Florida man gets beaten and arrested for refusing to roll down window at a traffic stop - General

[QUOTE=Mister_Jack;45835694]They can detain you if they suspect you of committing a crime. If they don't plan on charging you with a crime, they have no right to detain you. I seriously don't get how everyone here is like "Got what was coming to him." "Lucky he didn't get shot." Being stopped, profiled, searched without probable cause is a violation of civil liberties. I really hope that none of you experience police harassment in your lifetime, but you have no idea what it's like not being able to trust the people who seem to think they have absolute power over you.[/QUOTE] Where was he profiled and where was their intention to search him before he started acting like an idiot. He wasn't being harassed he was acting like a moron for the purpose of provoking the police.

Florida Statute 316.072 SP3: It is unlawful and a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, for any person willfully to fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any law enforcement officer, traffic crash investigation officer as described in s. 316.640, traffic infraction enforcement officer as described in s. 316.640, or member of the fire department at the scene of a fire, rescue operation, or other emergency. You don't need to be under arrest for this statue to apply. By refusing to roll the window down, he was immediately committing an misdemeanor. And how can anyone, in this thread, know he was being profiled? There is no proof for or against the fact there may have been probable cause, just because it wasn't stated in the video, to pull this guy over. Cops don't just pull someone over willy nilly because they are bored. Yes, they may follow someone because their vehicle or persons are suspicious, but if they speed or run a stop sign in the presence of a law enforcement officer, they can be pulled over. They go behind a Publix and shine their spotlight at cats when they get bored.

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;45812303]US law enforcement are not here to protect you, nor are they legally obliged to. They're here to enforce the law.[/QUOTE] What a silly thing to say, not here to protect us, Jesus Christ

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;45835855]Where was he profiled and where was their intention to search him before he started acting like an idiot. He wasn't being harassed he was acting like a moron for the purpose of provoking the police.[/QUOTE] I didn't say he was profiled. Can't say what happened because we don't have the whole story. "Acting like a moron." meaning "exercising rights and expecting cops to show some respect." huh.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;45813508]He had a reason, so yea he did have to get out the car.[/QUOTE] Lol, he "had a reason". Any cop can give you a reason, it doesn't make it true or valid. The problem with police enforcement is the word over an officer can trump any citizen without proper evidence. It's reasons like these that make me believe that all police should be required to wear cameras and microphones to record their encounters with citizens. It's been proven this has been effective in reducing the amount of unnecessary force and waste of resources. [QUOTE=NY Times]THE Rialto study began in February 2012 and will run until this July. The results from the first 12 months are striking. Even with only half of the 54 uniformed patrol officers wearing cameras at any given time, the department over all had an 88 percent decline in the number of complaints filed against officers, compared with the 12 months before the study, to 3 from 24.[/quote] [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/business/wearable-video-cameras-for-police-officers.html?_r=2&[/url]

[QUOTE=endorphinsam;45809530]that's why he didn't? also seriously, there are plenty of reasons and he said so in the video. he feared that from all the terrible cops in the area he'd have to deal with another terrible cop so he didn't roll it down completely. there's zero reason for the cop to need the window rolled down completely.[/QUOTE] "I'm afraid of cops hurting me so I decided to ignore their direct orders, as that was the best course of action I could have taken to keep safe." Not buying that, sorry. For a guy trying to play it cool and smart to stay safe, he sure took one of the dumbest courses possible. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] [T]http://www.online-paralegal-programs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/know-your-rights.png[/t] This whole debacle reminded me of this. All of you guys in this thread afraid of the police state coming to get you? Read this advice, follow it, and don't be stupid (like this guy was.)

