Yeah it is pretty disgusting how they gloss over it like oh they were just ignorant of the law well that is no excuse for the general public so WTF 🤬 is it a viable excuse for the people supposedly enforcing it
From what I know thru where trained, the officer didn't pay attention, there was a pan handler , trespassed then arrested on DOT property. He was trespassed for blocking traffic not for pan handling. They where before on that incident. The officer didn't pay attention.
Police are quick to point out that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”, however when it comes to them breaking the law, that’s the first thing the use, and they get away with being criminals.
At 8 minutes then you can hear the sergeant about to say the officer was giving directives but stopped himself short of saying the word directives. They're trained to be assholes
What makes things worse is that in these videos they are sometimes GIVEN THE LAW and they still choose to violate people's righs. I can understand if you don't have backup but if you have a second or third officer present, step away and search the code that the person is telling you....but then again if they do that and still mess up then there's no doubt their qualified immunity will be gone.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse in their case because if they don't know if something is legal they can easily look it up on their phones or contact a supervisor or contact the city attorney. They're just too lazy to do anything that any reasonable person would do.
This whole case is by far the best audit I have ever seen. I hope you and your family own New Smyrna Beach Florida. Thank you from every single American
As a retired 28+ year LEO, Sheriff's Dept. Patrol Sgt., I watch these and sometimes shake my head. This Sgt. was absolutely Spot-On. While I agree that the officers did not appear to have acted with Malice, they were still wrong and Should Not have been. This is definitely NOT where lessons Learned is acceptable. Not too many years ago before I retired I would do daily Roll-call discussions on these kinds of issues. None of my deputies ever got themselves into a Rights Violation situation because I pounded this into their minds. I too had encounters with "Auditors" around our Public Safety Building, where the Sheriff's Dept. and City Police Dept. was located. Usually, civilian employees saw the auditors outside doing their thing & notified me what was going on. I simply went outside, introduced myself to the auditors & had civil, friendly conversations with them. Even had positive comments about me by them on their channels. The city PD folks took notice and did the same when folks would call in on the auditors when they were at the Post Office, Court House, etc. I believe every LE agency ought promote ALL of their staff to be thoroughly informed with the statutes they are sworn to uphold.
Not all public property is the same. There are laws that say u can’t stand still on a sidewalk. The White House is public property. U can’t walk into the Oval Office
What is most concerning about these audits isn't the fact that the police over reach, violating citizens rights. The larger issue is that they are so poorly trained, that they don't know where their authority ends and the citizens rights begin. Either that or too many of them are not sufficiently equipped to grasp the nuance of the law or simply don't care.
..... they don´t give a f#*k......... they are sovereign citizens ........ they teach them, they can do whatever they want because they will face (usually) absolutely NO CONSEQUENCES when the break laws ( on a daily basis ), violating citizens rights ( on a daily basis ) and break or violate their oath of office....... on a daily basis ! 🤬
I think that in this case is that in their minds the bar's manager have more rights and it's more truthful than a man "panhandling" in the streets. They, the LEOs, asume that a business has more rights cause they are making money for the city and thus making them money. That's just as the ppst feudal japan and ronins.
Well they spend virtually no time studying laws, with the relatively short time they spend at the academy they can't possibly know much about each subject they are taught, from shooting , first aid, driving, taser, mace, etc. Hence the joke about a cosmetologist spends more time training than a cop.
I commend Sgt. Kirkland for being forthright and doing a proper review of the situation. It is also clear he's not going down for Beatty's ignorance of the law.
Clearly, the cops involved in this encounter were woefully, recklessly, willfully incompetent. And how the heck does any cop in this country not know you can't arrest a citizen just because they won't ID? Total madness.
