Thanks to Bud for submitting the footage of his interaction! His channel: ru-vid.com/show-UCmRKfeRHJ0mttNsipWUrDrw Details: thecivilrightslawyer.com/2023/06/28/cops-welcome-stranger-know-your-rights/
I would argue that he was detained once he turned around towards the officer when the officer said “come here”. And I’m even more certain that he was detained when the officer told him to put his drink down…the demand for the ID later just continued to deepen and confirm the detainment…along with the arrival of the other officer around the same time that the officer obtained his license.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus THOMPSON v. CLARK ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT No. 20-659. Argued October 12, 2021-Decided April 4, 2022 In January 2014, Held: To demonstrate a favorable termination of a criminal prosecution for purposes of the Fourth Amendment claim under §1983 for malicious prosecution, a plaintiff need not show that the criminal prosecution ended with some affirmative indication of innocence. A plaintiff need only show that his prosecution ended without a conviction.
They aren't ignorant, they know what they are doing and that's called fishing for cash. They do nothing wrong if those they extort from don't even know. Law enforcement are pros at taking advantage of the ignorant citizen.
The law and a law are very different (acts btw aren't laws). The law refers to your conscience. Clearly you can't be ignorant of that as that's something we're born with (unless you're a psychopath maybe but that's no excuse). It is in fact perfectly reasonable to be ignorant of some arbitrary thing someone at some point has written down somewhere. That's why rules and regulations are applied on the basis of assumed consent which also indicates that you can revoke consent of whatever arbitrary rule (aka policy) police (policy enforcement) are trying to enforce. That's why they're always so concerned with ID. If you identify as a person (which is a fictional entity) you're basically automatically consenting to their rules and regulations. All that said ultimately it's all about evil trying to destroy freedom (they don't adhere to their own rules if it's inconvenient).
@DavidK-hx6gn eh...some what. There is a certain personality type that wants to be a cop. It doesn't require teaching, it just requires a badge and a level of authority to bring it out.
To anybody who says this is "small", unconstitutionally depriving a man of his freedom for 8 hours is not a small thing. It's *exactly* the same thing as kidnapping and releasing the victim after 8 hours. I bet you wouldn't say that was small....
Too many people believe in the myth of authority, so if you are part of the government suddenly you can do things that are illegal for other people to do.
While I do agree with your point , being kidnapped off the street by a complete stranger and being detained ( and or arrested ) by a law enforcement officer for 8 hours are two completely different things .
@@bltn7469 Why? What's the difference? In this scenario what makes it reasonable for the cops to detain you? What crime were they even investigating? Why was he arrested? Public intoxication? What evidence gives them probable cause that he is drunk? I didn't see him slurring his words, swaying, having trouble standing, or having trouble walking. As far as i can tell they arrested him for NO reason. Hence the "charge" that didn't even make sense since no one at any point claims he created a risk to anyone. So what's the difference? Why can the cops kidnap you for 8 hours? What's the difference from me picking you up and holding you for 8 hours?
@@bltn7469 you literally just said the same thing twice. An officer, who is a stranger, just kidnapped the guy in the video. You can argue it's justified, but a stranger still literally kidnapped this man.
Qualified immunity can be removed. USC Title 18 section 1983 strips qualified immunity and allows someone to sue for civil rights violation under the color of law. You just have to find a lawyer with balls enough to try the offenders
agreed each cop should start being held accountable for their violating of rights. when sued it should come out of the pension fund too so other cops start holding the bad ones accountable...
@@jamesnew8170 true, but a judge can just ignore your lawyer and side with the cops,, which is what happens 90% of the time... kinda like when you sue a big corp imm arbitration, they all work against you the citizen...
Watching a FALLEN NYPD OFFICER. NAMED DILLIARD. TWITCH TWITCH TWITCH TWITCH TWITCH TWITCH. THEN BUHHHBYE. DID HIS KID SOME MONTH OLD ENJOYED THE BODY CAM FOOTS? HUH?? IT WAS SO AMAZING. THE KID SHOULD SEE THE VIDEO EVERY NIGHT and say “LOOK AT DADDY TWITCH MOM. “
2 minutes later and the guy would have been peacefully sleeping in his hotel; nobody was hurt, nobody robbed, nobody killed, no harm done. It's often the presence of cops that create the problem.
@@patrickfaul834 That probably would've gotten him arrested more quickly. I'm not saying he shouldn't have done it, it's almost never a good idea to talk to police, I'm just saying these cops were gonna arrest him either way.
