Caught walking while Black

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 10:40 AM)djs7685 Wrote: Every single person that I've ever been around or have heard of or have seen anywhere that had a police officer confront them, identification was almost always the very first thing asked for, and I've never seen an instance where they didn't ask for ID at all no matter what the incident happened to be.

I don't understand what the big deal is here. Yes, they could have just told her to get on the sidewalk and that's that, but seriously, what's so wrong with asking for ID? It's very typical for police officers to ask for that, it's not like they asked for anything out of the ordinary.

To me its just good public relations.  Other than walking in the road did this lady seem suspicious?  No.  Be pleasant with the citizen...be pleasant with the officer.  No story.

[djs7685]

(11-06-2015, 11:15 AM)GMDino Wrote: To me its just good public relations.  Other than walking in the road did this lady seem suspicious?  No.  Be pleasant with the citizen...be pleasant with the officer.  No story.

I think she was more out of line for taking this where she did than the police officer was for routinely asking to see identification.

We can agree to disagree on that, because I can't see any possible way that you're going to talk me into thinking that asking for an ID is in any possible way unnecessary. As SSF said on the last page... "You be very surprised at the number of felony warrants encountered by police during routine interactions." Asking for ID doesn't hurt anything and isn't causing anyone to go out of their way to perform a difficult task.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 11:38 AM)djs7685 Wrote: I think she was more out of line for taking this where she did than the police officer was for routinely asking to see identification.

We can agree to disagree on that, because I can't see any possible way that you're going to talk me into thinking that asking for an ID is in any possible way unnecessary. As SSF said on the last page... "You be very surprised at the number of felony warrants encountered by police during routine interactions." Asking for ID doesn't hurt anything and isn't causing anyone to go out of their way to perform a difficult task.

Agree to disagree.

[fredtoast]

Here is the issue.

What happened here was a "detention" by the police. It was a minor, but there are strict rules about when police are entitled to detain a person. Any restriction on a citizen's freedom can be a problem. In this case the lady was just out walking, but what if she was in a hurry to get somewhere? Even detaining a person for a few minutes can cause problems for that person.

The police have no right to request your ID unless they reasonably suspect you have committed a crime. In this case I don't know if the lady had committed any crime. There was a claim that another driver had to avoid hitting her, but that is a public safety issue and not a criminal issue. For example the police were able to park their car in the middle of the road without obstructing traffic on tjhis street.

So it all comes down to the question of did she commit any crime. It seems to me that the officers keep telling her that they are just making a "public safety" stop to tell her to walk on the other side of the road. when police officers come ion contact with an individual just on the basis of a public safety stop then they are not allowed to demand ID.

Personally I think the woman over reacted, but she handled the situation properly by fully cooperating with the police. I also think the police were not authorized to detain her while they confirmed her identification. Luckily this case ended peacefully, but if she had been in a big hurry to get somewhere and refused to wait around while they confirmed her ID it might have been different.

I find it very interesting that so many people here rant and rave about simple things like a driver doing the speed limit in the left lane like it is the biggest a-hole thing to do, but then claim they would have no problem being detained by the police when they had not broken any laws.

[djs7685]

(11-06-2015, 12:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I find it very interesting that so many people here rant and rave about simple things like a driver doing the speed limit in the left lane like it is the biggest a-hole thing to do, but then claim they would have no problem being detained by the police when they had not broken any laws.

Who has done this? Just wondering. Personally, I think people are idiots that treat the road I'm on as if it's a NASCAR track, and I've had a total of 0 speeding tickets in my entire life since ya know, I don't go over the speed limit. It's a speed "limit" for a reason.

I see people in the off-topic forums complain about people that drive "slow" from time to time, but I don't see any of them in here making the claim that you are making.

[*michaelsean*]

A few months ago I accidentally left my keys in the ignition while running into a convenience store. Car wasn't even running. I came out, and there is a cop with my keys in his hand. So he actually went into my car and took them out. Said it's dangerous to leave your keys in the ignition. He then asked me for ID. Then we went our separate ways.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 12:50 PM)michaelsean Wrote: A few months ago I accidentally left my keys in the ignition while running into a convenience store.  Car wasn't even running.  I came out, and there is a cop with my keys in his hand.  So he actually went into my car and took them out.  Said it's dangerous to leave your keys in the ignition.  He then asked me for ID.  Then we went our separate ways.

