Sandra Bland Arrest and Death

[The Romulan Republic]

First of all, the vast majority of people who interact with cops are not seriously injured or killed.

Secondly, fighting back physically generally isn't extricating yourself, but increasing ones' chances of getting seriously injured, killed, or convicted of a felony.

And thirdly, its not a good idea to advocate that people fight cops and break the law.

To be blunt, the fact that you think a civilian fighting back with pepper spray against a trained cop with a gun who can call in massive heavily armed backup if need be is a viable approach suggests that you are out of touch with reality.

[Lagmonster]

Wondering if she had pepper spray and if she could've got a shot off before the officer was able to pull out his gun. I'll have to watch the video again, but I think I recall the officer exposing his head when he tried to reach into the car. A moment of vulnerability that a pepper spray shot could incapacitate him. And then drive away as fast as she could.

Your plan is stupid, and you are stupid.

If you pepper spray a policeman in the US after he's stopped you for any reason whatsoever, you may as well just drive off a bridge as you make your getaway, because you will be accurately labelled an armed and dangerous man who attacks policemen at traffic stops, and will be pursued vigorously. Say anything you want about compliance, but the outcome for the people who ran or fought back are tilted unanimously towards "injury and/or death".

[Lord MJ]

Of course the ideal solution isn't for people to fight back.

The ideal state of affairs in order of idealness:

1. Having better trained cops so incidents like this don't happen in the first place.

2. Having our legal system and police culture reformed in such a degree in that if a situation like this does happen that cooler heads tell the arresting cop "You dumbass," and then promptly release Sandra from jail with flowers and an apology.

3. Having our legal system and police culture reformed in such a degree that if things get to the point that Sandra had to use pepper spray and drive off, the rest of the cops would say to the officer "You Dumbass, that was not good policing, you behaved like a thug and got treated as such."

Option 1 seems to be the easiest to make happen, but nobody in power want's to admit that there is an issue.

Options 2 and 3. Are hindered entirely by the pack mentality that goes on in the police and in some cases prosecutors. Even officers that believe in good police conduct rally whenever they feel their institution is under attack instead of cleaning their own house.

Secondly, fighting back physically generally isn't extricating yourself, but increasing ones' chances of getting seriously injured, killed, or convicted of a felony.

If you pepper spray a policeman in the US after he's stopped you for any reason whatsoever, you may as well just drive off a bridge as you make your getaway, because you will be accurately labelled an armed and dangerous man who attacks policemen at traffic stops, and will be pursued vigorously. Say anything you want about compliance, but the outcome for the people who ran or fought back are tilted unanimously towards "injury and/or death".

I agree that fighting back in the moment increases the chance of injury. The fact that there are increased risk after the fact though is however, an indication that our system is flawed and needs to be fixed. If an officer is behaving such a way that he is perceived as an aggressive threat to a civilian, rather than as an officer of the peace; a civilian should have the legal right to take whatever steps are necessary to extricate herself from the situation. Without the rest of the police department going into a tizzy about a "dangerous threat" and further endangering a civilians life, and prosecutors going along with it.

In fact she does have that legal right.... But it would take getting arrested, being remanded in jail for several months, and a trial, and a decent lawyer to be able to prove that out. Hence the problem with the system. There is a need to cut out that nonsense and be able to call a spade a spade from the get go, and spare the people that police are supposed to protect from that grief.

[Alyrium Denryle]

It's because she was arrested for assault on a public servant or something along those lines. In the probable cause statement the trooper says Bland kicked him and attempted to elbow him. When you watch the video you can hear the trooper say something about that.

This of course is irrelevant to the fact that the troopers decision to expand the scope of the stop is simply not there. He should have just put up with her anger had her sign the warning and be on his way.

By the way...is tin foil itchy?

I watched the same video you did. He refused to answer what she was under arrest for. He then cuffs her--and at this point he does not have anything he could arrest her for. Not signaling is a moving violation, not anything to arrest anyone for.

