Newly released dashcam footage shows Sandra Bland's arrest before she was found dead in jail

[Lonestar_logic]

When my daughter was on the HS golf team a cop pulled them over and the driver said," does someone smell bacon."
That cop went thru that car with a fine tooth comb writing up everything he could

luckily it's a small neighborhood and the cop knew all the kids

Without a warrant? Its not surprising the pig abused his power.

Don't need a warrant if there is probable cause. You really need to educate yourself a little before speaking on things.

So, when can police search your car? Generally, under the following circumstances:

1. You have given the officer consent
2. The officer has probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in your vehicle
3. The officer reasonably believes a search is necessary for their own protection (a hidden weapon, for example)
4. You have been arrested and the search is related to that arrest (such as a search for illegal drugs)

- See more at: Can the Police Legitimately Search My Vehicle Without a Warrant - FindLaw

 

[Two Thumbs]

no, it's not, that's an out and out fucking lie

Texas Statutes: TRANSPORTATION CODE TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFICSUBTITLE C. RULES OF THE ROADCHAPTER 543. ARREST AND PROSECUTION OF VIOLATORS SUBCHAPTER A. ARREST AND CHARGING PROCEDURES; NOTICES AND PROMISES TO APPEAR

Sec. 543.001. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT AUTHORIZED. Any peace officer may arrest without warrant a person found committing a violation of this subtitle.

So, yes...violate the traffic laws, you can be arrested.

But the main question is why you would say I was lying?

Sec. 543.002. PERSON ARRESTED TO BE TAKEN BEFORE MAGISTRATE. (a) A person arrested for a violation of this subtitle punishable as a misdemeanor shall be immediately taken before a magistrate if:

(1) the person is arrested on a charge of failure to stop in the event of an accident causing damage to property; or

(2) the person demands an immediate appearance before a magistrate or refuses to make a written promise to appear in court as provided by this subchapter.


no, she could not be arrested

based on what??

on what I c-p from the link

she could have been arrested only if she left an accident

for the traffic violation yes, however once she chimped out the traffic stop was not the reason for the arrest, it was her non compliance and attitude.

there is no law that allows a cop to order a person to quit smoking on their property
there is no law that allows a cop to arrest someone for speaking freely


that cop is a criminal, and will go to prison for assualt

 

[candycorn]

That was my point. It's his job to be professional even when he doesn't want to.

He will professionally haul your ass to jail.

Of course he will. Again proving my point that cops don't really care about professionalism and don't think it should be a requirement for them.

Cops are generally courteous, but they're also human and if you are an asshole to them then expect the same in kind.

And that is okay?

Quick question, does the right to be an asshole to anyone who treats you like an asshole extend to workers at the DMV, or Social Security office as well?

Sure, why not?

Do unto others.

And doesn't your employer have the right to fire you if you employ the "I'll be an asshole to whomever treats me like an asshole (whether or not I just imagine it or not)"? If so, lets not hear from you when the cop is shown the door in the very near future. Okay?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

He will professionally haul your ass to jail.

Of course he will. Again proving my point that cops don't really care about professionalism and don't think it should be a requirement for them.

Cops are generally courteous, but they're also human and if you are an asshole to them then expect the same in kind.

And that is okay?

Quick question, does the right to be an asshole to anyone who treats you like an asshole extend to workers at the DMV, or Social Security office as well?

Sure, why not?

Do unto others.

And doesn't your employer have the right to fire you if you employ the "I'll be an asshole to whomever treats me like an asshole (whether or not I just imagine it or not)"? If so, lets not hear from you when the cop is shown the door in the very near future. Okay?

So, police are supposed to just take whatever it is that they get without ever losing their temper? are they not human? Have you ever been pissed off at work (assuming you work, you are liberal so thats in question) Do you think it would be justified if you finally had enough from a mouthy co-worker or boss and you expressed your feelings only to be fired? that would be ok with you?

 

[TooTall]

He was arresting her for improper lane change. Unusual, but legal.

He clearly showed and repeated that he was giving her a warning for improper lane change. It wasnt until she refused to put out her cigarette that he threatened to arrest her. When she replied "For what?" he never said.

Her only charge was resisting arrest, despite not having a charge for arrest in the first place

She refused a lawful order to get out of her car. What I don't understand is her family is going nuts making accusations but they had three days to post a $5,000 bail to get her out of jail and couldn't be bothered.

"You can get out the car now" is not a lawful order. Also, there was no probable cause for her to step out in the first place. AND there has to be an actual charge in order to RESIST arrest. There is no additional charge stated, written or implied.

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

 

[ClosedCaption]

He clearly showed and repeated that he was giving her a warning for improper lane change. It wasnt until she refused to put out her cigarette that he threatened to arrest her. When she replied "For what?" he never said.

Her only charge was resisting arrest, despite not having a charge for arrest in the first place

She refused a lawful order to get out of her car. What I don't understand is her family is going nuts making accusations but they had three days to post a $5,000 bail to get her out of jail and couldn't be bothered.

"You can get out the car now" is not a lawful order. Also, there was no probable cause for her to step out in the first place. AND there has to be an actual charge in order to RESIST arrest. There is no additional charge stated, written or implied.

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

 

[TooTall]

She refused a lawful order to get out of her car. What I don't understand is her family is going nuts making accusations but they had three days to post a $5,000 bail to get her out of jail and couldn't be bothered.