[QUOTE=Mister_Jack;45836135]I didn't say he was profiled. Can't say what happened because we don't have the whole story. "Acting like a moron." meaning "exercising rights and expecting cops to show some respect." huh.[/QUOTE] He wasn't "exercising rights". The cop was giving him an order he was legally obligated to follow, as posted above. There's no reason not to role down your window for a cop other than your trying to provoke a response. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Aetna;45836319]Lol, he "had a reason". Any cop can give you a reason, it doesn't make it true or valid. The problem with police enforcement is the word over an officer can trump any citizen without proper evidence. It's reasons like these that make me believe that all police should be required to wear cameras and microphones to record their encounters with citizens. It's been proven this has been effective in reducing the amount of unnecessary force and waste of resources. [URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/business/wearable-video-cameras-for-police-officers.html?_r=2&[/URL][/QUOTE] Reasons are always going to be objective. Someone driving erratically and refusing to role down their window seems like reasonable suspicion to me. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] He didn't even need reasonable suspicion to ask him to step out the car.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;45837277]He wasn't "exercising rights". The cop was giving him an order he was legally obligated to follow, as posted above. There's no reason not to role down your window for a cop other than your trying to provoke a response. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] Reasons are always going to be objective. Someone driving erratically and refusing to role down their window seems like reasonable suspicion to me. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] He didn't even need reasonable suspicion to ask him to step out the car.[/QUOTE] There is no proof he was driving erratically, is there? The camera would provide that proof. I have a hard time trusting this officer with the way he was talking, he was being much less professional than the man in the car. I've taken 3 years of criminal justice, officers are trained and instructed to remain patient in situations such as these; I once had a block period in which we went over the course of action to be taken in this exact scenario. The officer was not being patient and was becoming frustrated, which is exactly why I don't trust his judgement in this situation. Now, the citizen was required to step out of the vehicle by federal law - it was unwise of him to refuse to do so, I'm not disagreeing that point in the slightest. I just wish these situations were LESS objective and more subjective.

[QUOTE=Aetna;45837744]There is no proof he was driving erratically, is there? The camera would provide that proof. I have a hard time trusting this officer with the way he was talking, he was being much less professional than the man in the car. I've taken 3 years of criminal justice, officers are trained and instructed to remain patient in situations such as these; I once had a block period in which we went over the course of action to be taken in this exact scenario. The officer was not being patient and was becoming frustrated, which is exactly why I don't trust his judgement in this situation. Now, the citizen was required to step out of the vehicle by federal law - it was unwise of him to refuse to do so, I'm not disagreeing that point in the slightest. I just wish these situations were LESS objective and more subjective.[/QUOTE] He was getting pissed because the guy was being a shit head and apparently had been dealing with him for a bit before the camera started rolling. I too four years of criminal justice in highschool too and am currently going to college for a criminal justice degree, or its criminal justice technology. Your right he should have remained calm and it was a unprofessional but it doesn't mean the reason he was pulled over wasn't legit. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] Its also hard to make things like reasonable suspicion anything but objective

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;45837873]He was getting pissed because the guy was being a shit head and apparently had been dealing with him for a bit before the camera started rolling. I too four years of criminal justice in highschool too and am currently going to college for a criminal justice degree, or its criminal justice technology. Your right he should have remained calm and it was a unprofessional but it doesn't mean the reason he was pulled over wasn't legit. [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] Its also hard to make things like reasonable suspicion anything but objective[/QUOTE] I understand. My point still stands that this (and all) traffic stop(s) would be much more worthwhile were they recorded and documented with material more concrete than word of mouth. This officer would then be justified in his actions and behavior (or at least, it would be understandable), but his job is to keep his head, no matter how much of a douchebag the citizen was being. Officers are instructed to cease action when they lose their cool and hand the situation over to a fellow officer, or if available, a superior. I feel that camera use would benefit everyone in this situation, seeing as we genuinely don't have the whole story - we don't know if the reason he pulled him over was legit, we don't know if the citizen was being difficult prior to when he started recording, and we don't know the behavior of the officer prior to the citizen starting recording. I feel that this situation could have been handled better by both parties, the citizen in particular, and video/audio recording definitely would have facilitated that to some degree. On a side note, the citizen is a Corporal in the Marines; I feel he deserves some credit in that he wouldn't be deliberately antagonizing a police officer just for the sake of it, as it could severely impact his career. Again, there's a lot of things we don't know, and I'm on no one's side.