Woefully, willfully, actually malicious and nefarious actions. “ *Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it* .” “... *only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved* .” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority *"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money* . *With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money* . *And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money* ." *-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution* . *It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected* . *But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact* . *The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life* . *And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat* ;. *The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets* . *But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful* . *The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act* . *He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit* . *He does not pretend to be anything but a robber* . *He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection* . *He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these* . *Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do* . *He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you* . *He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands* . *He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these* . *In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave* . *The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman* . *In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts* . *On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed* . *They say to the person thus designated:* *Go to A- B-, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property* . *If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him* . *If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year* . *If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside* . *If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band)* . *If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him* . *If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may* . *Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed* . *See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter* . *When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore* . *It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid* . *And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show* . *Lysander Spooner (1870)*
I can think of no other profession , from neurosurgeon to bartender , where such ignorance and incompetence would be tolerated by superiors or peers . Thank you for making it possible for us to see this .
Jeff Gray is teaching the police department that we citizens have constitutional rights and that these policemen and women need to know the laws or have access to learn the laws. They need to know that they work for us. It's our taxpayers that pay for their employment. Change their attitudes or get sued. Which is taxpayers have to pay that bill.
Not a very good supervisor if his subordinates were ever under the impression they had legal authority to detain a person doing nothing illegal. They should all know the law if they want to enforce law. Too much power to not know what is and isn't lawful!
exactly. The different doctrines need to be enforced EQUALLY. So Plain sight = Film ALL you want from legal vantagepoints whatever is in view is fair game, just as it is for police to claim that they saw a joint through a window. Ignorance of the law (QI)= citizens not of the blue line gang/caste can't invoke that defence but anyone from the blue caste can. Open fields = police can search any private property w/o warrent if it isn't the residential part of a property (the curtilage)(well they search thee houses and curtilage of private proterty w/o warrants every day anyways because of QI above) that is "the house" but as a citizen you can't walk in around the any public buildings parking lots/open fields w/o being tackled immediately even though such places were not restricted and...open to the public. Those are the 3 doctrines you can see being applied unequally EVERY day.
@@isaqkampp4044 THE COURTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FIRST IN ALLOWING , OR CREATING THE IMPRESSION THAT REASONABLE , ARTICULATE-ABLE , SUSPICION IS BEYOND COMPREHENSION OF POLICE ! NUMBER TWO GIVING AUTHORITY TO ALLOW LYING ! NUMBER THREE OFFICER SAFETY !
Not properly trained?? This guy was a vet on the force. The US Constitution doesn't change. He should have known better, but he didn't. Good riddance we don't need cops like this.
I hope there is a lawsuit coming here. What makes this worse is that Jeff *told* the officers that they were making a mistake, but cops simply refuse to believe that a citizen would know the law better than they do, or refuse to acknowledge when they have made a mistake. Of course they will get qualified immunity. This is why qualified immunity needs to be revisited. There is no penalty for cops if they "think" they are doing the right thing.
And that is EXACTLY why the interviewer asked that precise question. To make sure they can cover the officer's asses with QI by asking if, in his opinion, he thought the officers thought they were doing the right thing. "I know I drove over that boy and his dog but I THOUGHT I was doing the ride thing." QI needs to be abolished immediately!
I agree, but I'd say they'd still become corrupt eventually. Regardless of civilian or not, power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
It’s still being excused and covered….these videos are made to appease and make you think they are doing the right thing. Guarantee they go have a beer when the cameras are shut off
What amazes me the most is both cops believed they had the right to detain for panhandling ( wrong ) , but there was no panhandling regardless of it was legal or not . So detained for a crime that wasn’t being committed and doesn’t exist .
actually Galt didnt think he had enough to detain him thats why he was continuing to investigate and also called for back up to get a secondary opinion as to how to handle... i also believe Galt was fairly new to the job
@@politicjunkee unfortunately the police training nationwide is full of blind leading the blind and bad habits are learned and practiced so much they become concrete. i personally feel that police across the nation should have to do theory and fundamentals refresher training every 2 years as well as police academys need to be a few weeks longer and really teach them what the rights of the people have under the constitution
Isn’t it sad - and completely unacceptable - that a truck driver with no formal legal training knows much more about basic law than a supposedly well trained police officer? I mean we’re talking about the most basic precepts of law including private property rights, free speech and the legal requirements under which a pin officer can demand ID from a citizen? I mean this isn’t some arcane area of the law about which an officer might understandably be unaware…….this is as basic as it gets.
