Let's Debate the Police and Criminal Justice

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Let's Debate the Police and Criminal Justice

«‹›378 »

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

Jarmak posted:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/304/458

Zerbst is an origin case for the terms which define voluntary and intelligent in the context of waiving rights.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:22

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 15:51

GlyphGryph: Jun 23, 2013; Down came the glitches and burned us in ditches and we slept after eating our dead.

Genocide Tendency posted:

Because someone "just DIED" doesn't excuse their behavior of being lovely to a cop because they got pulled over.

I like this..

How cool is it to be able to re-write facts, with video evidence, to support your claim and continue to argue a point that is wrong? And not be able to realize that you are wrong?

Because again... The cop asked her to put out the cigarette. He ordered her out of the car.

I'm not going to get a response, am I? Ah well, I guess that's one way for a person to concede a point.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:24

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Hmm referencing Rodriguez is interesting though, there's a good case to be made there that since the citation was already written the authority for the temporary seize no longer applied and therefore neither did Mimms.

Which would make ordering her out of the car unlawful

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:25

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Well, on a criminal cops getting convicted angle, we've got this:

quote:

A San Francisco sheriff�s deputy was found guilty Tuesday of abusing his authority as a law enforcement officer when he beat a homeless man � a man who was initially accused of attacking the deputy until video footage emerged.

A jury convicted Michael Lewelling, 34, of assault under the color of authority, a felony, and misdemeanor assault in connection with the Nov. 3 encounter in the waiting room of San Francisco General Hospital.

�Anytime an officer violates the law, it is damaging to all of law enforcement. What is even more troubling is that this occurred at a hospital,� said District Attorney George Gasc�n. �No one is above the law, most of all those who enforce it.�

Lewelling was assigned to the sheriff�s patrol unit at the hospital when 59-year-old Fernando Guanill arrived early for an appointment regarding knee replacement surgery, and fell asleep.

Lewelling filed a report saying that when he asked him to leave, Guanill tried to attack him with his wooden cane and threatened to hurt him if he touched him. Guanill was jailed, but prosecutors, suspecting wrongdoing, declined to file charges and requested video evidence.

The video, said Assistant District Attorney Nancy Tung, showed Lewelling acting as the aggressor, and Guanill seemingly complying with his orders to leave.

�Mr. Guanill gets one step before he�s thrown back down in that chair � one step is all you get at San Francisco General Hospital,� Tung said in her closing argument. �The force is not reasonable.

�Deputy Lewelling is a bully,� she said. �He was picking on Mr. Guanill.�
Lewelling was also charged with perjury, filing a false police report, filing a false official document and felony assault, but was acquitted of those charges.

In his closing argument, Harry Stern, Lewelling�s attorney, said his client had perceived that Guanill was attempting to strike him with his cane, and therefore did not perjure himself when he wrote that in his report.

While his report may have had omissions due to faulty memory or report-filing, Stern said, it was not false.

Stern questioned Guanill�s credibility, citing past interactions he had with law enforcement and medical personnel. Guanill had previously been accused of pulling a knife and spitting on a uniformed officer, and urinating in a sink at UCSF Medical Center.

Stern said prosecutors charged Lewelling to capitalize on an atmosphere of mistrust of law enforcement and the San Francisco Sheriff�s Department.

�This is a political case, which is the most dangerous kind of case,� Stern said. �It�s very easy for a political prosecution to turn into a persecution.�

Stern said after the verdict that he planned on challenging the convictions before Lewelling�s sentencing on Oct. 7.

Lewelling is on unpaid leave. Department officials issued a statement Tuesday saying that �any departmental administrative action that has been postponed in this matter, pending the completion of the criminal court process, will commence promptly.�

(http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/S-F-deputy-guilty-of-beating-homeless-man-in-6425147.php)

So it wasn't assault or perjury and the victim had to go to jail before they could see justice, but it is something (that might get overturned on appeal).

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:32

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

Jarmak posted:

Hmm referencing Rodriguez is interesting though, there's a good case to be made there that since the citation was already written the authority for the temporary seize no longer applied and therefore neither did Mimms.

Which would make ordering her out of the car unlawful

That's my read. Cigarette smoking -> ???? --> arrest does not make for a lawful arrest.