So wrong on all levels . Illegally detained, false accusations, no warrant, violation of both 1st amendment and 4 amendment in so many ways. False arrest..
"...you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride." ... These back-end of the world cops all think the same. A mixture between occupation force, judge, jury and executioner, combined with an attitude problem and the firm believe that they are the ones making the laws in the first place. Strangers are unwelcome and automatically suspicious criminals. You'll need permission for everything from them *personally* . Travelling, resting, walking, driving, existing in certain places... And god forbid they don't know you and you refuse to tell them your plans, work, what you ate for lunch, hopes and dreams... your darkest secrets ... etc.
irene 4417 so what do you do about it?spend big bucks for a lawyer if you can find one and get a few bucks settlement and the pricks walk away to violate someone elses rights!
For someone supposed to be drunk the man stood still and never staggered he was not argumentative and he was far more polite than the two constitutional violators
@@TheresanewAuditorintownWell that's all the proof I need. And I place much value in his version if events because he's somebody so smart that he called 911 because somebody was acting kind of annoying.
Never speak to cops. Never. Instantly invoke your right to remain silent. There's no such thing as a friendly conversation with police; everything they ask is an attempt to get a reason to arrest you.
I also noticed that AFTER they told him he was under arrest, they did NOT read him his rights and they did continue to ask him questions. They even threatened him with a felony if he did not answer their question. These cops are dirty as hell.
For those who think not speaking will get you arrested...your usually predetermined to be arrested anyway so any thoughts it would have been worse to stay quiet? My opinion is it never helps no matter how charming you are after drinking...cops really don't want a conversation no matter how cool or different they claim they are. Alcohol is an unusually awkward drug as it effects directly the very things the police use to determine your guilt and your Judgement is first to go...so Drill baby drill it into your head now so when it occurs just do the very minimum and within the law cooperate. Police cannot at any time compell you to speak. Ever. If you have to ever break that no question rule only one occassion could be even considered...answering if this is your address...just nod and say yes(sir optional). That's usually once a citation has been concluded to be the end so don't mess that up. Just my opinion.
Why should they be fired ? YOU are not holding them accountable so why should they care ? I get what you mean and even agree but WE, THE PEOPLE, don't do crap about this and it happens on the regular.
…fire them and hire two who are just like them? There is no psychological evaluation process in the hiring or training of cops and the little training they get makes them behave exactly like we’ve seen in this video and thousand others like it.
@@cunever here's my opinion on all the changes and institutions needed. 1. Bodycams should roll 24/7 on shift 2. Any disabling or covering, should be immediate leave without pay while being investigated if it was actual device failure or intentional. If it was the device, back paid and no problem (but noted on record in case someone has lots of "failures"). If found to be intentional, depending on the situation it should be 1 month loss of pay, 10% dock of pension or immediate termination, blacklisting, and criminal charges (destruction/tampering with evidence, unlawful alteration of government records) and the incident dismissed by law. 3. There should always be audio OR video available. In the pisser? Video cuts but not audio. Reading sensitive ID info? No audio but video runs. All editing should be done by a minimum of two people, separately. 4. All videos should be available online within 72 hours, with metatags so you can search by: Date, Time, Location, Badge number, links to other officers on call. 5. Reports should be required to be written without the ability to "review the footage" and submitted into a repository that doesn't allow for it to be changed. This is to discourage falsifying info on the reports. 6. Special court + prosecutor for cases against cops. Private lawyers should be able to file criminal charges as a prosecutor with consensus of X other law firms. 7. Civilian board for reviewing complaints. This can be filled like jury duty. Have it rotate every 2 months, something like 50 people who will randomly get assigned to review a complaint (7 individuals from the pool, nobody knows who else is in the pool). No immediate/extended family or police adjacent members on the panel. 8. This board can make a determination for loss of pay / suspension up through termination by blind majority (5/7 vote). These would be made individually when they are reviewing the complaint. Not as a group. They also have the authority to recommend criminal charges. 9. Any cop that "resigns" or "retires" while under investigation should have all benefits and POST revoked and blacklisted. Prohibited from further LE or government employment. Investigation should still be finished and any termination/criminal charges entered. 10. Officers terminated should be treated as a Dishonorable Discharge like the military. Alternative: make them liable under the UCMJ and institute a special JAG court. Furthermore: 1. Cops should have a yearly psych/personality evaluation. This should be a random psychologist for each cop (no money grifting or favoritism) and the doctor should not be told the patient is an officer. Cop should not have the same psych on back to back evals. 