Man Arrested For Drinking Ice Tea in Parking Lot

reply to post by defcon5


ah an ABC officer that makes a bunch more sense thanks for that

law.onecle.com... info on abc officers and their powers etc

www.ncdps.gov... another interesting link but deals mostly with permitting but if you go near the bottom where it talks about what officers are not allowed to do it is kind of interesting,it also talks about how if a permit holder(to sell booze etc) allows people to drink on their premiss they can loose the license so it might have been liability that lead this officer to be so aggressive

A Terry stop allows the officer to do a non-intrusive pat down for weapons, not to sniff beverage cans. You can seize contraband if it is immediately apparent what it is during the patdown, but it has to be something you can determine by look or feel. To seize and inspect something that is not plainly contraband is far beyond Terry, and the officer would not have authority to do so.

At least not by any description of a Terry stop I've heard of.

It's obvious that the officer did NOT know if the beverage had alcohol in it or not. It was not plainly apparent to him. Therefore it is immune to Terry, since it was not a weapon.

I have thought it over, and I think this guy probably did deserve to be arrested after all. He trespassed for at least 30 seconds, and was therefore in violation of the law. It would be ludicrous to imagine that the officer should have any interest in overlooking such a heinous crime. If he hadn't arrested the guy he would have been neglecting to carry out his sworn duties! Some other examples:



Here we have a person who was physically combative, and therefore a threat to the officer. She refused his orders, and her behavior was such that he certainly felt threatened. I'm just glad he was quick enough to react with appropriate force before she was able to attack and severely injure him. For all we know she had a gun stashed in her bra. She is a Texan, and we all know how those people are with their guns. If she insists on acting and speaking like such a "Texan" while driving that sort of vehicle she should not be surprised when people assume she is armed.

Or this case:




Another example of a criminal who refuses to follow his orders, refuses to produce the requested documents for at least 3 or 4 seconds, and is physically combative with the officer. There is simply no room for discretion on the part of the officer here. The law MUST be enforced, and she MUST be arrested. Anything less would be anarchy.

Another example:



This guy was tresspassing, just like the tea guy, and given a citation. Later, when the cops wanted to reinforce the message by citing him again he forced the officers to beat the crap out of him when he refused to stop, leading the police on a dangerous high-speed pursuit in a residential area. Think of the children! Maybe the injuries that he sustained while resisting his arrest will make him reconsider the next time he'll feels like handing out subversive literature without the permission against the wishes of local authorities.

And this one:



This guy was a real scumbag: The SWAT team that bashed down his door and shot his dog found a whopping 8 GRAMS of cannabis in his house. That is some serious weight! I bet the streets were dry for weeks after the police intercepted that shipment, with weed addicts lining up outside the rehab clinics desperate from withdrawal. The people of Columbia should thank those officers for cleaning up the streets of that wretched ghetto he was living in. For all we know he was involved in dogfighting as well. We can't rule it out, but he did have everything you need to run dogfights (dogs, water bowls, dog food, etc) so we may as well assume it to be a probability.

These people were ALL guilty of crimes, and they ALL got what they deserved. It would be wrong for any of us to question the actions taken against them, because what do we know? We're just wannabe internet lawyers crying about dead dogs and spilled cans of tea. If a crime is committed there is no room for officer discretion. The full weight of the law must be applied to them, and the full weight of a fat cop must be applied to their necks and backs. I applaud all of the officers involved in these incidents for keeping the streets safe.

In case I didn't lay a thick enough layer of sarcasm across this post, I don't really believe any of this. I'm trying to illustrate the point that the police don't HAVE to do something just because they are authorized to do so, and that at times their actions can be legal but still disgustingly oppressive. None of these cops, as far as I know, were found to be acting beyond their authority, and all of these people were certainly guilty, but that is not much of a consolation when your granny is being tasered or your dog is eating bullets. Just because the police are acting lawfully does not mean they are acting morally or in the best interest of the community or their department.

Originally posted by defcon5
You do your business and you leave in a reasonable time. This guy was not doing business in there, which came up in the video, he was there waiting on someone.

The monster!

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by spacejosh

 

All I can get from your post is that you must have been guilty of something because you lost in court.
Beyond that, if you open a door, and they can see or smell something, they can then search that area, you basically gave them cause.