You could make an argument that she wasn't under arrest, and you might find a trial court that would buy it. But unless there's been some new erosion in the reasonable person standard, the bright line I've always followed is that a traffic stop becomes an arrest the moment you're told to get out of the car.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:32

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

Zerbst is an origin case for the terms which define voluntary and intelligent in the context of waiving rights.

Seriously? You're trying to be that much of a dick?

And you're still wrong Zerbst is about competency, amusingly the word "voluntary" doesn't even appear in the entire case.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:34

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

But unless there's been some new erosion in the reasonable person standard, the bright line I've always followed is that a traffic stop becomes an arrest the moment you're told to get out of the car.

Can't an officer order you out of your car for "officer safety" reasons without needing to arrest you or needing any sort of reason? I've been ordered out during a traffic stop so that I could be ticketed a safer distance away from the roadway (or at least that was the excuse) and that was in 2008.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:35

MariusLecter: Sep 5, 2009; NI MUERTE NI MIEDO

Trabisnikof posted:

Well, on a criminal cops getting convicted angle, we've got this:

So it wasn't assault or perjury and the victim had to go to jail before they could see justice, but it is something (that might get overturned on appeal).

quote:

While his report may have had omissions due to faulty memory or report-filing, Stern said, it was not false.

If he has brain problems that severe he should not be a cop. Or be in his own home without a caregiver.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:38

Kalman: Jan 17, 2010

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:40

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Randbrick posted:

If, indeed, there was "lovely" behavior, that would be one thing. But you are eager to find such behavior where none is to be had. And, yes, the recency of a human being's death does in facts excuse prior misconduct that barely rises to the level of "kind of being a jerk."

Being dead doesn't excuse you for being a belligerent gently caress. If you think it does, you are loving retarded.

And yes. She was being a belligerent gently caress. Which is why he should have called for a second officer and let them finish the stop.

GlyphGryph posted:

I'm not going to get a response, am I? Ah well, I guess that's one way for a person to concede a point.

I did respond.

Learn to read.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:40

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

That's my read. Cigarette smoking -> ???? --> arrest does not make for a lawful arrest.

You could make an argument that she wasn't under arrest, and you might find a trial court that would buy it. But unless there's been some new erosion in the reasonable person standard, the bright line I've always followed is that a traffic stop becomes an arrest the moment you're told to get out of the car.

An arrest is a seizure but not every seizure is an arrest, pulling you over in the first place constitutes a seizure. I have no idea why you think getting ordered out of the car constitutes an arrest, Mimms basically said its the exact same thing as a Terry stop.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:40

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

Jarmak posted:

Seriously? You're trying to be that much of a dick?

And you're still wrong Zerbst is about competency, amusingly the word "voluntary" doesn't even appear in the entire case.

quote:

The determination of whether there has been an intelligent waiver of the right to counsel must depend, in each case, upon the particular facts and circumstances surrounding that case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused.

This is "competency," in the language and vocabulary known to old white guys in the 1930's.

quote:

Can't an officer order you out of your car for "officer safety" reasons without needing to arrest you or needing any sort of reason? I've been ordered out during a traffic stop so that I could be ticketed a safer distance away from the roadway (or at least that was the excuse) and that was in 2008.

Yes. This is one of the myriad "exigent circumstances." Officer safety is inherently subjective and the only witness who can speak to it credibly is the officer himself. So you see a lot of bad stops and questionable searches that rise from officer safety concerns. But, yes, officers can separate people in a car, order them from A to B, and conduct patdown searches of the driver and passengers where the officer's safety is a concern.

On review of the video, I don't see what possible safety concerns could be raised with a straight face. I have seen people on the internet elsewhere suggest that Ms. Bland's cigarette was or should be considered a "weapon." But that's just really facile, even by police conduct standards. I haven't seen that argued here.

quote:

An arrest is a seizure but not every seizure is an arrest, pulling you over in the first place constitutes a seizure. I have no idea why you think getting ordered out of the car constitutes an arrest, Mimms basically said its the exact same thing as a Terry stop.

A traffic stop is the bastard child of Terry. A traffic stop empowers the officer to stop you in your vehicle for such time and with such minimal interference as is necessary to administer the ticket. Ordering you out of the car without exigent circumstance or other lawful cause constitutes an aggravation and delay of the underlying traffic stop and puts the driver in a position where they do not feel free to leave.