2. Like the courts love to do to us, any serious criminal allegations should result in subpoena of their social media, texts, emails, etc. 3. "Feared for my life" should be off the table. ROE should require being shot at first or a very limited set of exigent circumstances. 4. Removal of police attack K9s. Period. 5. Removal of police "drug detection" K9s. I originally proposed that a control test be allowed, a dog should be well trained enough to be able to work with a stranger as a handler and hit >90% in a blind scenario consisting of anywhere from 15-20 actual hidden drugs and have no more than 1 false positive per test but across 3 tests must have at least one test with 0 false positives. I have over a decade of SAR training experience (both K9s and handlers) and several years of explosives detection. This test is absolutely doable but I'm so fed up with zero accountability that my opinion is zero working dogs for cops. 6. Cops should be required to have a minimum education in civil rights and constitutional law. Continuing education should be required and consist of serious classes. 7. Certain advanced education levels should be met in leadership and civil rights and constitutional law prior to being eligible for promotion. 8. All cops salaried. No more unaccountable wage theft. 9. Ban unions. Public sector employees should not be permitted unions because they are not bargaining with the actual employers (the people). 9b. If you really *really* must have unions, they should be local unions. No statewide or nationwide unions. No paid union positions, they should all be filled by volunteers. Union dues should only cover *employment* related legal fees. Any cop sued or criminally charged should have to pay for their own lawyer. 10. Personal professional liability insurance. The city/taxpayers should not be on the hook for an individual cop's liability. City insurance should only cover an institutional failure (e.g. poor upkeep in a jail causing injury). 11. LE should not be permitted to carry or use any firearms not freely available to citizens. NFA items or any items that require tax stamps, licenses, etc should be prohibited. 12. Prohibition on no-knocks and high speed chases. Any attempt at planned apprehension should be organized to be carried out in a manner causing the least danger (e.g. following a wanted person to the gas station or grocery store and grabbing them on their way out when they are most vulnerable). 13. Prohibition on fishing expeditions. If a cop pulls you over they write your ticket for the observed offense and go. No running IDs, plates, we already banned dogs. 14. Any sort of SWAT deployment should require signing off by the Chief and Mayor or other elected official who will take liability for any excessive criminal behavior. 15. Criminal charges for cops who observe other cops violating Rights and don't report it. Criminal charges for cops who observe other cops commiting criminal offenses and don't arrest said cop like they would any other citizen.
that dude was chill af. if cops performed their actual duties, they would have helped him back to his hotel instead of violating an american. i wish cops watched these videos
The US police used to do that years ago. They'd say, "You walking home? Ok get in. I'll take you." But that's the difference in a peace officer and a dumbass that barely passed the exam.
@@mattym8 So what is your point? The video is running, for sure. Should they stop being peace officers and become intolerable jerks because they want the world to see how petty they are?
12:13 "..in these these small towns, they [the cops] have nothing better to do than stop and harass people." 15:58 "....follow this pen with your eyes" ....This is just a fishing expedition. The cops are looking for an *EXCUSE* (not *REASON* !!!) to meet their *QUOTA* of arrests for that month. Land of the free, Yeah, RIGHT! It's utterly crazy, and it's Foo *KKK* ing oppressive.
It's entirely possible that ONE person had been seen and described on the 911 call, but a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PERSON (ten minutes later) had been unlucky and had wandered into the target zone, then been molested and arrested by the cops.
I find it interesting if you are talking to cops directly, they assume everything you say is a lie. You call into 911, and everything you say is the truth.
It's unclear to me why "public intoxication" is a crime. We have bars, right? Place you have to go into public to get to and go into public to get home from. We even have numerous outdoor events where alcohol can be sold (stadiums, festivals, etc). None of that should exist if simply existing in public after drinking is a crime.
lol Public Intoxication is not this, Public Intoxication is peeing in public without trying to hide it, or doing something stupid while drunk like running onto the road blocking traffic or being a nuisance inside a McDonalds. This guy is just drunk talking to people. He does not look bad at all or being belligerent.
Most places (including my state) PI only kicks in when you are so drunk that you are a danger to yourself...as in, you can't be trusted to walk down the sidewalk without stumbling, falling, and hitting your head on the curb. A big problem with this is that there is no standard as to what level of intoxication that is, unlike a DWI. It becomes your word against the cops as to whether or not you were so drunk that you were a danger to yourself.