Also, they don't have to read you your rights, that is TV law. Your rights only have to be read when you are going to be questioned. Many places now just have an automatic system in the jail that reads everyone their rights at the same time while they are in holding.

yeah well you really dont know what happened do you? but if you must know, i was guilty of one thing riding a dirtbike on the street! but i was not charged with that. i was charged with not having a motorcycle license which you dont need for a dirtbike not having insurance which you dont need on a dirtbike not wearing a helmet which is not required by law on a dirtbike not having registration which you dont need on a dirtbike.he tried to call my off road motocross racebike a scooter so he could charge me with traffic violations.
and about the smell they cant go in a locked door without a warrant, so he got pissed and arrested me on bull# charges. happy now?i never had a automatic rights reader. in fact i sat there for at least five hours before being charged and processed it was complete bull#! because i closed the door in his face and he couldn't do # about it, so he made up some charges that didnt stick but, with lawyer fees, and bond, and court fees and the helmet charge that i took just to get it over with. it cost around 1200 bucks so yeah im kinda pissed about it.

Originally posted by defcon5
Its called reading between the lines to get to the underlying facts of what is going on here.

You mean "reading into a video the context which my biases predispose me to believing, because God knows the police cannot be in the wrong ever."

Originally posted by kimish
OK, bs. How hard is it to put alcohol into an open can?? Not hard at all. To my knowledge carrying an open alcohol container in public is illegal. All that X had to do was let the officer smell the can. Instead he was defiant. This is why many people get arrested for petty stuff, they're stupid and try pressing their luck.
Chances are that X has a rap sheet as long as his leg too. SMh.

ETA: Arizona tea is also popular in many subcultures. Codeine (illegal without prescription/or illegal to abuse) is used in the tea. OP< I know you are aware of this so stop the race baiting.

What'll be interesting to find out is if the guy was just there or was working for a liquor store.

Now, I don't know about you, but it seems a bit inappropriate for an ABC officer to be the employee of a liquor store as security.

And if he wasn't working for the store, how can he trespass the guy? As a cop, he doesn't have the legal standing to just say 'you're trespassing' on private property. That's up to the property owner to file a complaint.

As a security guy for the store, he could, possibly, but then you've got an ABC officer working for a liquor store.

I don't know about you, but that seems a bit beyond the pale. It's sort of like a gaming regulatory officer working as a dealer in a casino. If it's not unlawful, it ought to be, and at best it's suspicious.

reply to post by Bedlam


If I understand the situation correctly the ABC is a state agency, and that store is a government building. Here in Pennsylvania and we have a similar setup, where anything stronger than beer is only available from the "state store", as it is known.

Originally posted by defcon5I've had tons of interaction with the police during the course of my life, and never once have I had a problem.

Ah, but have you tried drinking iced tea while being black?

Originally posted by kimish

Originally posted by WaterBottle

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by kimish

 

I just have to say I find your excuses for this abuse of authority to be disgusting.

Is it cause the guy's black? If he had been a rich white guy would you still side with the rent-a-cop?

He's an admitted stormfront member, that's all you need to know.

Kindly prove I'm an admitted storm front member. Danke in advance.

Just because you don't like what I have to say doesn't mean you can go coining me racist. Because that's what you are doing, subtly. I'm not stupid nor naive.

Marinate on that.

Okay, I just got to the end of page three. And here I found someone accusing you of something you're denying, and now you're asking for him to provide proof of the accusation.

I agree that proof should be provided when someone is accused of something, just as you accused the person in the video. You already realize that if you're the one accused it shouldn't be done without proof. So...perhaps you can see why what you did accusing the person in the video of many and various things without proof was out of line and wrong.

You actually just provided a classic example of hypocrisy.

Originally posted by Slugworth
reply to post by Bedlam

 

If I understand the situation correctly the ABC is a state agency, and that store is a government building. Here in Pennsylvania and we have a similar setup, where anything stronger than beer is only available from the "state store", as it is known.

In general with ABC systems, the state owns the liquor and its licensees sell the liquor for the state. But the licensee owns the store. It's not the ABCs store per se. He still shouldn't have legal standing to order the guy to be gone. Unless he's working for a liquor store, and then you've got some regulator working for someone he regulates, for pay. Bad news if so.

eta: now, if as a generic cop, he had ordered the guy to depart on pain of a mopery charge, that might have been more apt. Begone or I'll arrest you for loitering, or mopery with intent to creep or the like. Disturbing the peace. But instead he went for a badly executed Terry stop and then proceeded to go for a trespass without ever identifying himself sufficiently. I guess this is what happens when you're an ABC cop and you don't have the practice stomping the little people like the beat cops have.

