kimmy Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 For all you arm chair experts watching the video-you clearly have preconceived ideas about the role of police, then watch the video, confirming your biases that police are bullies, then allow your emotions to dictate the rest. So you have to be a veteran police officer to have an opinion as to whether Officer Encinia needlessly escalated the situation? How about the opinions of experienced police officers who feel Encinia needlessly escalated the situation? This theory of entitlement some of you have that you can act like a jack ass and you are not responsible, is a crock. Unless you're a police officer, in which case it's a reality. This use of this video to smeer all police is a crock. This seems to be a growing trend in your messages. Criticizing the way the policeman acted in this video is not an attack on all police, any more than ridiculing Donald Trump is an attack on all Americans. This reflects as to what this police officer did no one else. How many tapes were shown on this thread of police officers where they were polite and spit on and abused by people they stopped? Will those of you now pissing on cops admit let alone show such videos? Of course not. You won't discuss all the issues, just the ones that suit your anti police biases. You want every police misconduct post to start off with the disclaimer that most policemen are probably good at their job? Should we also start off every terrorism thread with the disclaimer that most Muslims are not terrorists? Is this level of political correctness really necessary here? The woman probably had what is called a border line personality disorder-a phenomena where the individual cann easily be pushed or triggered into destructive behavior. Sounds like the opinion of an arm-chair expert. Its sad what happened. Exploiting her death for some of you to be able to piss on cops won't help. As some said finding new and better ways to defuse conflict is the lesson to be learned not stereotyping police with stereotypes. That is no more helpful that ridiculing this woman. It won't help. So... it's ok to talk about ways for the police to improve ... just not when somebody died? Is that what you're saying? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) The police could have put her in a jail restraint chair and spit mask so she'd still be alive, but then they would be criticized as well. The 'muricans have a cute little syndicated TV show called "Jail" on Spike TV where we get to see how wonderful "harmless" citizens behave after their arrest. Same guys who brought us "Cops". Edited July 25, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 The police could have put her in a jail restraint chair and spit mask so she'd still be alive, but then they would be criticized as well. The 'muricans have a cute little syndicated TV show called "Jail" on Spike TV where we get to see how wonderful "harmless" citizens behave after their arrest. Same guys who brought us "Cops". You should consider upgrading the quality of your entertainment. Maybe include some balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Arrested for disobeying a lawful police order. I agree with 90+ percent of what you're saying in this thread. Being calm and polite is critical to keeping an interaction with the police civil. Even if the police are completely in the wrong, the time to argue that is in front of a judge, not with the guy holding a gun who has already shown disrespect for your rights. BUT... The term "lawful police order" is one that gets misused frequently, especially by police. Just because a police officer says it, that doesn't make it lawful. There actually does have to be a law on the book concerning that particular incident. If there is no "must extinguish cigarette during roadside stop" law on the book, the order to do so is not lawful. Of course, again, the time to argue that is in court -- not on the side of the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) OK...but the lawful order was concerning exiting the vehicle, precipitated by the negative response to his polite request (with "please") to extinguish the cigarette. I could be wrong, but in most U.S. jurisdictions it is lawful for a police officer to order the driver out of the vehicle after a lawful stop. Police are trained to alert on verbal and non-verbal threats to controlling the stop and detention. Getting her out of the vehicle is part of that protocol. Edited July 25, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 He does not have the right to order her out of the car, unless and until he states the reason for it, which he did not do, as revealed by the dashcam. Again escalating the situation. He also doesn't have the right to make her put out her smoke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) I could be wrong, but in most U.S. jurisdictions it is lawful for a police officer to order the driver out of the vehicle after a lawful stop. It's not that simple. The reasons for the request do matter. If it's retaliation for her refusal to put out the cigarette, that may not be lawful order either. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/23/the-law-of-the-sandra-bland-traffic-stop/ Again, the problem for a person being detained is you can't ask the question "why". That should be the minimum you should be able to expect, but a police officer is not going to argue with you on the side of the road. It comes down to training, IMO. Police should be taught to explain themselves more instead of barking orders. Tell me the reason. Yes, you should still comply, even if you disagree with the rationale given, but at least now you know what to tell the judge instead of guessing and or giving the officer a chance to change his story. Edited July 25, 2015 by Bryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) Again, the problem for a person being detained is you can't ask the question "why". That should be the minimum you should be able to expect, but a police officer is not going to argue with you on the side of the road. It comes down to training, IMO. Police should be taught to explain themselves more instead of barking orders. Tell me the reason. Yes, you should still comply, even if you disagree with the rationale given, but at least now you know what to tell the judge instead of guessing and or giving the officer a chance to change his story. I'm not sure why it matters....once the police officers decide to detain and/or arrest, the legal mechanisms are quite clear, and many defense attorneys would advise you to shut up and cooperate, or incur other charges. Compliance and cooperation are a better strategy than disobeying lawful police directions. Bland obviously had some other issues in her life....cops are not mental health professionals, but often find themselves having to deal with people who have "issues". Edited July 25, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Apparently you didn't watch the dashcam. He is the idiot who escalated this beyond reason, and we have seen lot's of examples of it before. But go drink the koolaid, just leave your rights at the door. I'll do that. And next time a cop pulls you over tell him you'll smoke if you damn well feel like it and no you won't get out of the car. Enjoy jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) You know, the few interactions I have had with American police officers have been very reasonable and civil so perhaps race is a real issue. I don't know. Did you do what you were