Video shows white cops performing roadside cavity search of black man

ClosedCaption

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2010
53,233
6,719
Video shows white cops performing roadside cavity search of black man

Here’s what happened: Lakeya Hicks and Elijah Pontoon were in Hicks’s car just a couple of blocks from downtown Aiken when they were pulled over by Officer Chris Medlin of the Aiken Department of Public Safety. Hicks was driving. She had recently purchased the car, so it still had temporary tags.

In the video, Medlin asks Hicks to get out, then tells her that he stopped her because of the “paper tag” on her car. This already is a problem. There’s no law against temporary tags in South Carolina, so long as they haven’t expired.

Medlin then asks Pontoon for identification. Since he was in the passenger seat, Pontoon wouldn’t have been required to provide ID even if the stop had been legitimate. Still, he provides his driver’s license to Medlin. A couple of minutes later, Medlin tells Hicks that her license and tags check out. (You can see the time stamp in the lower left corner of the video.) This should be the end of the stop — which, again, should never have happened in the first place.

Instead, Medlin orders Pontoon out of the vehicle and handcuffs him. He also orders Hicks out of the car. Pontoon then asks Medlin what’s happening. Medlin ignores him. Pontoon asks again. Medlin responds that he’ll “explain it all in a minute.” Several minutes later, a female officers appears. Medlin then tells Pontoon, “Because of your history, I’ve got a dog coming in here. Gonna walk a dog around the car.” About 30 seconds later, he adds, “You gonna pay for this one, boy.”

Moments later, an officer named Clark Smith arrives with a police dog. He walks around the car with his dog. A fourth police officer then shows up. The four officers then spend the next 15 minutes conducting a thorough search of the car. Early into the search, Medlin exclaims, “Uh-huh!” as if he has found something incriminating. But nothing comes of it.

After the search of the car comes up empty, Medlin tells the female officer to “search her real good,” referring to Hicks. The personal search of Hicks is conducted off camera, but according to the complaint filed by Phillips, it allegedly involved exposing Hicks’s breasts on the side of the road in a populated area. The complaint also alleges that this was all done in direct view of the three male officers. That search, too, produced no contraband.

The officers then turn their attention to Pontoon. Medlin asks Pontoon to get out of the car. He cuffs him and begins to pat him down. Toward the end of the first video, at about the 12:46:30 mark, he tells Pontoon: “You’ve got something here right between your legs. There’s something hard right there between your legs.” Medlin says that he’s going to “put some gloves on.”

The anal probe happens out of direct view of the camera, but the audio leaves little doubt about what’s happening. Pontoon at one point says that one of the officers is grabbing his hemorrhoids. Medlin appears to reply, “I’ve had hemorrhoids, and they ain’t that hard.” At about 12:47:15 in the video, the audio actually suggests that two officers may have inserted fingers into Pontoon’s rectum, as one asks, “What are you talking about, right here?” The other replies, “Right straight up in there.”


Pontoon then again tells the officers that they’re pushing on a hemorrhoid. One officer responds, “If that’s a hemorrhoid, that’s a hemorrhoid, all right? But that don’t feel like no hemorrhoid to me.”

The officers apparently continue to search Pontoon’s rectum for another three minutes. They found no contraband. At 12:50:25, Medlin tells Pontoon to turn around and explains that he suspects him because he recognized him from when he worked narcotics. “Now I know you from before, from when I worked dope. I seen you. That’s why I put a dog on the car.”




Again, I ask the bootlickers. What is an unlawful request from Police? I hope this guy gets paid and they get fired for their made up laws and reasoning
 
Well...first off....the cops are morons for going near his ass. Gross. I never gave a fuck enough about dope to touch a filthy human like that. If it was a GUN that's different and would've been easier to detect.
Second.....the legality.

He "asked" for ID and guy gave it. Consent.
Paper tag. You can stop to verify ownership. Otherwise....car thieves would just keep a blank paper tag and write a valid date on it. So...no...you CAN'T get a ticket for a paper tag that's valid...but cops CAN stop you to verify that it's valid. You only need "reasonable suspicion" not "probable cause" to stop a car.


But back to the beginning.....fucking gross. Those idiot cops are simply too motivated. They won't be cops for very long.
 
Well...first off....the cops are morons for going near his ass. Gross. I never gave a fuck enough about dope to touch a filthy human like that. If it was a GUN that's different and would've been easier to detect.
Second.....the legality.