"When you pull away from me, you are resisting arrest!" he screams. But at that point, he is putting enough pressure on her wrist that she is screaming and crying in pain, of course she is going to pull away. So I suppose not placidly accepting an assault is resisting arrest.

He tells her she is going to jail for resisting arrest. Which is ridiculous when the original arrest is not lawful. Remember, he said she was under arrest before she was even out of the car, when no offense other than a moving violation was in evidence.

He claims she swung her elbows and kicked at him when he put her in handcuffs. First of all, that is incidental to putting someone in handcuffs. Flailing arms and legs kinda happen when you force someone to the ground like he did. For an arrest that was, on its face, illegal.

There are some contradictory claims by police about whether or not her alleged "assault" occurred before or during her arrest. The tape puts the lie to the claim that she was being arrested for assault. Which makes perfect sense when you consider that the officer in question very clearly also lied in his report of the incident.

The man is guilty of multiple felonies, frankly.

Sec. 20.02. UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly restrains another person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that:
(1) the person restrained was a child younger than 14 years of age;
(2) the actor was a relative of the child; and
(3) the actor's sole intent was to assume lawful control of the child.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is:
(1) a state jail felony if the person restrained was a child younger than 17 years of age; or
(2) a felony of the third degree if:
(A) the actor recklessly exposes the victim to a substantial risk of serious bodily injury;
(B) the actor restrains an individual the actor knows is a public servant while the public servant is lawfully discharging an official duty or in retaliation or on account of an exercise of official power or performance of an official duty as a public servant; or
(C) the actor while in custody restrains any other person.
(d) It is no offense to detain or move another under this section when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested.

Not a lawful arrest, ergo, Felony.

The kidnapping and perhaps even aggravating kidnapping statutes were also violated, because the arrest was not a lawful arrest.

And now they are smearing her in the press and trying to make it seem that because she smoked pot she deserved death. Worse, she smoked or ate pot while in their custody, somehow. Which either indicates a massive lie, or blistering incompetence on their part that is so bad that even if her death was a suicide it may constitute civil or criminal negligence.

Not that I am inclined to believe her death was in fact a suicide. At this point, I am fairly certain that every word out of that local government's mouthpiece is a lie.

[TheFeniX]

Not putting out a cigarette is serious business, so serious the officer didn't even order her to put it out. What did Waller County charge her with? If the only charge you can come up with is "resisting arrest," then it's pretty clear you work on a level of causality the rest of us don't.

And it always gets me how tight lipped officials are about an ongoing investigation unless they can use the information to slander a suspect. Best part, even if she was totally high on eval marriage-uana, she still broke less laws and killed less people than Waller County. Maybe more cops should smoke pot. Might make them chill the fuck out.

EDIT: I should add, pot is serious business in this state because Texas is run by morons. I'm sure there's more than a few Bud Light swilling rednecks who were like "ermagerd! She was on the pot!"

[TheHammer]

Of course the ideal solution isn't for people to fight back.

The ideal state of affairs in order of idealness:

1. Having better trained cops so incidents like this don't happen in the first place.

You're always going to have idiots in all walks of life. MOST cops are well trained and intelligent in their use of discretion. Which is why the outliers are national news when they do happen.

There is still the unfortunate practice whereby the good officers will protect to great extent the dumbass officers, but thats a different matter.

2. Having our legal system and police culture reformed in such a degree in that if a situation like this does happen that cooler heads tell the arresting cop "You dumbass," and then promptly release Sandra from jail with flowers and an apology.

They did tell the arresting cop "You dumbass" when they said he "had not complied with the department’s courtesy policy and procedures" and pulled him off the street.

3. Having our legal system and police culture reformed in such a degree that if things get to the point that Sandra had to use pepper spray and drive off, the rest of the cops would say to the officer "You Dumbass, that was not good policing, you behaved like a thug and got treated as such."