[QUOTE=Aetna;45838062]I feel he deserves some credit in that he wouldn't be deliberately antagonizing a police officer just for the sake of it, as it could severely impact his career. Again, there's a lot of things we don't know, and I'm on no one's side.[/QUOTE] this is from the cpl's statement from his "help my family recover" fundraiser page. [quote]The officer realized that playtime is over and cuffs me. When he gets me off the ground, I could see the mischievous grins on two of the officers' faces.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Aetna;45838062]I understand. My point still stands that this (and all) traffic stop(s) would be much more worthwhile were they recorded and documented with material more concrete than word of mouth. This officer would then be justified in his actions and behavior (or at least, it would be understandable), but his job is to keep his head, no matter how much of a douchebag the citizen was being. Officers are instructed to cease action when they lose their cool and hand the situation over to a fellow officer, or if available, a superior. I feel that camera use would benefit everyone in this situation, seeing as we genuinely don't have the whole story - we don't know if the reason he pulled him over was legit, we don't know if the citizen was being difficult prior to when he started recording, and we don't know the behavior of the officer prior to the citizen starting recording. I feel that this situation could have been handled better by both parties, the citizen in particular, and video/audio recording definitely would have facilitated that to some degree. On a side note, the citizen is a Corporal in the Marines; I feel he deserves some credit in that he wouldn't be deliberately antagonizing a police officer just for the sake of it, as it could severely impact his career. Again, there's a lot of things we don't know, and I'm on no one's side.[/QUOTE] I agree with this. It is very disturbing to me what a low standard public opinion has set for the police. I would get fired from my job for treating a customer like that. Why is it okay for police to act that way?

[QUOTE=Mister_Jack;45838727]I agree with this. It is very disturbing to me what a low standard public opinion has set for the police. I would get fired from my job for treating a customer like that. Why is it okay for police to act that way?[/QUOTE] He wasn't a customer, he was at that point someone being complainant.

[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;45838698]this is from the cpl's statement from his "help my family recover" fundraiser page.[/QUOTE] I'm at a loss as to what you're getting at? [editline]29th August 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Mister_Jack;45838727]I agree with this. It is very disturbing to me what a low standard public opinion has set for the police. I would get fired from my job for treating a customer like that. Why is it okay for police to act that way?[/QUOTE] Well.... you can't exactly compare the actions of a Police Officer to customer service. I said it before and I'll say it again, I have no idea if the citizen was behaving poorly prior to him recording, and I have no idea if the officer had a valid reason to pull him over. The only evaluation I am making is that they both made asses of themselves and I wish the entire encounter had been recorded from start to finish, instead of making generalizations on what could very well be a bait video.

[QUOTE=Aetna;45839027]I'm at a loss as to what you're getting at?[/QUOTE] based on the wording of his own event he tries to play the victim and antagonize the officers as sadists that gets off by "beating" him.

[QUOTE=Aetna;45839027] Well.... you can't exactly compare the actions of a Police Officer to customer service. I said it before and I'll say it again, I have no idea if the citizen was behaving poorly prior to him recording, and I have no idea if the officer had a valid reason to pull him over. The only evaluation I am making is that they both made asses of themselves and I wish the entire encounter had been recorded from start to finish, instead of making generalizations on what could very well be a bait video.[/QUOTE] Not exactly, but I'm still hard pressed to think of a job where an employee would not at least get spoken to about treating [I]anyone[/I] they interact with while on the clock like that. Except the obvious. The military. It really sets a tone for how the authorities see normal citizens. More and more normal people are treated by default as the enemy by leo's. I will have to do some digging, but there's an interview with a former police officer wherein he divulges that part of his actual training was provoking people he had stopped and actively attempting to elicit their fight or flight reaction. They want you to break the law. They want you to run. When your heart is beating into your ears and the possibility of your life ending (literally or in prison/criminal record terms) there's no way you're thinking or acting straight. It's as though certain officers see themselves as soldiers and that 'innocent until proven guilty' does not apply to them.

[QUOTE=J!NX;45835915]What a silly thing to say, not here to protect us, Jesus Christ[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0[/url]