Thats my point exactly. This is a 100% VANILLA situation. It doesn't actually get any easier than this one & 2 officers together couldn't even get it sorta right. Or even in the ballpark of right!! So if they can't handle this extreme softball situation what in the living hell are they doing with a badge & gun running calls!
cops violate the law its a "personnel matter" rather than a criminal matter like we get treated to... thats why bad cops exist and thrive, they get paid vacation for their ignorance, and at the end of the year and suspension they receive can often be refunded to them per the police union contract, leading to no actual punishment in the end... meanwhile, we get arrested and might lose a job while stuck in jail, pay for an attorney, and waste countless days in court...
You need to define "law".. they write provisions to justify their theft not LAW. There isn't "law" that is LAW. Violation of their "rules" or opinions isn't *LAW* . “ *Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it* .” “... *only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved* .” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority *"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money* . *With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money* . *And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money* ." *-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution* . *It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected* . *But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact* . *The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life* . *And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat* ;. *The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets* . *But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful* . *The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act* . *He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit* . *He does not pretend to be anything but a robber* . *He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection* . *He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these* . *Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do* . *He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you* . *He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands* . *He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these* . *In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave* . *The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman* . *In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts* . *On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed* . *They say to the person thus designated:* *Go to A- B-, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property* . *If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him* . *If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year* . *If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside* . *If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band)* . *If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him* . *If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may* . *Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed* . *See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter* . *When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore* . *It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid* . *And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show* . *Lysander Spooner (1870)*
this is the best argument ever witch means that officer should already know where property lines are ,see some camera videos,and do some kind of investigation before ever confrotnting jeff..I mean they use that word investigation very much but they dont know what that means..
This is a good Sergeant. Knows the laws, made sure his guys knew it, didn't try to cover it all up. I know from associated videos that both of the officers involved have owned up to the mistake, have learned the associated laws, and appear to have taken corrective measures. We need more police like these out in society. They can make mistakes, but don't try to bury it in bureaucracy, and better themselves at the end of it.
NOW WE KNOW IT'S NOT UNLAWFUL TO PAN HANDLE ! JEFF CAN PAN HANDLE ON BEHALF OF VETERANS ! TOO BAD JEFF DID NOT ASK THE COP FOR MONEY , AFTER THE INTERACTION !
That is what is so messed up with this whole situation. Even if the Leos were correct and pan handling was against the law, they had plenty of evidence that he wasn’t asking for money. If the Leo’s were going to invent an illegal act to hide behind, they should have at least choose one that he committed.
*only for fans over 18 years old* LOVEME.UNO/AGNEZ He's the person I love, he's my light day. The way the music flows and sounds is extravagant and fun. Anna is icon, legend, beautiful girl, princess, inspiration, a star. I could go on and on, understand this. #垃圾..
In my mind the fact that these cops believed panhandling was against a city ordinance exposes why allowing cops to lie to civilians is such a bad idea. They repeat a lie so often that it becomes the truth to them.
Even if it was, think about this. If they actually believed he was panhandling, with not only no evidence he was, but significant evidence he wasn't, what does that say about them? There are only two conclusions. They are either too stupid to hold any job nevertheless as a cop, or they didn't actually think he was panhandling, it was just an excuse. Now combine that with the fact it wasn't even a law. The answer is clear. They have no desire to enforce laws, they just do whatever the hell they want. Deprivation of rights under color of law is a federal crime, with punishments depending on specifics ranging from a year to life in prison, or death. This conduct will NEVER change until these punishments are imposed. And I don't see that ever happening unless the people take matters into their own hands first.
