DUI Checkpoint caught on film

[cassandrasdaddy]

i am poster child

for why you should wear hearing protection. i still can't hear anything intelligible before the supervisor get there and thats still not great.
hes still low par for 19 with me. seems he went looking for a confrontation got one and now is whining about getting what he went looking for. i would suggest he avoid travelling in pg county md.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

any transcripts done by other than mr darrow?

any legs to this or was this a get on the internet deal? he pursue it?
do any of those smarter than me know a way to make the tape intelligible?

 

[marzen]

Do we really need multiple page arguments to realize that we are living in a fascist state?

 

[Lucky]

Marzen; pop quiz - Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason?



Answer: "If it doth prosper, none dare call it treason.”

 

[wooderson]

They are actually public roads, paid for with public funds from taxpayers. Do you believe that I can withhold paying taxes and give up my "privilege"? Don't think so.

You're confusing theory with reality.

He gave you the legal reality of driving (as others did re: checkpoints). Don't confuse someone's statement as to the reality of a situation with what they'd choose to happen.

 

[wooderson]

"I don't wish to discuss my personal life" is, well, a <edit = foul word meaning "bad"> move on his part. I'm young enough to call that snotty without being age-ist.

"Why do you ask, officer?" or "I'm not coming from a bar or party, officer" would more than suffice (I prefer asking a question at that moment) without being confrontational.

Or, since it didn't seem to matter either way, tell the cop what you're doing. Being a schmuck at that point is in no way striking a blow for freedom and apple pie.

 

[AZRickD]

There was NOTHING snotty in his tone. He has an absolute right to refuse to answer unwarranted and probing questions which are designed to gather evidence against him in a court of law. His refusal to answer questions (which he taped,) could be used by the traveler as evidence to support that he steadfastly refused consent if he were charged and taken to trial.

Got that?

That's what a defense attorney would want him to do (even absent any criminal activity on his part).

Got that?

He need not justify this intrusion with a "Why do you ask, officer." Nor should he say, "I'm not coming from a bar or party, officer," when such a response will only result in the LEO asking, "Why would you think I thought you thought that I thought that you came from a bar or party, Sir?" Which will lead to more questions.

I have my lawyers card which says, "I refuse to answer any questions.... nor consent to a search of my person or vehicle..." in paragraph length on the back. Would you consider that snotty if I handed that card (an action which will be cited in court on my behalf.

I guess I'm confused as to how the USSC decided the BoRights would justify and allow this police activity based on Original Intent.

Can anyone find something written by the Framers that suggested that this kind of random, warrantless inhibition of the right to travel undetered was acceptable to them? And that threats could be used against someone who invokes his right not to discuss his private affairs that had nothing to do with DUI? After speaking with him, did they garner any RS or PC that he was intoxicated? For what reason did they remove him from his car and move the car (seizure)?

Can police pull people over without cause sans an officially sanctioned USSC-approved road block?

Rick

 

[Zak Smith]

Is he or is he not under a legal obligation to answer the question?

He is not.

Exercise of a right - silence in this case - does not comprise reasonable suspicion that a crime has been commited.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

better

if he had stayed silent. his behavior probably bought him a ticket to the next tier of sobriety checks. being belligerent is a sign of drinking in some folks especially young dumb ones. i have first hand experience here.they look for anything outa the ordinairy. they ask the question to 200 folks 199 answer junior jumps froggy. junior gets special treatment. the japanese say the nail that sticks up gets hammered. bet a c note he lacks the nads to follow through and see that hes got a loser case. be a good litmus test when he can't get a lawyer to take case

 

[Zak Smith]

Two rhetorical questions:

1. Was Rosa Parks a "nail that sticks up" and deserved to "get hammered?"

2. If being "out of the ordinary" is grounds for police threats ("or the other officer will find a reason to lock you up tonight."), how are the rights of a minority that know their legal rights to exercise them?

