fools who would probably otherwise end up in jail or in gangs, and help them to find jobs all across America.

US Police Departments...finding a place for every piece of scum in the country (whether it be behind bars, or behind a badge).




top topics



 
61
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join