Originally posted by kimish

Originally posted by WaterBottle

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by kimish

 

I just have to say I find your excuses for this abuse of authority to be disgusting.

Is it cause the guy's black? If he had been a rich white guy would you still side with the rent-a-cop?

He's an admitted stormfront member, that's all you need to know.

Kindly prove I'm an admitted storm front member. Danke in advance.

Just because you don't like what I have to say doesn't mean you can go coining me racist. Because that's what you are doing, subtly. I'm not stupid nor naive.

Marinate on that.

i've read kimish's posts up to here in the discussion and chucking the race card at him is pretty darn rich - you may not like his angle but it aint racist and his approach is imo reasonable whether or not you agree.. and i'd hardly expect me and he to be fairly pally if he was your average stormfront member considering how often i've posted (or indeed over posted) anti-islamophobe stuff... you'll need a lot more evidence to condemn someone with race hate.
and here is a confession...

i'm a stormfront member... yes indeedy, i sometimes go there to read what i am up against and learn the sort of crap i may need to contend with in future discussion and in my work with young people in troubled areas - know your enemy and so forth, and a membership is needed to read certain parts of the forum - am i a racist? the very idea is laughable

reply to post by defcon5

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by garbageface

 

Also stated in the article:

Viral video of man's arrest outside Fayetteville liquor store stirs controversyA statement from ABC Law Enforcement Chief Bill Belvin said that despite Beatty's assertion that he was drinking a non-alcoholic beverage, "the officer still had suspicions based on previous experience, and asked to examine the can more closely to determine if alcohol was present."

I suggest that you go read it yourself.

That’s a pretty convenient excuse there. Can they show proof of these suspicions based on previous experiences?

You know like some previous filed complaints against this man.

To me this sounds like an automatic response to justify ones own irrational actions.

Originally posted by defcon5
I didn't mean it was faked, I meant it was a setup.
They went there to cause a stir and film it.

So what you are saying is that you are a member of this group and have inside information as to what they were doing in Fayetteville NC, even though you live in Florida?

Can you please tell me which person you are in the video in question?

Still SMH!

Originally posted by defcon5
Also, they don't have to read you your rights, that is TV law. Your rights only have to be read when you are going to be questioned. Many places now just have an automatic system in the jail that reads everyone their rights at the same time while they are in holding.

So you can cite the Terry case law like it is valid, then turn around and spew this tripe.

So I am taking it that Miranda v. Arizona doesn’t mean anything to you either.

Can everyone see this non-sense?


They can pick and choose which laws they want to apply, yet expect us to follow all these laws that they will pick and choose to use so long as it serves their agenda.

When did the police become like Neo?

If you have been schooled and trained in the law and criminal justice then go and commit this type of act, you should be thrown into maximum security isolation and the key thrown away. You of all people should know better than this!!!

To think we have overpopulated jails with non-violent offenders. I say we let some go to make room for people who violate your rights, such as this hell bent man on a mission.

I bet the guy could sleep real well that night knowing that he took a man off the street guilty of drinking Ice Tea, while allowing the Drunk to trespass on the property. I salute you Mr. Eagle Eyes!!!

End Sarcasm.

reply to post by WaterBottle


Guess people aren't really watching the video. He says he is a cop and he shows his badge. As for the way he did it. Because the guy was being confrontational the judge won't care. He was told to leave the property and didn't not. That is tresspassing. The store and parking lot are private property not public.

I just arrived at work and cannot post what I would like to from my phone. I will post a video of another man who on more than one occasion is trespassing in Fayetteville yet the police do nothing to the man. I surely hope it was not because of his skin color.

The videos I am talking about are of a man trespassing at Fayetteville Tech Community College trying to preach religion to the students walking to their next class.

If anyone knows the video feel free to post it. If not I will add it as soon as I get back to my computer.




I don't know why it is not linking the right video. There is 6 more minutes to this where police show up. Go to this mans yt page to see the rest until I can get back home and fix this.