@@donaldwest8130 we need more CIVIL RIGHTS lawyers. Just as much as we need engineers and scientists. In every generation, there are tons of kids growing up to be the things you mentioned. Not very many are told of the option of being a civil rights lawyer.
Good comment makes me think you are using the brain cells and I've seen this can be confusing to police officers using this kind of intellect with them could be hazardous to your health'
@@cstacy Exactly, and the solution is simple, kick any DA's and judges that go along with the oinker's nonsense out of office at the next election, and make it perfectly clear to their successor that if they do the same thing then they're gone at the next election.
He was in more danger in the jail than walking back to his hotel! The guy at BP should be ashamed calling 911 for nothing. People need to be more aware how negatively the person they are tattling on is affected by thugs with badges.
That's what cops do ... I used to be one, and wasnt like that.. but since I wouldn't join in.. the department wouldn't let up the pressure on me to quit... Now, I hate cops.. They are trained VERY poorly.
This wasn’t minor. This man was majorly inconvenienced by having to spend the night in a jail cell. They need to start holding the supervisors of these officers accountable, for not keeping them under control.
Illegal arrest should be followed by automatic firing and kidnapping charges against the police officers. Ignorance of the law is not a defense, especially for law enforcement who should know the laws.
You're absolutely correct, but.......Alright, any job will correct you when you screw up even if that correction includes termination. These cops screw up all the time and no one ever corrects them so, they keep doing what they've always done. If you work at McDonald's and you keep giving double quarter pounders when thye should singles will get your ass fired but, a cop can make a bad arrest and none of his superiors bats an eye. Again you're correct, cops should face jail time when they violate the rights of citizens but, we don't puish it as we should.
I think there should be no such thing as a "consensual conversation". How can you consent when you are being coerced by an armed thug with a badge, uniform (clown suit), gun, taser, pepper spray, baton, backup and the authority of the state???
...and the ability to radio for TWO MORE CARS FULL OF COPS ...... AND A HELICOPTER.... They can escalate the situation beyond belief, just because they feel like it.
@@BOURNE_HERO No, he's not. He doesn't even talk about serious big stuff on a federal level, no interest in the wars, basically his wheel house is cops so that's what he sticks to.
Never once did they review the video from the store to verify the caller was correct. So now we have another example of arrest first and either never investigate or investigate last. This poor guy was pretty dang mello for a public intoxication charge.. IMHO
Dirty corrupt cops are a problem. We all must learn to exercise our rights effectively to combat these terrible infractions of our constitutional rights, and when they are violated, we must go the extra mile to hold these people accountable. I can only hope this citizen sues this law enforcement agency for their illegal actions.
In Nevada public intoxication is not a crime. And if you are intoxicated you can't give consent. So I would say this whole "interview" is inadmissible. In the old days, the cops would offer him a ride to his hotel, verify he's a guest and call it a night. But not today. The cops just gotta find something to make our life miserable. They are no longer public servants but tyrants looking for a victim.
@@RetireEatsDelivers That's not true. If that were the case they'd have offered to drop him off at his hotel and confirm he was a guest. That's all it would have taken to get "the creepy guy off the street." What today the cops go after anyone they can bust for anything they can think of. They are no longer "peace officers" but wardens trying to put everyone in a cell. BTW, what makes you think he was creepy? He seemed like the typical drunk guy in a Bart Simpson shirt. ;-)
they are being taught what our elected politicians want them to be taught. the politicians are the ones who allow this behavior, and do nothing to stop it.
I'm a retired Assistant Public Defender. I've handled tens of thousands of cases. We see these 4th Amendment violations constantly. When the case is dismissed, our work ends. John Bryan is correct. The prosecutors dismiss the cases, but the cops never get rebuked. Don't forget!! In addition to violating the constitutional rights of the citizen, any arrests entail hundreds of dollars of costs the taxpayer has to bear.
Why is it like how you've described ? And, what's the solution? How did the U.S.A. get to this place we're at now with so many problems with our police? Thanks for your post and hopefully your response.