"You can get out the car now" is not a lawful order. Also, there was no probable cause for her to step out in the first place. AND there has to be an actual charge in order to RESIST arrest. There is no additional charge stated, written or implied.

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

 

[TooTall]

Texas Statutes: TRANSPORTATION CODE TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFICSUBTITLE C. RULES OF THE ROADCHAPTER 543. ARREST AND PROSECUTION OF VIOLATORS SUBCHAPTER A. ARREST AND CHARGING PROCEDURES; NOTICES AND PROMISES TO APPEAR

Sec. 543.001. ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT AUTHORIZED. Any peace officer may arrest without warrant a person found committing a violation of this subtitle.

So, yes...violate the traffic laws, you can be arrested.

But the main question is why you would say I was lying?

Sec. 543.002. PERSON ARRESTED TO BE TAKEN BEFORE MAGISTRATE. (a) A person arrested for a violation of this subtitle punishable as a misdemeanor shall be immediately taken before a magistrate if:

(1) the person is arrested on a charge of failure to stop in the event of an accident causing damage to property; or

(2) the person demands an immediate appearance before a magistrate or refuses to make a written promise to appear in court as provided by this subchapter.


no, she could not be arrested

based on what??

on what I c-p from the link

she could have been arrested only if she left an accident

for the traffic violation yes, however once she chimped out the traffic stop was not the reason for the arrest, it was her non compliance and attitude.

there is no law that allows a cop to order a person to quit smoking on their property
there is no law that allows a cop to arrest someone for speaking freely


that cop is a criminal, and will go to prison for assualt

That cop ought to get promoted for getting a person stoned on pot off the highway.

 

[ClosedCaption]

"You can get out the car now" is not a lawful order. Also, there was no probable cause for her to step out in the first place. AND there has to be an actual charge in order to RESIST arrest. There is no additional charge stated, written or implied.

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

and your first assumption is to claim the cop is in the wrong.
The difference being?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

and your first assumption is to claim the cop is in the wrong.
The difference being?

I watched it, its not an assumption if I actually viewed what the fuck I'm talking about dumbass.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

and your first assumption is to claim the cop is in the wrong.
The difference being?

I watched it, its not an assumption if I actually viewed what the fuck I'm talking about dumbass.

no dumbass, you are assuming because the video is not clear as far as did she strike or slap him in the car, the video is not clear what happened once they left the view of the camera.
you are assuming based on your hatred for authority.

 

[TooTall]

Get out of your car is just as lawful an order as 'get on the ground.' Even you should know that.

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Yeah, except he didnt say that and again didnt have probable cause for it. Keep playing stupid

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

 

[ClosedCaption]

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

and your first assumption is to claim the cop is in the wrong.
The difference being?

I watched it, its not an assumption if I actually viewed what the fuck I'm talking about dumbass.

no dumbass, you are assuming because the video is not clear as far as did she strike or slap him in the car, the video is not clear what happened once they left the view of the camera.
you are assuming based on your hatred for authority.

If video of the incident isnt clear what are you defending? Stuff you didnt see happen? Like maybe she choked him using the force?

 

[TooTall]

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

This is what you posted in post #1. Did you lie about it?

5. Cop says get out the car because now she is under arrest

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

I went to your link on post #1 and the very first words the cop used are "Get out of the car!" Keep digging.

 

[ClosedCaption]

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

but what did the tape say? And what was the probable cause for it?

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

I went to your link on post #1 and the very first words the cop used are "Get out of the car!" Keep digging.

You still didnt watch the video I see. When you do come holla at me. Actually dont, if you defend something you have no idea about I can only imagine that your stance will still be unshakable once you have facts.

 

[TooTall]

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

I didn't watch the tape, I just thought you did and knew what was said. Obviously, I should have known better.

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

I went to your link on post #1 and the very first words the cop used are "Get out of the car!" Keep digging.

You still didnt the video I see. When you do come holla at me. Actually dont, if you defend something you have no idea about I can only imagine that your stance will still be unshakable once you have facts.

I did watch the link you posted and told you what I heard and it was even closed captioned on the video. If you are still too fucking stupid to believe it I can't help you. I do know for a fact that the cop gave her a lawful order and she gave him a ration of shit instead of obeying him. Perhaps you should look at the video again and then tell me that the very first words on the video are not "Get out of the car!"

 

[ClosedCaption]

Right

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

Oh MY FUCKING GAWD....Go at least find out what you are defending before defending it. But why would you, black person gets arrested and your default is to find the black person guilty. Why find out or have to be burdened with information?

Keep digging, I merely quoted what you posted. If you posted a lie don't blame me.

I dont, I only blame you for defending the actions of someone when you didnt even watch it

I went to your link on post #1 and the very first words the cop used are "Get out of the car!" Keep digging.

You still didnt the video I see. When you do come holla at me. Actually dont, if you defend something you have no idea about I can only imagine that your stance will still be unshakable once you have facts.

I did watch the link you posted and told you what I heard and it was even closed captioned on the video. If you are still too fucking stupid to believe it I can't help you. I do know for a fact that the cop gave her a lawful order and she gave him a ration of shit instead of obeying him. Perhaps you should look at the video again and then tell me that the very first words on the video are not "Get out of the car!"

Because its edited fucktard....then it shows how it started but if you didnt have the attention span of a fucking Goldfish you'd know that

 

[Two Thumbs]

There's a time to support the cops then there's clear PROOF, which the camera provides, that he had no right to drag her out of the car.

once he tried, she had every right to kill him in self defense