He "asked" for ID and guy gave it. Consent.
Paper tag. You can stop to verify ownership. Otherwise....car thieves would just keep a blank paper tag and write a valid date on it. So...no...you CAN'T get a ticket for a paper tag that's valid...but cops CAN stop you to verify that it's valid. You only need "reasonable suspicion" not "probable cause" to stop a car.


But back to the beginning.....fucking gross. Those idiot cops are simply too motivated. They won't be cops for very long.
:clap:

Outstanding Bucs. You get an A+ for that effort being an apologist for those despicable police and trying to paint their crimes as a rosy situation! :clap:
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
 
Oh....by the way.....this story had already been posted by one of your fellow lefties.

Somehow I doubt the mods will be in a rush to merge it like they do with other duplicate threads.
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
It is most certainly not legal. I wish there was a follow up article to see how much money these 2 won in a lawsuit.

Past criminal record is not enough for "reasonable suspicion." Especially when the officer has to ask for the ID of the person in the passenger's seat of the car to confirm their identify. Those bastard officers should all be out of jobs and paying their victims restitution.
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
It is most certainly not legal. I wish there was a follow up article to see how much money these 2 won in a lawsuit.

Past criminal record is not enough for "reasonable suspicion." Especially when the officer has to ask for the ID of the person in the passenger's seat of the car to confirm their identify. Those bastard officers should all be out of jobs and paying their victims restitution.

It is legal or jails couldn't do it.

Past history can and is used as part of reasonable suspicion. If a guy walks out of a known drug house and he's a known drug dealer...that's enough to stop him.
 
:rofl:

Police pull over and rape 2 cooperative innocents; they're just too motivated! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I can't believe it!

What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
It is most certainly not legal. I wish there was a follow up article to see how much money these 2 won in a lawsuit.

Past criminal record is not enough for "reasonable suspicion." Especially when the officer has to ask for the ID of the person in the passenger's seat of the car to confirm their identify. Those bastard officers should all be out of jobs and paying their victims restitution.

It is legal or jails couldn't do it.

Past history can and is used as part of reasonable suspicion. If a guy walks out of a known drug house and he's a known drug dealer...that's enough to stop him.
And what if he's doing absolutely nothing? And minding his own business?
 
What rape? They searched a suspect and obviously an unusual object was found. I for one never would have gone that far because it's fucking gross.

Taken as a whole....considering the guys past is as a drug dealer...I bet most people would've thought he was hiding drugs.

Still....the story makes me want to vomit.
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
It is most certainly not legal. I wish there was a follow up article to see how much money these 2 won in a lawsuit.

Past criminal record is not enough for "reasonable suspicion." Especially when the officer has to ask for the ID of the person in the passenger's seat of the car to confirm their identify. Those bastard officers should all be out of jobs and paying their victims restitution.

It is legal or jails couldn't do it.

Past history can and is used as part of reasonable suspicion. If a guy walks out of a known drug house and he's a known drug dealer...that's enough to stop him.
And what if he's doing absolutely nothing? And minding his own business?

Then he goes on his way. Since no probable cause of a crime existed.

But if you're a known drug dealer...leaving a known drug house...you're eventually getting stopped. And it's ok.
 
Wow so your fascist little brain supports on demand cavity searches on innocent citizens. Unbelievable.

Do I "support" it? No. It's gross. I'd never do it. But is it legal? Yes...if you have reason to believe something illegal is hidden there. They do it to almost everyone who goes to jail who has drug charges or has drug charges in the past. Which is why I'd never work in a jail.

Support it? No. Understand why it happens? Yeah. People hide drugs and weapons there.
It is most certainly not legal. I wish there was a follow up article to see how much money these 2 won in a lawsuit.

Past criminal record is not enough for "reasonable suspicion." Especially when the officer has to ask for the ID of the person in the passenger's seat of the car to confirm their identify. Those bastard officers should all be out of jobs and paying their victims restitution.

It is legal or jails couldn't do it.

Past history can and is used as part of reasonable suspicion. If a guy walks out of a known drug house and he's a known drug dealer...that's enough to stop him.
And what if he's doing absolutely nothing? And minding his own business?

Then he goes on his way. Since no probable cause of a crime existed.

But if you're a known drug dealer...leaving a known drug house...you're eventually getting stopped. And it's ok.
Which wasn't the case. And even a dog sniffed him.

And I'm pretty sure that a cavity search in your scenario is still illegal.
 