To my knowledge, this is the point at which a driver feel they are not free to leave. Because they are not free to leave. And because, in the context of related caselaw, the cop has at that point started directing the movement and actions of the citizen. (IE stand here, go there, do this.)

This gets incredibly squishy in the context of DWI-related traffic stops, which is why you have a legal right to refuse to comply with field sobriety tests, and where implied consent acts as a prophylactic.

Randbrick fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Aug 5, 2015

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:42

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Kalman posted:

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

White is race.

Hispanic is ethnicity.

Hispanic with out the presence of Asian, African or some other race is classified as white.

Edit 1:
Click here for :science:

Edit 2:
There was/is a dispute about this and at one point they were considering making hispanic/latino/spanish decent a separate race, but officially they are still considered an ethnicity.

Genocide Tendency fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Aug 5, 2015

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:42

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

This is "competency," in the language and vocabulary known to old white guys in the 1930's.

Yes, that's what I said, the issue that was under discussion was whether the request was an order, which goes to duress, not intelligence.

Randbrick posted:

Yes. This is one of the myriad "exigent circumstances." Officer safety is inherently subjective and the only witness who can speak to it credibly is the officer himself. So you see a lot of bad stops and questionable searches that rise from officer safety concerns. But, yes, officers can separate people in a car, order them from A to B, and conduct patdown searches of the driver and passengers where the officer's safety is a concern.

On review of the video, I don't see what possible safety concerns could be raised with a straight face. I have seen people on the internet elsewhere suggest that Ms. Bland's cigarette was or should be considered a "weapon." But that's just really facile, even by police conduct standards. I haven't seen that argued here.

He doesn't need to articulate a reason to order her, Mimms says he can do it because of the inherent danger of a traffic stop.

The real question is whether the traffic stop is complete if he wrote the ticket but didn't give it to her yet.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:49

TheImmigrant: Jan 18, 2011

Kalman posted:

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

It's racist to make assumptions about him, if that is the case.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:52

ActusRhesus: Sep 18, 2007; "Perhaps the fact the defendant had to be dragged out of the courtroom while declaring 'Death to you all, a Jihad on the court' may have had something to do with the revocation of his bond. That or calling the judge a bald-headed cock-sucker. Either way."

Kalman posted:

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

White Hispanic. See e.g. George Zimmerman.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:56

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

All right I give up, I am struggling to see the relevance of Encinia's hispanic heritage to...well, anything.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:58

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

Jarmak posted:

Yes, that's what I said, the issue that was under discussion was whether the request was an order, which goes to duress, not intelligence.

He doesn't need to articulate a reason to order her, Mimms says he can do it because of the inherent danger of a traffic stop.

The real question is whether the traffic stop is complete if he wrote the ticket but didn't give it to her yet.

That's a good counterargument case. I'd distinguish it, though. In Mimms, the Court (unwisely) bought into a blanket officer safety argument. The officer's motivation, therefore, became reasonable in that context.

There is no officer safety concern evidence in the video. Indeed, the officer's behavior is directly contrary to any officer safety claim. He evinced no concern for his safety that would be answered by having Ms. Bland exit the vehicle UNTIL he developed a personal argument with her.

The video shows retaliatory behavior, not safety-minded behavior.

Further, this patdown behavior can't just start up AFTER the stop is concluded. If he had ordered her out at the onset and patted her down, he could cloak himself in that argument. But once the stop went on, and, indeed, completed, without issue or apparent threat, and he then orders her out of the car in retaliation, there's no officer safety rationale to be had.

And he absolutely does have to articulate a reason. Mimms may stand for the de facto proposition that we've created a giant gray area exception to the Fourth Amendment, but it still requires at least a cursory rationale of officer safety.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 19:59

MariusLecter: Sep 5, 2009; NI MUERTE NI MIEDO

VitalSigns posted:

All right I give up, I am struggling to see the relevance of Encinia's hispanic heritage to...well, anything.

He's not white so racist cops are not a thing.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:03

DARPA: Apr 24, 2005; We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over.

Kalman posted:

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

What definitions are you using for Hispanic and white that make the terms mutually exclusive?