No, she didn't "have to use pepper spray" She just needed to keep her mouth shut and put out the cigarette and cooperate. The cop was overstepping his authority, but that's not the place to make an issue of it. Now, I'm not saying you just "Do what you're told" and let them abuse their power but you LET THE FUCKING LAWYERS HANDLE IT. You don't pepper spray the cop, or be combative.

The one and only exception to this would be if you were being cooperative and still get the strong impression that the cop means you harm. Then and only then do you resort to the use of force to escape.

In short, your suggestions are idiotic.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I see multiple people have been mislead by my statements. I apologize. I'll attempt to clarify here and end with a rant.

1) The charges.
I was responding to a couple posters that were upset that she was arrested on the sole charge of resisting arrest. This is understandable because several media outlets have echo this inaccuracy and the anger is also understandable because you must be under arrest for a different crime before you can resist arrest. That's what the legal block in my academy instructed. However, it is still inaccurate. In the charging document that this trooper submitted when booking her into jail he articulates the reason for the arrest to be an assault against a police officer and then articulates her resisting that arrest. If you're wondering...yes he is lying on the charging document. His articulation does not reflect what we see in the video. So fuck him. However, it's still true that her charges are assault on a police officer with the resisting arrest added to her charges because she allegding did not comply with that arrest. Not just resisting arrest.

In no way should this be taken to mean that I think the trooper was in the right. He is absolutely in the wrong. He extended the stop illegally. The stop was basically over all he had to do was have her sign the ticket. The reason he chose to extend the stop is clearly contempt of cop. So fuck him.

2)The tin foil comment.
I was poking fun at the people who seem to think, perhaps I'm mistaken here, that the video was intentionally edited. There's a couple problems with this. The most obvious is the editing was insanely terrible and obviously not fit for distribution. The second is as far as I could tell the edit doesn't help the trooper at all because it doesn't cover up his most significant mistake. Extending the scope of the stop due to contempt of cop. All they had to do is edit it to make it seem like she was refusing to sign it and then justify the arrest from that point. So, yeah...my jab still stands.

3)My rant...
Pulling people over for failing to signal is such a chicken shit traffic stop. Nobody was put in danger by her failure to signal and when it comes to very minor infractions probably giving someone a break by not wasting their time with a warning is the right thing to do. Obviously this guy is a stat whore and I dispise stat whoring. Also, the way he accelerates up on her I totally believe that she was just trying to get out of her way. I also think he knows exactly what he's doing and "intimidates" people into changing lanes knowing that they're just trying to get out of the way of a fast approaching law enforcement vehicle so giving a three second signal probably isn't at the top of their mind. So, yeah. Fuck him again.

I'd like to see the book thrown at him but sadly I won't be holding by breath.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Wondering if she had pepper spray and if she could've got a shot off before the officer was able to pull out his gun. I'll have to watch the video again, but I think I recall the officer exposing his head when he tried to reach into the car. A moment of vulnerability that a pepper spray shot could incapacitate him. And then drive away as fast as she could.

I would imagine that cops are trained for that kind of thing though.

And in either case she would have to deal with the cops again as a consequence because cops aren't the kind that will look at that video and say "our man was a dumbass and the black chick did nothing wrong."

But it would still be better than what actually transpired seeing as that resulted in her ending up dead.

What you're suggesting here would likely end with her being dead and to top it off a greater change of the trooper being exonerated and we all know he doesn't need the extra help with that. When you fight or flee the police you are helping them hurt you. If it's a good honest cop you'll just end up with life altering charges. Fleeing a cop in a vehicle is a felony in most states. If you're dealing with some trigger happy corrupt lying asshole then is a good chance you're going to die.