Originally posted by defcon5
Where have I heard this before:

Viral video of man's arrest outside Fayetteville liquor store stirs controversy
Lawyers who practice criminal and civil rights law said it's not clear from the arrest video or a second related video (which shows the man being put into a police car), whether the officer was right or wrong. They said they needed more information about the circumstances that could have been left out of the videos, such as whether there had been problems or complaints of people illegally drinking alcoholic beverages in the parking lot.

A statement from ABC Law Enforcement Chief Bill Belvin said that despite Beatty's assertion that he was drinking a non-alcoholic beverage, "the officer still had suspicions based on previous experience, and asked to examine the can more closely to determine if alcohol was present."

Oh, yeah...

Originally posted by defcon5
The fact that the business had an “off duty” or “undercover” police officer on the lot tells that they have had problems in that area with drinking and loitering already.

The incident was in the parking lot of a Cumberland County ABC store on Morganton Road, across from Cross Creek Mall. Libero's agency handles law enforcement for the county ABC Board.

Once Libero has Beatty handcuffed, he orders the videographer off the property. The videographer, still recording, argues but walks away and gets into a car. The video next shows him exiting the car from a neighboring parking lot to continue shooting Beatty's arrest.

Funny that since the officer was supposedly “acting outside his authority to arrest on THAT property” that he wouldn't just go to the other parking lot and arrest the other guy as well?
I guess that means he must have had authority to trespass someone ONLY in the parking lot of the ABC liquor store....

Gee...Where have I heard that before?

Originally posted by defcon5
The officer quite clearly stated he was “trespassing” and needed to leave the property.
The officer cannot “trespass” anyone off private property without the consent of the owner or agent.

Even the ACLU isn't touching this one yet and suspects the video to be edited...

Lawyers David Courie of Fayetteville and Raul Pinto of the American Civil Liberties Union office in Raleigh said they would need to know more about the circumstances before they could say whether Libero had a valid reason to stop and arrest Beatty.
Courie noted the seemingly drunk man who walked through in the middle of the encounter. The store may have a problem with drunk people in its parking lot, he said.

"It seemed like it was a search," Pinto said. But he noted that the video appears to have been edited, and he doesn't know what key information was left out.
"Without all of the facts as to what could have happened prior to the encounter, that those facts could arise to probable cause, we just don't know enough to make that determination," Pinto said. "These inquiries are very fact specific.

Your post only weakens your previous statements. No one knows what happened and they need to investigate more. In other words, the cop may be lying. Why take the stance he isn't?

CJ

reply to post by Slugworth


Excellent research SlugWorth,

I just think the officer should have upped the voltage on his tazer, i don't believe 50,000 volts was enough for a 72 year old woman. They can be pretty frisky, it's a good thing the Male officer didn't try and subdue her himself as he was alone. In fact I'm surprised he approached her car without backup because you know these old ladies from the south are infamous tea drinkers!

And i love the other video where officers are involved in a low speed pursuit reaching speeds of about 5mph. Those darn ten speeds really need to be banned before more people scrape their knees! That kid got what he deserved, how dare he pass out flyers at the local high school! What does he think this is, a free country?

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

 

actually, he told him he was arresting him then cuffed him.

He says "you are being arrested". He never says "you are under arrest". He then calls the REAL cops on his cell phone.

But yeah, he didn't identify himself, he did tell them he was the "po-lice" when asked, but provided ZERO identification. Honestly, they could have shot him once he grabbed the guy. Anyway it's all on tape, but without a breathalizer and testing on the can, what exactly would he be charged with? Not leaving a parkinglot fast enough?

With this tape, its highly unlikely that any charges would stick. Guy still got taken to the ground, cuffed, and halled in for processing (and at night like this, chances are he spent the night in a cell), for DRINKING ICED TEA.

I still wanna know how common it is to film people drinking tea in a parkinglot. Personally, i feel like there's more to this story that we're not getting.

People film each other doing all sorts of stuff all the time. Have you been on youtube or facebook?

Whether the charges would stick or not is beside the point but the hassle of being detained by some arrogant
cop would piss me off to no end! If this was a real video I would get a lawyer to file a lawsuit for harassment and false arrest! Since the officer had no real initial reason to approach X then he was racially profiling and should face charges as such but since we are living in Amerika I can't imagine anything like that would happen!