When you're sovereign you are not wrong. “ *Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it* .” “... *only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved* .” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority *"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money* . *With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money* . *And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money* ." *-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution* . *It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected* . *But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact* . *The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life* . *And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat* ;. *The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets* . *But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful* . *The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act* . *He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit* . *He does not pretend to be anything but a robber* . *He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection* . *He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these* . *Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do* . *He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you* . *He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands* . *He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these* . *In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave* . *The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman* . *In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts* . *On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed* . *They say to the person thus designated:* *Go to A- B-, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property* . *If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him* . *If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year* . *If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside* . *If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band)* . *If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him* . *If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may* . *Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed* . *See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter* . *When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore* . *It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid* . *And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show* . *Lysander Spooner (1870)*
Of the many blunders the two officers made, the most egregious was to not realize after questioning the complainant and witnesses that panhandling never occurred and they never witnessed it themselves, zero evidence of panhandling even if it were a crime.
Sovereign is never wrong. “ *Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it* .” “... *only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved* .” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority *"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money* . *With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money* . *And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money* ." *-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution* . *It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected* . *But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact* . *The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life* . *And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat* ;. *The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets* . *But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful* . *The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act* . *He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit* . *He does not pretend to be anything but a robber* . *He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection* . *He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these* . *Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do* . *He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you* . *He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands* . *He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these* . *In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave* . *The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman* . *In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts* . *On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed* . *They say to the person thus designated:* *Go to A- B-, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property* . *If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him* . *If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year* . *If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside* . *If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band)* . *If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him* . *If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may* . *Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed* . *See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter* . *When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore* . *It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid* . *And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show* . *Lysander Spooner (1870)*
15:00 This part of the story is very telling; they took his CW permit, but didn't run it to see if it was valid; they used it as a de facto ID to run him for warrants. They weren't interested in his permit, they just wanted his name and DOB.
they all lied on that whole part of it,, because it fit their narrative. on the body cam video you can see jeff's drivers L in the cops hand as he left the bar.
This SGT is very thorough. Makes me very proud/happy to see a sense of true professionalism that I am sure will eventually filter down to his subordinates. With that said the auditor a.k.a. also known by many 'Jeff' to be very educated, calm demeanor and not up in your face like many other auditors I have seen. I commend him on a successful audit and thank him for producing real change by way of education, following through and no need to cause drama. Lastly, I am a Veteran, I unfortunately was homeless twice and it makes me happy to know we have a man out there doing his part to follow through on right for all of us all while asking for prayers and kindness to GODBLESS THE HOMELESS VETS! HooAh!
Sgt Richard Kirklan.. gives me the impression of an honest man.. extremely professional.. seemingly unbiased!... big BIG respect him... your service here is very much appreciated
This is a clear example of thin blue line and the extreme care they have for qualified immunity. It baffles me how a LEO could be so ignorant of the law, so egotistical and biased and that's fine cause he "didn't intent" and the repercutions are a simple slap in the hand and a strong word from the chief saying "don't get caught doing it again". This things happen cause they really think that they are the law and have all sorts of authorities and their biases are legit, like taking the word of the bar's manager as true. The worst is that those LEOs hardly learnt anything cause their egos and training made them bulletproof against reasoning.
:-) The police know the lawsuits are coming and know there is little they can do to stop it. However they can try to put they best face on preventing the loss of qualified immunity for the sake of the officers involved, especially since Jeff made it clear to the police that rights and attorneys were in play with this interaction and they "needed to proceed with caution".
What are you even talking about? The standard to be stripped of qualified immunity is "clearly established precedent putting an officer on notice." It is *NOT* what the officer thought nor even 'what a reasonable officer would do" (which should be the standard).
Their job was to investigate, had they investigated, interviewed people, looked up the city ordinances, did their job none of this would have happened. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
"but he told me he had a gun" and yes he did, but he told you after you detained him and began the process of assaulting and kidnapping him... They can't stop themselves from being victims at every opportunity, and even when it's all recorded they'll still try to use the "I feared for my life and that's why I did it" type of excuse.