asked? Did you speak in a polite voice? Did you tell the officer to drop dead and refuse his simple instructions? I think the theme we see in all of these incidents is not the color of the person interacting with police, but their attitude of non-compliance. Edited July 26, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 He does not have the right to order her out of the car, unless and until he states the reason for it, which he did not do, as revealed by the dashcam. You went to law school where, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 You went to law school where, exactly? Toronto Ontario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 I'm not sure why it matters. It matters because a person who feels their rights are being violated could end up escalating the situation for no reason, and because police officers also tend to escalate situations for no reason. If the officer's rationale for the order is on tape on the dashcam, the person being detained has a reasonable expectation that things will work themselves out in the end as long as they remain calm and comply right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Toronto Ontario. Well far be it for me to question your word, but given Canadian law differs from the US law in a number of significant ways I'd question the value of your judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well far be it for me to question your word, but given Canadian law differs from the US law in a number of significant ways I'd question the value of your judgement. Not my judgement. It's the judgement of the US lawyer who is director of the Texas Civil Rights Project. Jim Harrington. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Did you do what you were asked? Did you speak in a police voice? Did you tell the officer to drop dead and refuse his simple instructions? I think the theme we see in all of these incidents is not the color of the person interacting with police, but their attitude of non-compliance. When I say civil and reasonable, I mean on both sides. I respect police but I don't feel intimidated by them. A police officer is supposed to know what he can legally do and act accordingly. She may have been a PITA but it was the officer who decided to escalate the situation. He turned it into a contest of wills for no real reason other than she wasn't being nice. The behavior shown was exactly the same kind of thing you see in a road rage incident. Not professional at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 It matters because a person who feels their rights are being violated could end up escalating the situation for no reason, and because police officers also tend to escalate situations for no reason. If the officer's rationale for the order is on tape on the dashcam, the person being detained has a reasonable expectation that things will work themselves out in the end as long as they remain calm and comply right now. Police officers are asked to take great personal risk when performing "routine" traffic stops that can spin out of control very quickly. They have to assess risk based on visual, verbal, and non-verbal cues. I have never had a problem with a police stop or detention because I do nothing to challenge their lawful authority or personal safety. Comply and cooperate works better than screaming about my "rights". Debate it later in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Not my judgement. It's the judgement of the US lawyer who is director of the Texas Civil Rights Project. Jim Harrington. Lots of lawyers have lots of opinions. Big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Imagine the thousands of traffic stops everyday where no one is arrested or hurt, but those people are losers, the real heroes defend the rights they imagine they might have by behaving like assholes to someone who might decide to arrest you, or, because the police are human, might just get pissed off enough to hurt you. What imaginary world do some of you live in where the police should be so perfect that you can behave like an asshole to them and they will never react, or over react to it? What an unimaginably childish view of the world, o but I know, if only we trained the police to be 'nice', no weapons either, that'l work, might as well not have them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 ....cops are not mental health professionals, but often find themselves having to deal with people who have "issues". They don't have to be doctors but they should be trained to a degree that they can be regarded as mental health paramedics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Police officers are asked to take great personal risk when performing "routine" traffic stops that can spin out of control very quickly. They have to assess risk based on visual, verbal, and non-verbal cues. I have never had a problem with a police stop or detention because I do nothing to challenge their lawful authority or personal safety. Comply and cooperate works better than screaming about my "rights". Debate it later in court. I don't disagree, and that is how I definitely act if I get pulled over. I have, however, witnessed more than a few incidents that didn't go that way -- the person being detained literally did nothing at all, and the police officer began the interaction with an assault, and a flat out refusal to explain what he was doing and why. Police should not be given the opportunity to lie and or change their story later though. Having an actual reason why they are asking you to do what ever they are requesting is the minimum we should expect from them. If they don't have one, they can't claim that it's a lawful order. You shouldn't even have to ask, the explanation should be in the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Lots of lawyers have lots of opinions. Big deal. Laws are not opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 (edited) Police should not be given the opportunity to lie and or change their story later though. Having an actual reason why they are asking you to do what ever they are requesting is the minimum we should expect from them. If they don't have one, they can't claim that it's a lawful order. You shouldn't even have to ask, the explanation should be in the question. I don't see it that way....it is not a game of legal cat and mouse. Insisting on a "reason" before complying /cooperating will only feed a false dynamic, wherein the officer can/will fabricate whatever is necessary. If the cops make a mistake, either move on or make a federal case about it. The expectation and strident demand of "Why did YOU stop ME!" starts the escalation process, undermines the officer's lawful authority, and attempts to set up an equal power relationship where none exists. Police officers are not ignorant to this issue and have attempted to confront it in some U.S. cities. http://www.wysm.org/ Procedurally, the police officer is first concerned with securing the scene and assessing risks, not engaging in a debate about what is or is not a legal stop. Lots of people don't understand that. Once the cop decides you are not a physical threat, he/she can shift into the next phase of the stop / detention. Edited July 26, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 A better question to ask would be, what have I done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 A better question to ask would be, what have I done? Nothing you can't deny then...or later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.