So the police can go in to your car for any reason they want?  Does that give them permission to snoop around?

Sounds fishy to me.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-06-2015, 12:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: So the police can go in to your car for any reason they want?  Does that give them permission to snoop around?

Sounds fishy to me.

I don't know if he was allowed to do that or not based on what he considers a public danger.  

[SteelCitySouth]

(11-06-2015, 12:50 PM)michaelsean Wrote: A few months ago I accidentally left my keys in the ignition while running into a convenience store.  Car wasn't even running.  I came out, and there is a cop with my keys in his hand.  So he actually went into my car and took them out.  Said it's dangerous to leave your keys in the ignition.  He then asked me for ID.  Then we went our separate ways.

(11-06-2015, 12:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: So the police can go in to your car for any reason they want?  Does that give them permission to snoop around?

Sounds fishy to me.

(11-06-2015, 01:42 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't know if he was allowed to do that or not based on what he considers a public danger.  

In many states it is a violation to leave you vehicle running while at a store.  This is an ordinance that has been put in place to combat vehicle thefts.  Since it is a violation the police have probable cause and can do that.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-06-2015, 01:52 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: In many states it is a violation to leave you vehicle running while at a store.  This is an ordinance that has been put in place to combat vehicle thefts.  Since it is a violation the police have probable cause and can do that.

It wasn't running, but I can see the keys being left in the ignition as a problem as well.  A kid jumping in, or just flat out theft.

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 01:52 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: In many states it is a violation to leave you vehicle running while at a store.  This is an ordinance that has been put in place to combat vehicle thefts.  Since it is a violation the police have probable cause and can do that.

I know in New York a couple years back they were handing out tickets to people who were warming up their cars in the morning in their own driveways saying it was against the law to have an unattended vehicle running.

I just can't see it being legal for them to go IN to the car and take the keys out.  Then ask for ID?  Seems a stretch.

[*michaelsean*]

(11-06-2015, 02:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: I know in New York a couple years back they were handing out tickets to people who were warming up their cars in the morning in their own driveways saying it was against the law to have an unattended vehicle running.

I just can't see it being legal for them to go IN to the car and take the keys out.  Then ask for ID?  Seems a stretch.

I forgot to mention that he called me by my name before he saw my ID.  Had already called in my plates.  It was a little creepy.  

[JustWinBaby]

Yes, she's very oppressed

[GMDino]

(11-06-2015, 02:57 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I forgot to mention that he called me by my name before he saw my ID.  Had already called in my plates.  It was a little creepy.  

So he went to all that trouble and waited for you...why go IN to the car and get the keys if he was going to stand there the entire time?

[Rotobeast]

(11-07-2015, 09:56 AM)GMDino Wrote: So he went to all that trouble and waited for you...why go IN to the car and get the keys if he was going to stand there the entire time?

I'm sure he went in to get the keys, as a "safety precaution". (Which I don't agree with)
To which gave him the ability to snoop for other substances/issues.
Again, I don't agree with entry of the vehicle. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-06-2015, 11:51 AM)GMDino Wrote: Agree to disagree.

That's fine, as long as you realize your position is one based on complete ignorance of how the job of a peace officer is, and should be, conducted.  I know a fair amount about a fair amount, but when it comes to issues regarding taxes I completely defer to Matt.  As his job deals with taxes and the laws regarding taxes I'd look foolish if I claimed to know more about it's workings than he does.  This isn't an argument over a subjective issue like the level of force used in an encounter, this is a basic procedure issue.  You always establish someone's identity when you contact them in an official capacity.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-06-2015, 02:57 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I forgot to mention that he called me by my name before he saw my ID.  Had already called in my plates.  It was a little creepy.  

He knew the owner of the car's name, he didn't know, for certain, that you were that person.

(11-07-2015, 09:56 AM)GMDino Wrote: So he went to all that trouble and waited for you...why go IN to the car and get the keys if he was going to stand there the entire time?

Who said he went IN the car?  He very likely reached in an grabbed the keys.  As to why he did so, to reinforce the entire reason he initiated the contact, that it would be easy for anyone to do exactly what he did.  Consider it a teaching moment.  As Mike didn't end up with a citation it's clear the officer was simply trying to reinforce why his actions weren't exactly well thought out.

(11-07-2015, 11:50 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: I'm sure he went in to get the keys, as a "safety precaution". (Which I don't agree with)
To which gave him the ability to snoop for other substances/issues.
Again, I don't agree with entry of the vehicle. 