I'll give you some insight into the training. Cops are trained to handle being pepper sprayed. In fact, we are pepper sprayed and put through a stress shooting qualification. I scored a 90. Then we sit down and write out a statement articulating the effects of the pepper spray and that statement is put into our permanent record. Now not everyone is effected by pepper spray equally. Some articulated that they were still able to function reasonably well. Others, like me, seriously considered asking for an ambulance because I thought there was a possibility I was going to die. It was panic and I got it under control but it took a good couple minutes of hell. So, to clarify those statements wouldn't help someone slightly effected by it if they used deadly force against the person who pepper sprayed them but me it would help a great deal. Now not all police academys do that statement, in fact very few do, but a majority do some sort of fighting through it and it usually ends with gunfire. This is based off the idea that the person isn't running away though and is still being aggressive. We're talking about a dishonest corrupt asshole of a cop so food for thought.

EDIT TO RANT
Forgot to add. It pisses me off that he seems offended that she isn't excited about being pulled over and receiving a ticket. Even if it is just a warning. People don't like that. Is it necessary. Yes, sometimes. Even when it is necessary I don't expect people to be happy about it. In fact, it's kind of weird when they thank you for the ticket. Grow some fucking skin man.

[Lord MJ]

No, she didn't "have to use pepper spray" She just needed to keep her mouth shut and put out the cigarette and cooperate. The cop was overstepping his authority, but that's not the place to make an issue of it. Now, I'm not saying you just "Do what you're told" and let them abuse their power but you LET THE FUCKING LAWYERS HANDLE IT. You don't pepper spray the cop, or be combative.

The one and only exception to this would be if you were being cooperative and still get the strong impression that the cop means you harm. Then and only then do you resort to the use of force to escape.

In short, your suggestions are idiotic.

Yeah in an ideal world you can trust the cop to not be aggressive. But given that Sandra's only lack of cooperation was not putting out a cigarette and asking specifically why she is being told to get out of the car, I fail to see why she should have to keep her mouth shut. The cop went immediately to beast mode when she did not put out her cigarette. And quite frankly cops should be better trained to handle pushback than that. There are FAR more disrespectful things to do than not put out a cigarette.

If I was in that situation if I smoked I would have put out the cigarette when asked, but there is no reason for things to escalate immediately if I did not.

My point remains, the minute the officer refused to answer her questions, he ceased being an officer, and instead became an aggressive and potentially dangerous actor. And any reasonable measures of extricating herself from the situation are in play. Now I would not fly off the handle here, but I'm certainly not going to put myself at a physical disadvantage to a potentially dangerous actor unless I felt that doing so was the best option for my survival. The same way I would handle being approached at knife or gun point by some guy on the street and being told to give up my wallet. Submission may be the best option in that case, but only due to survival reasons.

The difference with cops being that, say she had managed to incapacitate the officer and escape. The rest of the police department should not fly off the handle and automatically consider her a dangerous suspect. That one can not realistically expect cooler heads to prevail in the aftermath is outrageous. And more so than individual aggressive cops, it's the institutional culture that needs to be broken down and rebuilt.

[TheFeniX]

There is still the unfortunate practice whereby the good officers will protect to great extent the dumbass officers, but thats a different matter.

Actually, that's related and a huge part of the problem. Departments fucking destroy officers and correctional officers who try to stop or report wrong-doing. When it's expected all your buddies will back you up, what fear do you have against rights violations and wrecking some citizen who can't fight back? The only reason more of these get reported is because cameras are everywhere now. I can only imagine the amount of abuses in the past we'll never seen brought to light because smartphones didn't have the saturation they do now.

Note: that's just two examples. I think it was the NYPD that had an officer committed to a mental institution for trying to report abuses. There's been many more. So, if good cops aren't safe from the bad ones, how safe can private citizens be? And what faith would you have in a system for reporting bad cops? As a nerdy white guy, I have little issues with police. Aside from one or two (always County cops.... ugh), I have had nothing but positive experiences with police. But there's a reason minorities don't trust police on near the level that white people do.

