Everyone is dancing around the truth in the Sandra Bland arrest. What happened is obvious.

[PredFan]

Wrong. It was quite clear to anyone who cares about the truth, that Bland escalated the incident, that the cop was courteous until she became obstinate, and he responded in kind.

He did not lie about the incident. He may have lied about one aspect of it, but the whole incident is right there on the tape. What is on the tape is enough to prove that he was within proper police procedure and that what happened to her was her fault.

Guarantee you that the cop will be almost completely exonerated. Of course YOU and other left wing nutters will claim it was a farce and racially motivated. Pretty typical M.O.

No, this cop isn't going to get away with it. His own department is already throwing him under the bus.

You are right. This whole incident is on tape.

He claimed he tried to deescalate the situation- IN fact he escalated it by threatening "to pull her ass out of the car" and "I will light you up".

He claimed that she assaulted him when in fact the tape from the dashboard and the tape taken by the civilian show no such assault taking place.

He MIGHT be able to avoid criminal prosecution, but his career as a cop is done.

Sit back and watch. Get ready to weep, and practice your outrage. He will be nearly exonerated. I guarantee it.

 

[Muhammed]

He can ask you anything he wants you do not have to comply. If he asks you to step out of the vehicle you do have to comply but the court will then make him explain why he made her get out of the car. The court then will most likely inform the cop he violated her fourth amendment rights.

SCOTUS disagrees with you.

 

[Hawkeye2j]

He can ask you anything he wants you do not have to comply. If he asks you to step out of the vehicle you do have to comply but the court will then make him explain why he made her get out of the car. The court then will most likely inform the cop he violated her fourth amendment rights.

SCOTUS disagrees with you.

No it does not

 

[Hawkeye2j]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

 

[dannyboys]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

YOU fucking try refusing to put out a cigarette in any State after any cop tells you to put out the cigarette while you are sitting in your car after the cop has stopped you.
Fucking go ahead asshole!
Then get back to us.
Dear God you are the dumbest poster I have ever read on any forum.
Learn how to spell cigarette.

 

[Muhammed]

Whether or not it is wise is not the question. The question is whether or not she was within her rights and she was.

No she was not within her rights to refuse the officer's lawful order to step out of the car.

The Supreme Court has already ruled on this matter. During a traffic stop an officer can order the occupants to get out of the vehicle.

 

[Muhammed]

He can ask you anything he wants you do not have to comply. If he asks you to step out of the vehicle you do have to comply but the court will then make him explain why he made her get out of the car. The court then will most likely inform the cop he violated her fourth amendment rights.

SCOTUS disagrees with you.

No it does not

Google Pennsylvania v Mimms

 

[Muhammed]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

He didn't order her to put out the cigarette. Maybe you should actually watch the video before you go spouting off like an ignorant fool.

 

[Hawkeye2j]

Whether or not it is wise is not the question. The question is whether or not she was within her rights and she was.

No she was not within her rights to refuse the officer's lawful order to step out of the car.

The Supreme Court has already ruled on this matter. During a traffic stop an officer can order the occupants to get out of the vehicle.

I did not say that. I said she was within her rights to refuse to put out her cigarrette. She has to get out of the car if she is ordered. The Courts later decide whether that order was reasonable.

 

[Hawkeye2j]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

He didn't order her to put out the cigarette. Maybe you should actually watch the video before you go spouting off like an ignorant fool.

He asked her, she refused and that is when he ordered her out. That is why I said the court would decide. Face it you ask her to put it out, she questions him on it and then he orders her out it is no longer a request but an order.

 

[Muhammed]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

He didn't order her to put out the cigarette. Maybe you should actually watch the video before you go spouting off like an ignorant fool.

He asked her, she refused and that is when he ordered her out. That is why I said the court would decide. Face it you ask her to put it out, she questions him on it and then he orders her out it is no longer a request but an order.

The Supreme Court had already decided. He didn't need a reason to order her out of the car, period.

I don't know why so many dumbasses are presuming that she was arrested for not putting out her cigarette.

 

[Oldstyle]

What does this have to do with Progressives using the IRS to target conservatives? Get a clue, Joe...

You just argued that when you give someone authority, we should let them use the authority as they see fit.

SCOTUS gave the IRS the authority to decide who was a legitimate "social welfare" agency and who was a "Koch Brother Scheme to Fool Stupid People into Voting Against their Own Economic Interests"

The Supreme Court didn't give the IRS the right to divulge private tax payer information to one side of a political campaign! They didn't give the IRS the "right" to target one political group at the behest of another who controls power in Washington! There is no excuse for what you Progressives did at the IRS, Joe! It was sleazy and against the law when Nixon tried and failed to do it back in the 70's and it was even more sleazy and more against the law when the Obama Administration SUCCEEDED in doing it now!

 

[Oldstyle]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

He didn't order her to put out the cigarette. Maybe you should actually watch the video before you go spouting off like an ignorant fool.

He asked her, she refused and that is when he ordered her out. That is why I said the court would decide. Face it you ask her to put it out, she questions him on it and then he orders her out it is no longer a request but an order.