It's striking to know that over 20 times the number of innocent civilians are killed every year by cops then cops die on the job(incl accidents and non criminal acts) It's literally more dangerous to be a civilian around cops and it is for cops to be around civilians.
Law enforcement has way too much power whenever it comes to legal firearm carry. In most states you have to tell them your armed, give your license to carry and or state license. Submit to disarmament. Allow them to run or in effect register your firearm without consent or a warrant. It's like you give up your 4th and 14th amendment rights to exercise your second.
And the presence of a firearm magically makes anything they do justified in their eyes. They associate the very presence of a gun as dealing with a bad guy and they just have to look for the crime or interpret something in the right way. The training given to LEOs pushes these mindsets.
@@napalmstickylikeglue How doe's a Law Enforcement officer "register" your firearm over the radio.? I live in Florida and it is a "non - declare" state. Those of us who carry legally in Florida know you only have to declare once asked, not upon contact with a LEO. I always out of common sense let a police officer know I am legally carrying and present my credentials regardless of the law. I've carried for over 30 years in Florida. I'm NRA certified instructor. No one registers your firearm unless it's an NFA weapon or accessory such as a suppressor. Those items are federally controlled by the Dept. of Treasury. When you buy a firearm the Federal Form (4473) you fill out is a NOT a registration of the firearm. It's chain of custody form. That is why you should always get a bill of sale when you sell a firearm privately. If a police officer calls in the serial number of your weapon they are only checking to see if it is stolen. It is not a registration over the radio just because you have possession of the weapon. A firearm can be sold many times privately without any paperwork involved in most jurisdictions. The 4473 is only an initial chain of custody through FFL dealers, not private citizens. Some cities and counties have laws in place about recording private gun sales between non-FFL dealers.
@@nomadjeff1922 Okay so you're one of those, eh? One of those who actually believes that the government doesn't know what they have purchased because they don't want to believe it. 1. The majority of municipalities retain records of radio transmissions. Which means that if your weapon serial number is transmitted, it creates a record that never goes away. Along with that record is your name, and date of birth. Which means that it absolutely is being documented. 2. You lost all credibility whenever you admitted to being an NRA instructor. That course is an absolute outdated joke.... And has been for the past 15 years. Not to mention it has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation at hand. But I guess I should mention that I am a US infantry Marine, prior law enforcement, and currently a certified instructor with the USCCA. So go tell about NRA certification to someone who is actually impressed. 😏 3. After you complete a 4473, they are then required to contact NICS to get the proceed, do not proceed, or delay. That informs the federal government that you are purchasing a firearm.... And where you are purchasing a firearm. After that the FFL is required to keep documentation on that transaction. Including details on the firearm. Which documentation is subject to obtainment by the ATF at any point. I should probably also mention that my sister's best friend, has a father who was a field agent for the ATF. Now generally I hate law enforcement at every point however I do know him through family..... Which has led to a few being thrown back and conversations discussed. He said and I quote, "you are quite ignorant if you believe the government isn't keeping track of everything you have purchased regarding firearms". That means if you have used a credit card to buy a magazine, a credit card to buy ammo, a credit card to buy a firearm. They know.... They know a lot more than you and I could ever imagine. So while there is not currently a national registry, there is the makings of a national registry. In fact it's actually came out a couple months ago that the ATF is compiling millions of firearm transaction records into an electronic database. Here's something else to think about.. it doesn't matter if you still possess a firearm they believe you do. It only matters that they get a warrant to kick in your door and then they get access to all your Firearms where then they are able to create their registry. Anything else?
Oh my word, there was never a single mention in this interview concerning the “lawyers are for court”statement! This is another rights violation and a fairly significant one. Many questions were asked after Mr Grey requested his attorney. At least the Sarge didn’t blame this whole thing on Grey as others did!