I think it's funny that all my white friends would stand around telling stories about some cop being a dick to them when they were in the process of chewing the cop out for doing his job. And that's the end of it. Like, the cop just shot back a bit, wrote a ticket, and left. The looks on the faces of our Hispanic friends was always priceless. They could never in any way pull that kind of shit and not expect to get tossed in jail.

This isn't like getting shat on by a Best Buy rep. Them having a few shitters around doesn't effect me in the least as I can run down to Fry's, or whatever. But policing isn't a service you can refuse, so that they have done little to anything to crack down on the Blue Wall does a lot more damage than some idiot selling you a bad TV. The loss of that trust means more people will be on edge around police and do something stupid/act in a way the officer views as suspicious, get hassled even more, leading to less trust. It's a lose-lose, but only for citizens.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Other problem with pepper spraying the cop that ignores the legal ramifications: That shit splashes. My dad worked for the post office and had the opportunity to carry mace to repel dogs. He's said that no matter what you try to do, some of it will get you too. Sandra Bland would have had her vision impaired and probably not have been able to flee effectively. Pepper spray is indiscriminate.


Some states it's legal to resist unlawful force. Some states it isn't. Nowhere is it a terribly good idea. You're better served suing the shit out of police department after the fact. As we've seen, even that isn't 100% effective.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Yeah in an ideal world you can trust the cop to not be aggressive. But given that Sandra's only lack of cooperation was not putting out a cigarette and asking specifically why she is being told to get out of the car, I fail to see why she should have to keep her mouth shut. The cop went immediately to beast mode when she did not put out her cigarette. And quite frankly cops should be better trained to handle pushback than that. There are FAR more disrespectful things to do than not put out a cigarette.

The reason why is because he ended up harming her during the arrest.

If I was in that situation if I smoked I would have put out the cigarette when asked, but there is no reason for things to escalate immediately if I did not.

Agreed. However, if they do it's probably a good idea to not make things worse by escalating it yourself.

My point remains, the minute the officer refused to answer her questions, he ceased being an officer, and instead became an aggressive and potentially dangerous actor. And any reasonable measures of extricating herself from the situation are in play. Now I would not fly off the handle here, but I'm certainly not going to put myself at a physical disadvantage to a potentially dangerous actor unless I felt that doing so was the best option for my survival. The same way I would handle being approached at knife or gun point by some guy on the street and being told to give up my wallet. Submission may be the best option in that case, but only due to survival reasons.

You are at a physical disadvantage. The cop has a firearm, a bullet resistant vest, training and some have excellent training in tactics and shooting. I don't know how Bland's situation did not fall under the category of being approached by a criminal with a firearm or knife.

The difference with cops being that, say she had managed to incapacitate the officer and escape. The rest of the police department should not fly off the handle and automatically consider her a dangerous suspect. That one can not realistically expect cooler heads to prevail in the aftermath is outrageous. And more so than individual aggressive cops, it's the institutional culture that needs to be broken down and rebuilt.

When a cop is injured, killed, etc. The video isn't immediately reviewed when they have good suspect information and in some cases the video has to be taken back to the station for review. So, even if the video shows him trying to rape and murder you that fact might not come to light for several hours. That's a lot of time to be running around hunted by people who think you just hurt their buddy.

[Lord MJ]

You are at a physical disadvantage. The cop has a firearm, a bullet resistant vest, training and some have excellent training in tactics and shooting. I don't know how Bland's situation did not fall under the category of being approached by a criminal with a firearm or knife.

Which is one reason why I may choose submission as the best option for my survival. Assessing the likelihood of a potential beating if I submit vs the likelihood of dying if I chose to fight or flee. I'm not saying fleeing is the best option, it's one of a set of shitty options one has to choose from when they get into such a situation.

When a cop is injured, killed, etc. The video isn't immediately reviewed when they have good suspect information and in some cases the video has to be taken back to the station for review. So, even if the video shows him trying to rape and murder you that fact might not come to light for several hours. That's a lot of time to be running around hunted by people who think you just hurt their buddy.