It's an order that he has every right to issue. That was decided by the Supreme Court years ago, Hawkeye! Good luck arguing that your Fourth Amendment rights have been violated because it's established case law by the Supreme Court that they haven't been by that request. Police have been granted the right to ask the occupants of a vehicle...driver and passengers...to step out of the vehicle so that the officer can establish that they are not a threat.

 

[Bonzi]

You have an articulate and good looking black woman who probably came from up north some where and you have a very red neck white officer with that hickey kind of country accent. He's probably spent his entire life within 10 miles of where that incident took place. I bet he has a half dozen confederate T shirts.

For some reason, and you can see it here on the USMB, conservatives and right wingers believe you should just give up every right you have and instantly jump at what a police officer says, no matter the circumstances, or you get what you deserve. Especially if you are black, Hispanic, gay or some other minority. It's an example of the ultimate police state.

So he stops her for not using her turn signal. Of course she should use her turn signal, that's what it's there for. He should have just given her a ticket or a warning. And if it was some other white with that hickey accent, you know he would have only given a verbal warning if he had bothered to stop them.

And I'll tell you something else. I have relatives in the deep south that I spent some vacations and a couple of summers with growing up. I speak perfect "Yawl (or as some USMB members insist, "ya'll"), and I have been stopped because my license is from out of state and I just start talking Yawl and they suddenly talk very nice and have never given me a ticket.

Clearly that officer provoked her and escalated the situation with "put out your cigarette" and "step out of the car" and arresting her. It wasn't that he wanted her respect. He wanted her to cower and shuffle and she wasn't having it. So in his tiny and racist little mind, he was teaching her a lesson and it was within his right to teach her that lesson no matter what the actual law said because of who he was, the uniform he was wearing and who she was. In that part of the country, it's the "natural order" of things.

... meanwhile White people get murdered for no reason, but who gives a shit? No one....

 

[dannyboys]

You only have to comply with a lawful order. If you are in your own vehicle and smoking a cigarrette you are within your rights. Making you put that out is an illegal seizure.

He didn't order her to put out the cigarette. Maybe you should actually watch the video before you go spouting off like an ignorant fool.

He asked her, she refused and that is when he ordered her out. That is why I said the court would decide. Face it you ask her to put it out, she questions him on it and then he orders her out it is no longer a request but an order.

In other words she was a stupid negro POS who was stoned, blasted through a STOP sign, then when stopped refused a request to put out the cigarette, then started getting in the cop's face b/c she was looking for a fucking problem.
She found the problem she was looking for.
She's maggot food now. At least she accomplished something meaningful in her life..........feeding thousands of maggots.
I can't really think of a higher calling for her life.

 

[MikeK]

So when the Progressives are running the police, and they MAKE you bake that gay wedding cake and pay for those abortions, you are going to smile, and go on your merry way, right?

Paying for abortions reduces cost in the long run because the majority of unwanted babies end up on welfare along with the unwed female parent.

And why should anyone be negatively concerned about gay wedding cakes? This isn't Saudi Arabia.

 

[MikeK]

She was bullied into killing herself? You've taken victimhood to a whole new level.

Bullying is exactly what she was subjected to and it is what led to her suicide. There was no good reason for that cop to behave the way he did. His bullying started with the "put the cigarette out" nonsense and he escalated it step by step.

He should have had the sense to recognize he was dealing with a woman who was emotionally stressed by what was happening and cut it short. He had completed his purpose, which was stopping her and issuing a warning or a summons, but her conduct wasn't sufficiently submissive, so step-by-step he provocatively incited an arrest situation.

I am not ignoring the probable racist aspect of this situation. The main problem I have with that is it ends up creating unnecessary problems for lots of others, not to mention the enormous cost.

If the cop was dealing with some provocatively belligerent jive-ass punk Black male I could understand the cop becoming agitated. I would, too. But women are women, Black, White or Yellow. They respond to stress in a temperamental manner which can wear away at a man -- if he allows it to.

It simply isn't manly to respond like that football player who recently knocked his girl-friend out in an elevator. It's stupid. The way to deal with an emotional woman is ignore her outbursts and get away -- if you can. And Encinio could have gotten away. He chose not to. For whatever reason, whether stupidity, ego, racism, or all three, he chose to deliver a metaphorical knockout punch -- and look what happened.

He had no sensible reason to tell her to put her cigarette out, or to tell her to get out of her car. His union lawyer will try the "officer safety" bullshit but in this case it isn't going to work because the incident is being closely examined and analyzed by too many interested parties.

 

[cnm]

Here's the thing I see

If she would have just put out the cigarette he I get the feeling he would have most likely let her drive away with a ticket

He got his panties in a wad when she politely called him on being an arsehole and lost it entirely when she defended her rights. If you think it proper that citizens have to tiptoe around behaviour that the policeman's supervisors condemned, well, that's a funny practise of freedom.

 

[cnm]

What a dumbass..
No body killed her,and had she just acted civilized she wouldnt have been arrested in the first place.
Stop defending people who behave badly.

I'm rather confused at the way you're so quick to surrender someone else's rights.

 

[cnm]

She got mouthy and resisted arrest. Don't arrest and you live in a lawless state.

She politely and factually answered his inquiry as to why she was irritated. I don't believe there's a law against smoking in one's own vehicle. Nor do I believe either of those things are grounds for arrest. The officer's supervisors appear to agree.