@gotrythym I was a practitioner in the courtroom. I'm also a conservative politically. It is not my nature to dump on institutions as folks on the left do. In the county where I practiced there were many municipalities all with their own police department. There are such things as organizational culture where some police departments are better than others. The police department in well to do areas and tourist areas have different pressures applied to them. For instance businesses don't want vagrants or homeless sleeping or milling about in front of their stores. So more arrests are made to "clean up the streets." In poor areas the cops don't give a crap about vagrants and homeless except to use that as a pretext for shaking them down if they suspect drug possession or possession with intent to sell. Also there is profiling going on. Some departments or locals may be more susceptible to racism. Blacks get harassed more. So many speak in a nasty way when they get stopped by cops because they are sick and tired of the BS. But when they talk that way it escalates. This is why "deescalation" is being taught in some departments. With the advent of police body cams and dash cams things have gotten better. But things are still not good. There is also a stress on numbers to justify budgets, promotions, and salary increases. This leads to abuses where cops fabricate stuff to justify arrests. I could go on and on and on.
@@solido888 You make a very valid point. I think there is a lot of confusion about what is liberal and what is conservative. Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court [now deceased] was a conservative. But you could find no greater defender of the 4th Amendment than Scalia. If you can point out why you think I'm a liberal maybe I can respond better.
@@zenodotusofathens2122 I'm not buying that the man who wrote the court's opinion for legal, pretextual traffic strops is a defender of the 4th amendment at all, let alone it's greatest defender. While I do agree that many conservatives join with liberals in calling for greater police accountability and transparency, the broader conservative political movement has strongly aligned itself with a 'back the blue" mentality, in which they advocate for unquestioning acceptance of police authority. This is in stark contrast (hypocrisy, really) with their purported small government ideology that claims the 2A is the vehicle by which we defend against the very government tyranny they seek to abide by "backing the blue." You openly admit that profiling exists, and that blacks get harassed more, but it was not liberals who threatened to cancel the NFL if Colin Kaepernick continued kneeling. While one could make a strong argument that the words "conservative" and "liberal" have lost their true meaning in the American vernacular, you identified as politically conservative, so I have trouble seeing how your views reconcile with that political stance in the colloquial meaning of conservatism used in our country.
The reason law enforcement has become comfortable violating rights is two fold. First citizens don't know their rights, second lawyers refuse to even participate in civil rights cases unless there's use of force violation. So basically there's no way for the poor people that can't afford to pay the high hourly rates of the few lawyers that do take cases.
You vote the bums out. Plus, the cops have very quickly found out that overpolicing rich neighborhoods will cause them to get sued by the local cartel of lawyers, and the city council meeting to get a steady stream of “keen voters” that drop their opinion.
Literally why I’m going to law school. We had generations of people taught to worship a uniform and now we are here. Everyone should have the opportunity to file a case when their rights have been violated.
The cops waste so much time going after “Soft Targets”. They know who the drug dealers and meth cookers are in a town that size, but those s aren’t “Soft Targets”. Go do your job! Protect the public.
quit talking to them, about anything. invoke your rights. to remain silent and to have a lawyer present in ALL questioning. they aren't just your ENEMY, they are completely without HONOR.
This gas station employee is a punk. I have worked overnights at the same gas station (BP) and was able to handle these matters many times without calling the cops.
I didn't hear him tell the operator that he had asked the customer to leave, so he went straight for the cops. Because that's so much faster than asking the guy to leave.
Seriously!!! Dispatch should've politely informed the _911 Emergency_ caller that 1) This is NOT an emergency! And 2) Someone in front of a store chatting with people is well within their rights to do so. JFC.
SOP. I was stopped at a traffic stop (er, fishing expedition) in Tennessee a few years ago. I handed the officer my driver's license, and he immediately asked me: My name. My address. Where I was coming from (my class reunion in Ohio). Where I was going to (home in Texas) Annnnnnd.....what was the name of my high school (I was pushing 60) and what was their mascot?
Perhaps the policeman cannot read so he has to ask to be told what the ID has imprinted on it. Apparently that is the case since he evidently has not read the constitution including the fourth amendment.
@@jchr4381 LOL Wrong. John Bel Edwards is a major cop apologist. He signed that garbage "blue lives matter" law that allows resisting to be charged as a hate crime, and he helped to cover up a video of a group of state troopers beating a man to death after a car chase.