Which is one more reason why.

a.) It should be made clear to pursuing officers that we do not know the details of situation so use sound judgement when approaching the suspect. Wouldn't it be the case that there wouldn't be people running around hunting for her in this event unless it was ordered by their superiors?

b.) There is no reason why they have to go immediately apprehend her if that did happen. If we are talking about hours here and not days.

[Lord MJ]

There is still the unfortunate practice whereby the good officers will protect to great extent the dumbass officers, but thats a different matter.

Actually, that's related and a huge part of the problem. Departments fucking destroy officers and correctional officers who try to stop or report wrong-doing. When it's expected all your buddies will back you up, what fear do you have against rights violations and wrecking some citizen who can't fight back? The only reason more of these get reported is because cameras are everywhere now. I can only imagine the amount of abuses in the past we'll never seen brought to light because smartphones didn't have the saturation they do now.

Note: that's just two examples. I think it was the NYPD that had an officer committed to a mental institution for trying to report abuses. There's been many more. So, if good cops aren't safe from the bad ones, how safe can private citizens be? And what faith would you have in a system for reporting bad cops? As a nerdy white guy, I have little issues with police. Aside from one or two (always County cops.... ugh), I have had nothing but positive experiences with police. But there's a reason minorities don't trust police on near the level that white people do.

I think it's funny that all my white friends would stand around telling stories about some cop being a dick to them when they were in the process of chewing the cop out for doing his job. And that's the end of it. Like, the cop just shot back a bit, wrote a ticket, and left. The looks on the faces of our Hispanic friends was always priceless. They could never in any way pull that kind of shit and not expect to get tossed in jail.

This isn't like getting shat on by a Best Buy rep. Them having a few shitters around doesn't effect me in the least as I can run down to Fry's, or whatever. But policing isn't a service you can refuse, so that they have done little to anything to crack down on the Blue Wall does a lot more damage than some idiot selling you a bad TV. The loss of that trust means more people will be on edge around police and do something stupid/act in a way the officer views as suspicious, get hassled even more, leading to less trust. It's a lose-lose, but only for citizens.

Part of the culture thing again.

But in this case, moreso than police departments, I'm angry at politicians. Have any politicians came out and talked about what is described here?

I'm sure some politician somewhere has said something, but for the most part it's silence.

Afraid of pissing off the police bloc? Afraid of Fox News saying something bad about them?

Bernie Sanders has said that we need police reform, but has he been courageous enough to say that the institutions themselves are the problem?

For that matter, I am dismayed that President Obama, the President hasn't been able to say, "The institution itself is corrupt."

[Block]

Saying the institution is corrupt is supremely counterproductive. The only fix for total corruption is complete destruction and rebuilding. You can say the culture of the organization needs to change, which is more accurate and leads to solutions such as replacing leadership and updating training and standards. Better tone, better results.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Which is one reason why I may choose submission as the best option for my survival. Assessing the likelihood of a potential beating if I submit vs the likelihood of dying if I chose to fight or flee. I'm not saying fleeing is the best option, it's one of a set of shitty options one has to choose from when they get into such a situation.

It seems that generally submission is the best option up to a point.

Which is one more reason why.

a.) It should be made clear to pursuing officers that we do not know the details of situation so use sound judgement when approaching the suspect. Wouldn't it be the case that there wouldn't be people running around hunting for her in this event unless it was ordered by their superiors?

The problem with this approach is that you are giving time for an actual criminal to get away, arm himself with more dangerous weapons, etc.

b.) There is no reason why they have to go immediately apprehend her if that did happen. If we are talking about hours here and not days.

It's always best to apprehend someone as soon as possible. I mean if we're talking about violent criminals.

[TheFeniX]

But in this case, moreso than police departments, I'm angry at politicians. Have any politicians came out and talked about what is described here?