Dear LEO's: Without Jeff and others doing these audits your errors (and illegal actions) would never come to light and these rights abuses would persist. We know that more and more departments are reviewing these public videos and hopefully revising training and procedures accordingly. The First Amendment is the ultimate Quality Assurance program. Please take advantage of these opportunities to improve your professionalism and your public perception.
the second your not free to move about you are arrested of your freedom. the police word salad " detained" is used so they dont trigger the " arrest" word. they dont want the 5th ammendment evoked, so they use the soft icecream backpedal slide to the side word detained. its still an arrest of free dominion for a free man to pass and repass at his leisure and upon his wish.
What does that mean, I'm just a little pregnant? Your the supervisor and one of your officers are enforcing his will instead of law. Did your start action against the officer that detained the free citizen, or did the victim file a complaint ?
It is very hard to LIE when you have video posted to RU-vid to prove exactly what was stated and what happened. Without this, it would have been a LIE....
He lied though. What was the source of belief that pan handling was illegal. Was he trained by someone to believe this? Did he read it somewhere? This notion that he acted on an erroneous belief is just a furtherance of the lie. He had no facts to support that the man was in fact pan handling. They were put on notice that what they were doing was illegal and yet they still chose to take the actions they did. He put a spin on this in an attempt to minimize the responsibility of those under him. And in the process reduce the responsibility on him for his effectiveness as a supervisor.
They never seem to mention that the waitress lied to get what she wanted and that the Owner also acted upon that lie. It was a false report to start with because he never approached the tables, customers or asked them for anything. It seems the only ones that did anything wrong that night was the Restaurant workers, the owner and the police!
“ *Those who are capable of tyranny are capable of perjury to sustain it* .” “... *only those who have the will and the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will civilized men be robbed, or enslaved* .” ― Lysander Spooner, No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority *"So these villains, who call themselves governments, well understand that their power rests primarily upon stolen money* . *With money they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money* . *And, when their authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money* ." *-The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution* . *It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay any tax, as he is to pay a tax, and be protected* . *But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact* . *The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life* . *And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat* ;. *The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets* . *But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful* . *The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act* . *He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit* . *He does not pretend to be anything but a robber* . *He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection* . *He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these* . *Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do* . *He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you* . *He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands* . *He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these* . *In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave* . *The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves “the government,” are directly the opposite of these of the single highwayman* . *In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the responsibility of their acts* . *On the contrary, they secretly (by secret ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed* . *They say to the person thus designated:* *Go to A- B-, and say to him that “the government” has need of money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property* . *If he presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our business, and not his; that we choose to protect him, whether he desires us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him* . *If he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon themselves the title of “the government,” and who assume to protect him, and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that we do not choose to make ourselves individually known to him; that we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for the present year* . *If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and trouble beside* . *If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members of our band)* . *If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in one of our courts) with murder, convict him, and hang him* . *If he should call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that “our country” is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; tell him to quell the rebellion and “save the country,” cost what it may* . *Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed* . *See that the work of murder is thoroughly done, that we may have no further trouble of this kind hereafter* . *When these traitors shall have thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a wherefore* . *It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid* . *And how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to support “the government,” it needs no further argument to show* . *Lysander Spooner (1870)*
Unfortunately, as often happens, the police jump in feet first on the side of the business owner instead of remaining impartial during their investigation. This is going to cost the local taxpayers dearly!
My wife, an internal reviewer for a government entity here in Australia (neither police nor corrections), said this IA Investigator is terrible, and is leading the interview. She said that there was no way she'd be able to get away with this kind of interview in her department.
I totally agree and got that vibe listening to the conversation. They both fed off one another in my opinion. Terribly disgusting. Once again police investigate themselves and little if anything will happen to the cops that act unlawfully.