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

yes

rosa was. and she had what it took to foment change. betting on junior? i'll give ya 3 to one odds.

junior went looking for a confrontation. he got one just the right size for him. safe low risk. he got his video on the net. i'm waiting for the enhanced audio with a transcript done by someone other than the young hero. the aclu can swing that.... unless they know the event is a nonstarter

 

[AZRickD]

if he had stayed silent. his behavior probably bought him a ticket to the next tier of sobriety checks.

This is an admission that the LEOs were coercing cooperation with the infringment of his rights and the threats under color of law.

...being belligerent is a sign of drinking in some folks especially young dumb ones.

The only individual who was beligernet was "Officer #4" who said,

You better stop runnin your mouth or the other officer will find a reason to lock you up tonight.

If anyone sounded like they were drinking it was "Officer #4" who didn't seem to understand the situation and whose story was might peculiar...

Brett: Why am I being detained?
Officer #4: Because you don't have a driver's license.
Brett: I do have a driver's license. I gave it to the other officer.

junior jumps froggy. junior gets special treatment.

What does "jumps froggy" mean? What on Earth does that mean? Did his refusal to answer a question give the LEOs articulable PC or RS? The fact that they found nothing means that their USSC-approved "sixth sense of a law enforcement officer" is wrong. He didn't "jump froggy." He simply excercised the 'nads to exercise his rights and say "no" to a handful of Keystone Kops who couldn't articulate why they were doing what they were doing; couldn't drive his car; didn't know where his drivers license was; utilized the finely focused resources of four LEOs to find nothing because they reacted stupidly to someone who exercised his rights to refuse to answer evidentiary interrogatories.

the japanese say the nail that sticks up gets hammered.

You really don't think that cute saying paints those LEOs in a flattering light, do you?

bet a c note he lacks the nads to follow through and see that hes got a loser case.

Hardly the point, is it? His decision to pursue this, successfully or not is not really a gauge on the first 30 seconds of the video, is it?

The LEOs did what they did. They attempted to intimidate, under color of law, an American Citizen, who was not suspected of committing any crime.

THEY FAILED.

They've been exposed. That's worth it to me.

And that you support the activities of these LEOs sickens me.

Rick

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

its tough for some folks

to swallow but the courts have ruled on these check points. good luck with the revolution. me i roll the window down say hi go on down the road. and somehow it just doesn't generate the same feelings in me that it seems to with those in the vanguard of the revolution. i like to grin breath i=on their special flashlight too do it obviously and they'll laugh stop asking questions

 

[AZRickD]

rosa was. and she had what it took to foment change.

You don't know history. Rosa had the backing of an army of NAACP attorneys from day one who had been planning to fight the city on the bus issue for months but were looking for just the right, sympathetic plaintiff. Rosa was it. But she went to trial, and the jury convicted her.

The court case wasn't the issue. It started the boycott that brought the city to its knees.

junior went looking for a confrontation.

He was obeying all laws. The confrontation began at the behest of the LEOs who used the color of law in a failed attempt to intimidate him.

the aclu can swing that.... unless they know the event is a nonstarter

to swallow but the courts have ruled on these check points.

You still think this is about court cases. This is about getting the word out. Just as the Kelo case brought to light the usurpation of property rights that were supposed to be protected by the 5th Amendment. "Wow, police really can behave like bullies against someone who isn't doing anything wrong? I didn't know that." A few more people and a few more people. One soul at a time.

Rick

 

[saltysquid]

It's unbelievable that some people that think it's just fine that others get their rights trampled. I didn't see anywhere at all where the kid was beligerant and ANYONE that defends the cops yanking him out of his car for this would also defend them if they shot 50 rounds into him for not telling them where he was going. I can understand supporting cops for doing their jobs, but it's stuff like this that gives cops a bad name and should be nipped in the bud....not pat them on the back for it and blame the person they wronged. Supporting bad behavior by those sworn to "protect and serve" only makes it worse for those that actually do their job.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

good luck

"This is about getting the word out."
the hard thing for you is as fast as you get the word out to a knew member of the revoluttion another one is getting older grinning and laughing about how silly he was when he was ydfoc. its a sad reallity for the revolution


at some point most folks cross over from fighting the establishment to being the establishment, seminal moment in life when you realize it. like the first time you tell some young pup something your old man told you that you hated then but realize you mean it now

 

[AZRickD]

Sorry, CassDaddy, that's not an argument that does any favors to the reprehensible actions of the LEOs.