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:03

Toasticle: Jul 18, 2003; Hay guys, out this Rape

Kalman posted:

I've been wondering this whole time if anyone was going to get around to pointing out that Officer Encinia was Hispanic, not white.

Probably wildly off topic but I did door to door for the 2010 census and I seriously spent about 25% of my time at a 'white' persons house listening to them bitch endlessly that Hispanic was not a race. About a dozen getting red-faced spittle flinging angry about it. 100% of the over the top belligerent 'waste of my tax dollars' assholes were white. I had to stand in the Florida heat (2010 was so loving hot they dropped the dress requirements) outside one assholes door while he tried to call his congressman until his wife embarrassingly filled it out.

I've done it every time since 1980 and 2010 was the first time we were explicitly not allowed to tell people its not only legal its in the loving constitution because they were afraid of the reactions of the recent rise of tea-party anti-government lunatics.

Sorry your post triggered so many fun memories of racists assholes bitching about 'spics and illegal mexicans standing in their air conditioned house while I stood their sweating my rear end off in direct sunlight. One guy in a multi-million dollar McMansion wanted to know if next time N*** wont be a race anymore. Reason I do it every decade is 95% of the other people they hire are pant-shittingly afraid of going into even slightly poor neighborhoods and as little as it is the least I can do is try and make sure they get counted. Its also a loving shock to live in West Palm Beach and not 4 miles north of my condo I was interviewing a woman and her daughter who were living in a literal 10x10 concrete box with a tattered sheet as a door a mile away from downtown Delray Beach.

I guess to keep it somewhat relevant, yes racism is still deeply embedded 14 years after 9/11.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:10

Lemming: Apr 21, 2008

Genocide Tendency posted:

Being dead doesn't excuse you for being a belligerent gently caress. If you think it does, you are loving retarded.

And yes. She was being a belligerent gently caress. Which is why he should have called for a second officer and let them finish the stop.

She was only "belligerent" after he told her to get out of the car. Before that, he said she seemed upset and asked why, and she told him. Even after, she wasn't aggressive, she was more indignant and angry, which anybody would be when they're getting arrested because they didn't put out a cigarette.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:13

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

That's a good counterargument case. I'd distinguish it, though. In Mimms, the Court (unwisely) bought into a blanket officer safety argument. The officer's motivation, therefore, became reasonable in that context.

There is no officer safety concern evidence in the video. Indeed, the officer's behavior is directly contrary to any officer safety claim. He evinced no concern for his safety that would be answered by having Ms. Bland exit the vehicle UNTIL he developed a personal argument with her.

The video shows retaliatory behavior, not safety-minded behavior.

Further, this patdown behavior can't just start up AFTER the stop is concluded. If he had ordered her out at the onset and patted her down, he could cloak himself in that argument. But once the stop went on, and, indeed, completed, without issue or apparent threat, and he then orders her out of the car in retaliation, there's no officer safety rationale to be had.

And he absolutely does have to articulate a reason. Mimms may stand for the de facto proposition that we've created a giant gray area exception to the Fourth Amendment, but it still requires at least a cursory rationale of officer safety.

He hadn't actually issued her the ticket yet though, so whether the traffic stop was "complete" is an open question, in Rodriguez the entire process of issuing the warning was completed.

I was using articuable reason in the sense of observable facts ala Terry, which is the wording the PA Supreme court used in their decision which was struck down in Mimms, but yes, the officer does I suppose have to at least give lip service to the fact it was generically for officer safety, which is assumed valid. But this is really splitting hairs here because the effect of that is police of the blanket ability to pull you out of the car during a traffic stop.

Jarmak fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Aug 5, 2015

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:20

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Lemming posted:

She was only "belligerent" after he told her to get out of the car. Before that, he said she seemed upset and asked why, and she told him. Even after, she wasn't aggressive, she was more indignant and angry, which anybody would be when they're getting arrested because they didn't put out a cigarette.

What?

She was belligerent well before that.

Don't re-write history.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:24

Kalman: Jan 17, 2010

VitalSigns posted:

All right I give up, I am struggling to see the relevance of Encinia's hispanic heritage to...well, anything.

To posters repeatedly posting "white cop/black person".