Few, not only because department reactions can be extreme (while also unintentionally beneficial), but because it can be political suicide to appear "soft on crime." You really don't gain much by attacking police. It will probably stay that way until a large enough voting block of minorities can't be gerrymandered into silence. But hey, we can just create more laws of the felonious variety so they can't vote either way.

For that matter, I am dismayed that President Obama, the President hasn't been able to say, "The institution itself is corrupt."

It's bad from quite a few angles for the President of a country to paint a wide brush like that. It looks terrible both internally and externally. That said, I wouldn't have called the entire law enforcement of the US corrupt, but I'm starting to crack. When we're rounding up random people and only granting them freedom after the promise not to talk, it's getting pretty fucking bad. HPD had a huge dust-up and got a shit-ton of cops (read: thugs) fired when they went gangbusters more than a few years back. At least they actually learned something from that.... with the taxpayer footing the bill for their student loans.

Damn, thinking about that can still get my heart-rate up. Must be going soft.

[Channel72]

But in this case, moreso than police departments, I'm angry at politicians. Have any politicians came out and talked about what is described here?

I'm sure some politician somewhere has said something, but for the most part it's silence.

Afraid of pissing off the police bloc? Afraid of Fox News saying something bad about them?

The NYC mayor Bill DeBlasio came out pretty strongly against the NYPD.

[Dominus Atheos]

No he didn't, all he said was that he told his interracial son to be careful around cops.

Because Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face. A good young man, law-abiding young man who would never think to do anything wrong. And yet, because of a history that still hangs over us, the dangers he may face, we've had to literally train him—as families have all over this city for decades—in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him.

He did not come out strongly (or even a little) against the NYPD.

[Dominus Atheos]

2)The tin foil comment.
I was poking fun at the people who seem to think, perhaps I'm mistaken here, that the video was intentionally edited. There's a couple problems with this. The most obvious is the editing was insanely terrible and obviously not fit for distribution. The second is as far as I could tell the edit doesn't help the trooper at all because it doesn't cover up his most significant mistake. Extending the scope of the stop due to contempt of cop. All they had to do is edit it to make it seem like she was refusing to sign it and then justify the arrest from that point. So, yeah...my jab still stands.

Given that some dashcam footage is still recorded onto VHS, I can believe that it was an editing error.

[Dominus Atheos]

As usual, The Onion is having a field day with this:

Do You Know Why I’m Pulling You Over, Being Wildly Aggressive, And Charging You With Assault Today, Sir?

July 23, 2015

Good afternoon, sir. Go ahead and roll your window all the way down for me. My name is Officer Daniel McEwen from the Greene County Police Department. Now, do you know why I’m pulling you over today, being overly aggressive, and charging you with a felony count of assaulting a police officer?

I’m going to need to see your driver’s license, vehicle registration, and proof of insurance. Thank you, sir. Now, just sit tight in your car while I take a look here and grow increasingly hostile. I’m just going to start addressing you in an unmistakably threatening tone that is specifically meant to intimidate and provoke, and then drastically escalate the situation so that it quickly gets out of hand.

Are you aware of the speed limit on this road, sir? It’s 35. I had you clocked at 52 miles per hour, which is why I had to stop you and exhibit a nakedly confrontational, antagonistic, and condescending attitude, practically daring you to challenge my authority in any way whatsoever. You can’t be driving that fast around here, so I’m going to have to write you a ticket and then violently place you under arrest the moment you do or say anything that isn’t in complete and utter compliance—or which could even be remotely construed as noncompliant—with every single instruction I give to you.

Do you understand all that, sir?

If you have any questions about this ticket, I’d be happy to wildly overreact to anything you say that shows the slightest hint of resentment, annoyance, or resistance. Really, while you have me here, I can easily interpret any snide remark or frustrated comment as a potential threat to my safety—even so much as an angry look—and respond in a disproportionately combative way by erupting in unwarranted rage, taking out either my 50,000-volt Taser or my handgun, and pointing it directly at you through the driver’s side window.