You'll have to do better. Well, actually, you're under no obligation to do better, and I have my doubts as to your success in that venture.

And you're about as snarky as I can take this late at night.

Rick

 

[iiibdsiil]

Waiting to get stuck in one of these myself. "Have you been drinking tonight son?" "Sure have!"

Waste their time a little bit, then inform them it was a Sprite on the rocks.

 

[Husker1911]

CSDaddy, if jumping conclusions were a sport, you'd be a champ!

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

salty

did they pull him outa his car? i missed that. were he truly of the fiber to become a hero of the revolution he woulda passively resisted this most egregious asault upon his freedom. apparantly his commitment didn't extend that far. just far enough to come off in a manner that seems to inspire very different feelings. i wish we could do a poll about how old folks are and their position on this kid. might be revealing

 

[Robert Hairless]

I heard one officer tell the driver to leave the car, which the driver did. I heard the driver offer to move his car and I heard the officer tell him not to do it.

I did not hear anyone ask the young man for permission to enter or drive his car.

I did hear someone (presumably an officer) get into the car and say repeatedly "I can't drive stick!" while laughing.

I also heard and saw someone (presumably an officer) drive the car from where the first officer told him to leave it.

I also heard the young man say that he himself had offered to move his vehicle but the first officer told him not to do it. And I heard the young man say that he locked the car when he exited it but an officer took his keys without his permission. I also heard him say that he didn't think that the police had a right to drive his vehicle without his permission.

Kids like that must be troublemakers for sure. Some old folks are fine.

 

[AZRickD]

C-daddy,

Now you're not only doing a disservice to the LEOs in your arguments, you're making yourself out to be contemptable as well.

No further work needs to be done here.

Rick

 

[HiroProX]

JD0608, let me know when law enforcement starts to treat us "civilians" with respect again.

Badge + Gun != instant respect. Respect is earned by integrity, something those officers showed none of, I daresay they are just thugs. And thugs deserve no respect.

cassandrasdaddy, I couldn't care less what "old folks" think on the matter as frankly those "old folks" are the people directly responsible for things being as screwed up as they are today. They're the ones who said "Yes sir Mr. President!" to every one of the career criminals from FDR to Shrub regarding every violation of our rights that comes down the pike. So tell me... why should I care what fascists in denial think?

 

[rustymaggot]

the only thing i think the kid did wrong was not take the camera with him and get the whole story.

cops have no reason to do much more at a sobriety checkpoint than see if your drunk. stopping and turning the car off is a safety thing(so the drunk asses dont try to run and drive over cops). after the cars stopped i feel all the cops should do is ask if the person was drinking and if the cop smells booze then go from there.

it would be different if the cops stopped the car for a reason. if they are checking everybody, they should be extremely polite and make it fast. they are there to protect and serve, not harass and impede.

 

[saltysquid]

Cassandra, you are talking drunk now. I didn't see them ask him if he wanted out of his car. It's about the difference in right or wrong, period. Making stupid statements about a revolution does nothing to make your view sound in the least bit intelligent. If the cops were in the right I would say so, I strongly support our local police. You spouting off about the revolution can't change that. AZRickD is right, you are not doing any service to these leo's whatsoever. In fact it would not suprise me if you were one and act the same way.


I'll go first, I'm retired and have 8 grandkids and a life member of disabled american veterans. How does that fit into your narrow minded, preconceived notions? How old are you? I have been the establishment for quite some time, but that does not mean I blindly support the establishment when it's wrong. I leave that to sheeple and it seems they are not in short spply.