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:27

Dr Pepper: Feb 4, 2012; Don't like it? well...

Genocide Tendency posted:

What?

She was belligerent well before that.

Don't re-write history.

Which of course means "Darkie McRetard" deserved to die, got it.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:30

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

Jarmak posted:

He hadn't actually issued her the ticket yet though, so whether the traffic stop was "complete" is an open question, in Rodriguez the entire process of issuing the warning was completed.

I was using articuable reason in the sense of observable facts ala Terry, which is the wording the PA Supreme court used in their decision which was struck down in Mimms, but yes, the officer does I suppose have to at least give lip service to the fact it was generically for officer safety, which is assumed valid. But this is really splitting hairs here because the effect of that is police of the blanket ability to pull you out of the car during a traffic stop.

The articulability standard is essentially vacuous and utterly subjective. But it can still find occasional vitality in situations where the cops get so lazy and inured to doing whatever they want that they establish facts at preliminary hearings, depositions, dash cams, etc. that obviate an officer safety claim downstream.

Realistically, all you have to do as a cop if you want to search any vehicle at any time and have that search stand up in court is just tell the driver, "I smell the odor of burnt marijuana and I feel unsafe." And then order them out. But if your average career traffic cop were that good at things, then that cop wouldn't be a career traffic cop.

Here, the officer's video-taped behavior is so utterly at odds with a potentially unsafe situation that a judge (in a criminal law context) or a jury (in a civil context) would have to have already drank a shitload of kool-aid to buy in.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:30

Lemming: Apr 21, 2008

Genocide Tendency posted:

What?

She was belligerent well before that.

Don't re-write history.

Uh, yeah, that's what I said, she only started getting indignant and upset after he started the process of arresting her. Up until that point, she cooperated with him completely.

Edit: My video linked to a different part when I first loaded it, so I rewatched and yeah, the whole time she was cooperating completely. She only got upset and indignant when he told her to get out of the car, which was the start of him arresting her.

Lemming fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Aug 5, 2015

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:32

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

She wasn't calling him massah and even implied that his ticket was unfair while acknowledging that nothing stops him from giving it to her, how could he back down from that challenge to box?

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:35

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Kalman posted:

To posters repeatedly posting "white cop/black person".

Sorry, I still don't see the importance, nor why you think white and Hispanic are mutually exclusive categories. Could you elaborate.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:36

Radbot: Aug 12, 2009; Can't post for 3 years!

Haha that poo poo about Hispanic people being considered white isn't even true, every demographic/census form I've ever seen as a "non-Hispanic white/non-Hispanic caucasian" as an option, or if it's not, there's a "Are you Hispanic?" question elsewhere.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:38

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Lemming posted:

Uh, yeah, that's what I said, she only started getting indignant and upset after he started the process of arresting her. Up until that point, she cooperated with him completely.

Edit: My video linked to a different part when I first loaded it, so I rewatched and yeah, the whole time she was cooperating completely. She only got upset and indignant when he told her to get out of the car, which was the start of him arresting her.

So her being lovely over the stop before he told her to get out of the car doesn't count because....... It makes you wrong so you ignore it?

Ah. Gotcha.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:38

GlyphGryph: Jun 23, 2013; Down came the glitches and burned us in ditches and we slept after eating our dead.

Genocide Tendency posted:

I did respond.

Learn to read.

Can you quote it? Because I reread the stuff you said and must have missed it because I still can't find it. You seem to be rewriting history here, in addition to accusing things of your opponents in the thread without any evidence for them.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:40

Jarmak: Jan 24, 2005

Randbrick posted:

The articulability standard is essentially vacuous and utterly subjective. But it can still find occasional vitality in situations where the cops get so lazy and inured to doing whatever they want that they establish facts at preliminary hearings, depositions, dash cams, etc. that obviate an officer safety claim downstream.

Realistically, all you have to do as a cop if you want to search any vehicle at any time and have that search stand up in court is just tell the driver, "I smell the odor of burnt marijuana and I feel unsafe." And then order them out. But if your average career traffic cop were that good at things, then that cop wouldn't be a career traffic cop.

Here, the officer's video-taped behavior is so utterly at odds with a potentially unsafe situation that a judge (in a criminal law context) or a jury (in a civil context) would have to have already drank a shitload of kool-aid to buy in.