Video shows white cops performing roadside cavity search of black man

Here’s what happened: Lakeya Hicks and Elijah Pontoon were in Hicks’s car just a couple of blocks from downtown Aiken when they were pulled over by Officer Chris Medlin of the Aiken Department of Public Safety. Hicks was driving. She had recently purchased the car, so it still had temporary tags.

In the video, Medlin asks Hicks to get out, then tells her that he stopped her because of the “paper tag” on her car. This already is a problem. There’s no law against temporary tags in South Carolina, so long as they haven’t expired.

Medlin then asks Pontoon for identification. Since he was in the passenger seat, Pontoon wouldn’t have been required to provide ID even if the stop had been legitimate. Still, he provides his driver’s license to Medlin. A couple of minutes later, Medlin tells Hicks that her license and tags check out. (You can see the time stamp in the lower left corner of the video.) This should be the end of the stop — which, again, should never have happened in the first place.

Instead, Medlin orders Pontoon out of the vehicle and handcuffs him. He also orders Hicks out of the car. Pontoon then asks Medlin what’s happening. Medlin ignores him. Pontoon asks again. Medlin responds that he’ll “explain it all in a minute.” Several minutes later, a female officers appears. Medlin then tells Pontoon, “Because of your history, I’ve got a dog coming in here. Gonna walk a dog around the car.” About 30 seconds later, he adds, “You gonna pay for this one, boy.”

Moments later, an officer named Clark Smith arrives with a police dog. He walks around the car with his dog. A fourth police officer then shows up. The four officers then spend the next 15 minutes conducting a thorough search of the car. Early into the search, Medlin exclaims, “Uh-huh!” as if he has found something incriminating. But nothing comes of it.

After the search of the car comes up empty, Medlin tells the female officer to “search her real good,” referring to Hicks. The personal search of Hicks is conducted off camera, but according to the complaint filed by Phillips, it allegedly involved exposing Hicks’s breasts on the side of the road in a populated area. The complaint also alleges that this was all done in direct view of the three male officers. That search, too, produced no contraband.

The officers then turn their attention to Pontoon. Medlin asks Pontoon to get out of the car. He cuffs him and begins to pat him down. Toward the end of the first video, at about the 12:46:30 mark, he tells Pontoon: “You’ve got something here right between your legs. There’s something hard right there between your legs.” Medlin says that he’s going to “put some gloves on.”

The anal probe happens out of direct view of the camera, but the audio leaves little doubt about what’s happening. Pontoon at one point says that one of the officers is grabbing his hemorrhoids. Medlin appears to reply, “I’ve had hemorrhoids, and they ain’t that hard.” At about 12:47:15 in the video, the audio actually suggests that two officers may have inserted fingers into Pontoon’s rectum, as one asks, “What are you talking about, right here?” The other replies, “Right straight up in there.”


Pontoon then again tells the officers that they’re pushing on a hemorrhoid. One officer responds, “If that’s a hemorrhoid, that’s a hemorrhoid, all right? But that don’t feel like no hemorrhoid to me.”

The officers apparently continue to search Pontoon’s rectum for another three minutes. They found no contraband. At 12:50:25, Medlin tells Pontoon to turn around and explains that he suspects him because he recognized him from when he worked narcotics. “Now I know you from before, from when I worked dope. I seen you. That’s why I put a dog on the car.”




Again, I ask the bootlickers. What is an unlawful request from Police? I hope this guy gets paid and they get fired for their made up laws and reasoning

Some cops are pigs. Hopefully they are reprimanded in some way.
 
Let's look at the scorecard shall we:

Trayvon Martin was murdered for no reason.
Michael Brown was murdered while his hands were up.
These two were practically raped by cops for no reason at all.

Yeah, I'll wait to hear the truth before I care.
 
I'd press charges, claiming aggravated sexual assault or rape. I'd sue all officers personally as well as the department. I don't believe roadside cavity searches are legal. If this is in any way a gray area, I'd definitely pursue it very loudly so the public understands it is legal for cops to do this and can cry foul to change it.

If cavity searches are necessary, it needs to be done in private, not roadside. Ffs, bring a police van if you need to. I don't see any "need to" here, and I support the police ... But not abuse of power.

Stop and frisk is one thing. Stop and anal probe needs much more than suspicion. He can't search the phone because not enough cause, but he can stick his fingers there!?!? Not without a warrant IMO.
 
I felt something hard between your legs.

How come I didn't see a glove? No glove? And then he scratches his nose? Or was that a scratch?
 

Forum List

Back
Top