There's an old saying about not stirring anything if you don't want to smell anything. He was looking for a hooker and found himself in himself in a bad situation that just got worse. Fortunately, no one was hurt. Those being said, if you don’t want to have an encounter with a law enforcement officer, then don’t put yourself in a law breaking situation.
However, that does not mean that an officer can act as though either of these two keystone cops did. In fact, they should consider themselves quite lucky that they are still able to suck oxygen from the atmosphere. It’s real easy to see that they were either poorly trained or completely ignored their training.
So where did they mess up. Let me count the ways. Billy Bad Behind approaches the vehicle wearing gloves. Why? Doing so would indicate that he got out itching for a fight. Not saying that law enforcement officers shouldn't put on cut proof gloves to frisk a person. I do it all the time. But, I certainly don't drive around wearing them. Seeing how they got out of the car rather quickly when they arrived on scene, I may be wrong, but I thing he was already wearing his gloves. Again Why?
Only under certain circumstances can an officer search an automobile without obtaining a warrant. One reason would be if contraband is scene in plain sight. I didn't see anything in the video that would indicate this. Another reason would be if consent was given. I doubt that was the case as I never saw either officer contact the driver prior to the back seat being searched attempt to lawfully inventory the contents prior to impoundment.
I don't know how these guys were trained, but only a complete idiot would crawl around in the back seat of a car with an unrestrained person in the front seat. Again he's lucky he gets to go home. It could have turned out real bad had he been dealing with a felon instead of some lonely soul looking for company on a dimly lit road.
The young guy obviously has a chip on his shoulder. He needs professional help. He takes things way too personal. In our line of work, nothing is personal. We do a job. That's it, nothing more. Why all the belittlement? Neither of these guys have counselor as part of their job description. They are law enforcement officers. As such they enforce the law. They are not there to cast judgment on anyone. It's not part of what we do.
Clearly the driver of the vehicle has a cause of action under 42 USC 1983.
"Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia."
In addition, to civil damages for the 1983 action, these two guys should get down and pray that this guy's lawyer doesn't make a criminal complaint with the FBI for civil rights violations.
My 2 cents