Again, you're assuming he did anything more than open the door and grab the keys.  Given Mike's story it doesn't appear there would have been time for him to do much more.  Also, car thieves often leave a shaved key or a key of any kind in the ignition of the car because removing and reinserting it can be a time consuming process.  Especially if they have jammed any sort of key into a broken ignition, which is not always clearly visible.  So, again, there are reasons LEO's do things that you're just not going to be aware of by dint of having never done the job.  Also, again, the officer's intention in this instance was clearly not to jam someone up.

[fredtoast]

(11-07-2015, 02:13 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:   You always establish someone's identity when you contact them in an official capacity.  

But you have no right to demand ID unless you have cause to believe they are involved in criminal behavior.

For example I have had police pull up when my car had a flat tire and they did not demand ID from me.  Police come in contact with people for lots of other reasons other than investigating criminal behavior, and they do not always demand ID.

Would a black person in a shabby old car that had a flat tire in an exclusive, mostly white neighborhood be requested to provide ID?  I am saying "Yes".  But a white guy in a nice car would probably not.  Same reason that the only person I have ever known who got pulled over for not using his turn signal when changing lanes was a long-hired guy who was driving and old VW  microbus. 

Is that what happened to a black lady in a hoodie in a white neighborhood?  Maybe.  I don't know for sure, but I can understand why she might have had that opinion.

[fredtoast]

(11-07-2015, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Again, you're assuming he did anything more than open the door and grab the keys.  Given Mike's story it doesn't appear there would have been time for him to do much more.  Also, car thieves often leave a shaved key or a key of any kind in the ignition of the car because removing and reinserting it can be a time consuming process.  Especially if they have jammed any sort of key into a broken ignition, which is not always clearly visible.  So, again, there are reasons LEO's do things that you're just not going to be aware of by dint of having never done the job.  Also, again, the officer's intention in this instance was clearly not to jam someone up.

I now a good bit about what police do and this is total BS.  I have seen tons of cases where officers have claimed they pulled someone over for something like a seat belt violation, but then try to get permission to search the car.

I guarantee that this police officer was looking for contraband when he entered the car to get the keys.  Since he was not leaving the scene he knew there was no chance that someone would steal the car.  That was a total BS excuse for entering the car.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-07-2015, 03:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But you have no right to demand ID unless you have cause to believe they are involved in criminal behavior.

Who used the word "demand" counselor?  Oh that's right, you did.  Objection overruled.

Quote:For example I have had police pull up when my car had a flat tire and they did not demand ID from me.  Police come in contact with people for lots of other reasons other than investigating criminal behavior, and they do not always demand ID.

Were you engaged in a behavior that could result in a citation in this instance?  The answer would be no.  Was the woman in OP engaged in a behavior that could result in a citation?  The answer would be yes.  I trust further explanation of my point is unnecessary.

Quote:Would a black person in a shabby old car that had a flat tire in an exclusive, mostly white neighborhood be requested to provide ID?  I am saying "Yes".  But a white guy in a nice car would probably not.  Same reason that the only person I have ever known who got pulled over for not using his turn signal when changing lanes was a long-hired guy who was driving and old VW  microbus. 

Would a car load of white kids in a mostly black neighborhood be asked to produce ID?  I'm saying yes.  While you may not like it a person who is out of place arouses a certain level of curiosity or suspicion.  Defense lawyers like to pretend this kind of logic doesn't make sense.

Quote:Is that what happened to a black lady in a hoodie in a white neighborhood?  Maybe.  I don't know for sure, but I can understand why she might have had that opinion.

She can have whatever opinion she wants.  In this case her opinion is wrong.

(11-07-2015, 03:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I now a good bit about what police do and this is total BS.  I have seen tons of cases where officers have claimed they pulled someone over for something like a seat belt violation, but then try to get permission to search the car.

True, and absolutely 100% irrelevant to the point you're replying to.

Quote:I guarantee that this police officer was looking for contraband when he entered the car to get the keys.  Since he was not leaving the scene he knew there was no chance that someone would steal the car.  That was a total BS excuse for entering the car.

Oh, you guarantee?  I'd expect better language from a person in the legal profession.  You could say you strongly suspect that the officer did so but you absolutely cannot say you guarantee it.  Unless you're the omniscient god we keep talking about around here.  Are you that god?