I appreciate the clear, concise descriptions of the laws given. I am a Canadian and my husband and I drove to the US every year on holidays, we were fortunate to have never encountered a police stop but after viewing the stories on The Civil Rights Lawyer you couldn’t pay me to drive to the States now, which is sad as we found most people to be absolutely lovely.
i didn’t see the cops go inside and speak with the clerk to positively identify him as the person causing the disturbance…it’s possible he was not the original suspect
The cops technically aren't allowed to do this but the problem is there is never any serious punishment for cops breaking the law. What needs to happen is when police fuck up they lose something significant like 10 years of their life.
the people who you elect are the ones responsible for doing nothing about the actions of these nazi thugs. the elected officials, by doing nothing endorse the actions, because they want you under control, and not free!
"Officer safety" does not trump a person's rights no matter how much police want it to. I'm tired of it being used as "justification" for them to do anything and everything.
Officer safety will soon become all too real. All because of encounters such as this with tyrannical, ignorant cops.They are not earning the hate, they are creating the hate. While the judicial system supports and even encourages this behaviour, trust is eroded and soon disappears. Nobody should be classed as outside of the law. Remove Qualified and Judicial Immunity from the system before the uniform becomes a target. Nobody wants to see people hurt or worse, but it will, inevitably, happen.
@@ebrakefml hes right, thats the job they signed up for. if youre a fry cook at mcdonalds, you get fry grease on you, thats a danger of the job, so suck it up buttercup. i feel scared and nervous around cops wiith their batman utlity belts all the time, but im not allowed to tackle and restrain them....
> "Officer safety" does not trump a person's rights no matter how much police want it to. You're being facetious, right? 🤨 Cops think they are their own highest priority above all else, and the law agrees, that's why a crime against a cop is considered worse than the same crime committed against a civilian, that's why they're called "aggravated" when done against a cop. That's why when a civilian is harmed it's "we'll see what we can do, but no promises", but when it's a cop, it's "this is personal! this is one of our own!" That's why the courts have repeatedly allowed cops to harm people by pretending they were scared. That's why the ones who shot Philando Castille literally jumped in the air like Shaggy and Scooby. 😒
I'm still not a defunder because taking away resources would be punitive, not constructive. What would be constructive is over hauling most of those crappy protections and having federal guidelines that are legally binding for all law enforcement with a clear list of penalties for each infraction...ya know like the military has, and investigations into misconduct are only to be performed by a third parties with no ties to the that community to be rotated out periodically to prevent a familiar relationship. Plus to be a cop should require two years of training with a deep focus on civil rights and legal procedures, with clear language standardized language for communicating intent. None of this "ey yo c'mere buddy, imma wanna talk to ya dude."
@@brandtnicholson4532 with civil asset forfeiture many districts are allowed to collect funding directly from the source. So defunding in those cases wouldn't make a whole lot of difference since the ppl in those areas still tend to believe the rule of law is on their side and justice will prevail because apple pie, and grandmas cookies, church on sunday and a hard day's work is its own reward.
I think the defund the police movement was blown out of proportion and the originators chose poor wording to label their idea considering the word “defund” carries serious negative implications. The original argument wasn’t to completely quit funding police departments, but to instead the additional allocate funds that would typically go to police to a separate organization so that instead of having police respond to a mental health call (just one example), mental health professionals would instead respond to deescalate the situation. I think police are stretched too thin, and expected to do more than what’s required, which has led to many areas being “over-policed”. I also think police are under trained and many are not properly vetted prior to being hired. Finally, I do think they are given too much money considering they buy military vehicles. I live in a very rural town in PA with a very small population, and our police have a massive armored vehicle that I just cannot fathom why it was ever considered a necessity aside from them wanting a cool toy.
@@chickensdone1 Right on point! Poor word choice really gave it a bad "sound bite". It needs a redistribution of the $$$. I know of no other business or industry that keeps the bad workers employed like law enforcement. I know of companies that cut the bottom 20% of the workers every year. Continually hiring and training. Growth every year, always getting better. If you cant do the job correctly, you can't keep the job. Problem here is that it's sooooo systemic and frankly, they don't want to improve.
11:54 you hit the nail on the head. They have nothing better to do besides generate revenue and harass people like this… and remember. If it happens to one man, it can happen to any man. Never underestimate the ability of police to make any situation worse!
Not to "any" man. The real reason he's asked what he's doing in the town is to make sure he's not the visiting friend of somebody important. That's how it works in small towns
I’m really glad you brought up that the prosecutors are unwilling to address the crimes committed by the cops - the only crimes evidenced by this video.