Now, I have to head back to my patrol car real quick, so please bear with me here for a few minutes. Then you can be on your way to jail in no time as soon as I come back and forcibly remove you from your vehicle, slam you into the asphalt, cuff you, and jam my knee into your back as I radio in that I need backup right away because you’re resisting arrest—all the while both outright ignoring your vocalized concerns for your safety and directing my own petty, barbed insults at you. Just so we’re on the same page here, you’ll be getting three points on your license for speeding and also assault charges that carry a minimum sentence of one year in prison, but you’ll be assumed guilty of both while I automatically receive the benefit of the doubt despite any and all evidence to the contrary.

You know what, why don’t you step out of the car, sir? And put that goddamn cell phone away.

http://www.theonion.com/blogpost/do-you ... ly-a-50916

Ticketed Motorist Pointing Finger Just The Green Light Cop Needed

July 23, 2015

Recalling the provocation that came midway through a routine traffic stop, Danville police officer Dylan Hayden told reporters Thursday that driver Donald Watkins’ decision to frustratedly point his finger at him was just the green light he needed. “Legally, I’m not allowed to touch the motorist after pulling him over, but when he extended his index finger directly toward me, I knew that gave me the go-ahead right there to take whatever action I deemed necessary,” said Hayden, adding that as soon as he noticed the conceivably threatening hand gesture, he had full authority to skip right ahead to exerting force. “Frankly, I probably would’ve had the okay to rock and roll after he cursed under his breath, but I wanted to be absolutely certain that I was in the clear. Once he pointed his finger at my chest from inside his vehicle, I knew I’d be covered no matter what happened next. He really left the door wide open for me with that one.” Hayden expressed confidence that there was probably someone wanted for robbery who looks similar enough to Watkins to legally justify pulling him over in the first place.

http://www.theonion.com/article/tickete ... ight-50913

[Channel72]

No he didn't, all he said was that he told his interracial son to be careful around cops.

Because Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face. A good young man, law-abiding young man who would never think to do anything wrong. And yet, because of a history that still hangs over us, the dangers he may face, we've had to literally train him—as families have all over this city for decades—in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him.

He did not come out strongly (or even a little) against the NYPD.

Okay. Yeah, you're right - saying he "came out strongly" was much too exaggerated, I agree. But his statement is definitely openly acknowledging the problem of institutionalized racism within the police force. And it certainly cost him a lot of trouble with the NYPD. Does that count for anything to you?

[Vendetta]

Okay. Yeah, you're right - saying he "came out strongly" was much too exaggerated, I agree. But his statement is definitely openly acknowledging the problem of institutionalized racism within the police force. And it certainly cost him a lot of trouble with the NYPD. Does that count for anything to you?

Whilst factually correct, all that does is underline the need for people like DeBlasio to speak so openly, not only to their own sons but to the public at large.

Police forces in America* are racist. Institutionally and incorrigibly so.

* Also the UK, especially London.

[Lord MJ]

I've been reading some posts about how people that are outraged at Cecil the Lion being killed in Zimbabwe by an American douche are evil people because they care more about some lion than a black woman. And that people should respond to posts about the lion of Facebook with pictures of Sandy Bland. :/

Come on, yes, the death of Sandy Bland is worse than the death of a lion, but please, don't act like jackasses and start attacking people that care that some American douchebag spent $50k to kill a beloved lion.

I also hear things from the other side of the aisle, that liberals don't care about blacks because they are focusing on things like Banking regulations, Net Neutrality, and Campaign finance reform. I have to roll my eyes about this. I guess it doesn't occur to people that there are multiple problems in the world, and though blacks may not thing much about those problems because they are focused on black issues as opposed to campaign finance reform, it doesn't make other people that are focused on those issues "non caring" about black people.

I think I lost part of my brain having to consume and digest such stupid reasoning.

[Borgholio]

I think I lost part of my brain having to consume and digest such stupid reasoning.

This is why I no longer read comments from articles posted to websites that are even slightly to the right.