Not really, if anything he can cite her belligerent and uncooperative behavior as an additional reason to be concerned about his safety.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:42

Randbrick: Sep 28, 2002

If it's "belligerent" to contest a loving traffic ticket at this point, then I don't even know anymore.

If the cops accuse you of something and you don't say anything, they can try to use your silence as a form of admission in court, for gently caress's sake. If you contest the charge, you're belligerent and deserve (?) to be arrested for whatever the hell.

Near as I can tell ,the Right Thing to do when accused of a crime or issued or a ticket or looked at suspiciously by a cop is to recite your innocence in the King's English, using all the vocal fry and uptalk you can muster to soften the blow, preferably while wearing a t-shirt from the last Patrolmen's Benevolent Society community picnic and funrun, and doing a non-threatening, complimentary dance.

quote:

Not really, if anything he can cite her belligerent and uncooperative behavior as an additional reason to be concerned about his safety.

He can "cite" that, sure. But he's arguing against a video tape.

Randbrick fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Aug 5, 2015

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:42

Lemming: Apr 21, 2008

Genocide Tendency posted:

So her being lovely over the stop before he told her to get out of the car doesn't count because....... It makes you wrong so you ignore it?

Ah. Gotcha.

How was it her being lovely? She was understandably frustrated due to the stop, and only told the cop why she was upset after he specifically asked her to tell him how she was feeling.

The real question is why does hearing a black woman say what she's thinking instead of masking it behind a smile for a man automatically make you think "belligerent"?

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:42

BENGHAZI 2: Oct 13, 2007; by Cyrano4747

Randbrick posted:

If it's "belligerent" to contest a loving traffic ticket at this point, then I don't even know anymore.

If the cops accuse you of something and you don't say anything, they can try to use your silence as a form of admission in court, for gently caress's sake. If you contest the charge, you're belligerent and deserve (?) to be arrested for whatever the hell.

Near as I can tell ,the Right Thing to do when accused of a crime or issued or a ticket or looked at suspiciously by a cop is to recite your innocence in the King's English, using all the vocal fry and uptalk you can muster to soften the blow, preferably while wearing a t-shirt from the last Patrolmen's Benevolent Society community picnic and funrun, and doing a non-threatening, complimentary dance.

Actually if you just refuse to create joinder the demons known as the police will be bound to your will

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:43

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

Genocide Tendency posted:

So her being lovely over the stop before he told her to get out of the car doesn't count because....... It makes you wrong so you ignore it?

Ah. Gotcha.

Being lovely isn't being belligerent.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:43

Genocide Tendency: Dec 24, 2009; I get mental health care from the medical equivalent of Skillcraft.

Radbot posted:

Haha that poo poo about Hispanic people being considered white isn't even true, every demographic/census form I've ever seen as a "non-Hispanic white/non-Hispanic caucasian" as an option, or if it's not, there's a "Are you Hispanic?" question elsewhere.

Look at how wrong you are!

quote:

The race and Hispanic origin categories used by the Census Bureau are mandated
by Office of Management and Budget Directive No. 15, which requires all
federal record keeping and data presentation to use four race categories
(White, Black, American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian and Pacific Islander)
and two ethnicity categories (Hispanic, non-Hispanic). These classifications
are not intended to be scientific in nature, but are designed to promote
consistency in federal record keeping and data presentation.

It is important to recognize that this system treats race and ethnicity as
separate and independent categories. This means that within the federal system
everyone is classified as both a member of one of the four race groups and also
as either Hispanic or non-Hispanic. Consequently, there are a total of 8
race-ethnicity categories, as illustrated by the table below:

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 15:51

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Genocide Tendency posted:

So her being lovely over the stop before he told her to get out of the car doesn't count because....... It makes you wrong so you ignore it?

Ah. Gotcha.

Why does being testy and annoyed justify getting ordered out of the car after the stop is complete, again? Those aren't threats, those aren't crimes, and the only infraction she did commit (not signaling) he had already written a ticket for so that's not the reason he ordered her out of the car or he would have done it at the outset, not waited until after she refused to put out her cigarette.

# ? Aug 5, 2015 20:44

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Let's Debate the Police and Criminal Justice

«‹›378 »