That's good advice, but as anyone who has ever met a police officer will attest to, it will also make them hostile. And cops are childish, they will charge you with any petty, minor infraction they can as revenge for "being difficult".
It's a damn shame to arrest him. He is NOT a criminal. If I was a cop, that situation required nothing more than telling the man to go to his room until he sobered up. Why are citizens always treated like enemies?
Thanks John for the play-by-play breakdown of this video. On the surface many people would say that it's not a big deal, but these are the "inches" that leads to "miles" of our rights being taking away.
Any time charges are dropped, an investigation needs to be done into how and why the officer felt that there was probable cause to make an arrest. Doing this, we may see plenty of cops making fair and reasonable arrests, but there is an epidemic of police officers arresting people, knowing that nothing will stick, simply just to punish them and remove their freedom temporarily. And if investigations are done every time charges are dropped, maybe we could pinpoint the problematic officers and the problematic logic they use to make unconstitutional arrests. Because if you make the arrest, how can you have no intention on prosecuting? If you have no intention of prosecuting, you shouldn’t have made the arrest in the first place. That absolutely insane. “I have no intention of kidnapping you. I’m just going to tie you up and throw you in my basement overnight. Don’t worry, it wasn’t kidnapping. I let you go.”
@@HawksDiesel they absolutely should. Every LEO should have a college degree in a relative field and the academy should be a multi year schooling just like it would be for a lawyer or doctor or anything else that specialized. LEOs should not be allowed to be a high school dropout’s safety net job. Imagine high school dropouts doing open heart surgery. Now imagine them legally shooting unarmed victims in the street. One of those things is a reality.
"Just comply." Really? As a former cop, I don't think I could be a cop today because the police are so corrupt. It was bad in the 70s and 80s, but it is much worse today. I chuckled out loud when I heard the charges.
All of you retired cops are lying to yourselves. You want to convince yourselves that you were one of the mystical "Good" cops back in those days. Bull S**T pal, BULL S**T...
Even a tiny move against the Constitution should be a big deal and be punished harshly by law. Prosecutor not charging these thugs is a disgrace to humanity. This is a gang against the citizens. Unfortunately, It is the case Not only in the US but worldwide.
A real police department would be pissed at officers for this arrest when the drunk individual could be sent to a hotel. At least one officer is taken off the call sheet to process a nothing arrest. Serious waste of resources. Juvenile behavior on the part of the officers.
@@Matty272 Anyone should be able to bring this criminal charge to a grand jury and if the grand jury finds probable cause then just straight to prison for the prosecutor.
They want cops harassing and arresting people. Because every once in a while they get something that sticks. Their job is to keep us in line and show us who's boss. Of the thousands of these civil rights videos I've seen, I have yet to see a single one involving accusations of murder, theft, rape, destruction of property, or kidnapping. You know, actual crimes. It's always vague BS like trespassing, loitering or merely pissing off cops.
Did the cops even do a breath test ? I hope a Lawyer helps him out . This happens too many times & the more the police get away with it , the harder it will b for them to stop . Thank U John for All U do for us .
If any officer complains that you are helping this guy to sue a police department, you can tell him, "If you haven't done anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about!"
@@Mike_E_DeShaman ??? The point being, the same non-reassuring line the "guilty-until-proven-innocent" crowd uses to goad people into subjecting themselves to a fishing expedition, will be on the other foot for a change.
Any attorney has every right to bring suit against the government on behalf of a client. If a cop has a problem with that, then that tells me that he or she conducts themselves in a manner that they know is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
This happened to me at the mall. I was completely sober, but because someone called & reported a drunk guy I got arrested for public intox. I tried to fight it in court, but the cop lied on the stand. So I was found guilty of public intoxication even though I was completely sober. The thing with public intox, they don’t have to give you any tests to prove it. They can just make up a story if there’s no body cameras. That’s what happened to me.
I feel your pain. More than once I've had a cop completely lie in his testimony about our entire interaction, characterizing me as horribly as he can. The us vs. them mentality so many cops has is disgusting.
This must have been several years ago. These days, it I expected that cops will have body cams. No body cam, no case. Juries want video for these types of crimes before they'll convict.
As stewards of public safety, the policemen in this video could have easily said to the suspect "Hey we had complaints about you, we're gonna escort you back to your hotel. We want you to just sleep it off." Then they could've made some veiled threats of arrest if they saw him out again that night, and left it at that. The guy could've spent the night in his hotel, and gone about his business the next day. Simple and easy.