I agree with your assessment, however comparing two different countries policies and procedures is counterproductive. I would rather live in New Smyrna Beach than Australia. We have the 2nd amendment and an ability to defend ourselves against our rogue government. I have seen many videos of construction workers in Australia getting beaten for various Covid lockdown issues. Or arrested for driving to another city for KFC🍗
@@alvinmortimer7536 I do hear you but disagree onthe 2A stuff. (Not going to argue anything, THAT would be counter productive. ) We DO need a 1A, though, as we don't have a right to express ourselves currently enshrined in our constitution, which makes me angry because the courts have upheld that we dont have the right to free speech. However, a 💩 investigator, is a 💩 investigator, no matter which country you're talking about.
You can hear Beatty's end of the call with the sergeant in Beatty's BWC video... Beatty clearly didn't know panhandling wasn't illegal. he even argued a bit. He's not that cunning.
Truely amazing that in this day and age with all the social media and postings of this kind of incidents that are recorded probably almost every day around this country that so many police officials don't know the basics of the law. Very scary and unacceptable.
Here is the thing, even if pan handling was a crime they had no proof Jeff did so and in fact were told he did not ask for money. Therefor that is no defense at all for qualified immunity which seems to be what they are attempting to do.
@@fireskycam9889 this is a point that is too infrequently mentioned but arises over and over. complainants lie, yet there is never an investigation regarding the crime of providing false information to the police. jeff gray's modus operandi, unfortunately, muddles the waters here since a reasonable person might conclude -- albeit in error -- that the catchphrase to "pray for the homeless vets" is, in fact, an implied plea for money. but in other audited interactions, there is no such ambiguity and the 911 caller is just making stuff up. i have had personal experience in this regard and can only advise that when conflict arises, be the first to call the police. the complainant, for whatever reason, seems be granted the mantle of truth teller so far as responding officers are concerned.
“I don’t think violating his rights was intentional” You mean like when someone is going 10mph over the speed limit when no one is around yet you still give them a ticket?
It’s also not intentional when the drunk driver crashes into a family’s car and kills someone. The fact that it wasn’t intentional is not even a consideration in that case.
@@tubehound69 a crime requires a victim. Driving drunk is eminently dangerous to self and others; driving 10 mph over the (usually arbitrarily low) speed limit with no traffic around is the definition of victimless. People should have more awareness of cars around roads. Roads are *for* cars.
For every one person who knows their rights, there are hundreds who don’t. As long as they continue to make millions off these people, nothing will change.
@@oxyfee6486 There are also hundreds who do know their rights and still entitle the police to violate them. They think that to be protected by the police we must allow the very people we pay to prevent crime to commit crime and abuse those "other citizens" than themselves because they think that somehow they are immune. "Back the blue until they abuse you" and they still don't can't get passed the indoctrination.
A bit refreshing to hear a Sgt. talk so freely about his subordinates, and how “ignorant” and “misinformed” they were in this situation. Crazy to hear him not twisting into a pretzel trying to defend their actions.
lol he tries to minimize what beatty did as unintentional- you UNINTENTIONALLY run a red light and cant afford the fine you WILL do couple or more days in jail !! the whole dept - like most- is pure scum thru and thru !
I love how the interviewee says the officers were just "ignorant" of the law. I guess ignorance of the law _IS_ an excuse when you're a cop. I can't wait to see how this plays out. My guess us nothing more than an undisclosed disciplinary action, i.e. swept under the rug.
This is all pre-civil case, which shortly after filing will promptly be settled for around $40K-$100K. Hopefully a lot more, but this seems to be the going rate.
@@petermiddo Officer is asked and affirms that subject's civil rights were violated. Only question is how big will the settlement be. Might be lower than usual given Jeff requested to be placed in handcuffs.
@@heartsky I'm not sure what bearing that would have on a civil rights violation. Cuffed or uncuffed, an unlawful arrest is an unlawful arrest, along with the running of his pockets and deprivation of property.
The seargent handled this well. I'm impressed and appreciative for seeing his example of professionalism in handling this event. Mistakes were made, lessons learned and perhaps a positive outcome.
The Sgt. seems to know his exactly what his job is!! Well-spoken and honest notice how he knew better about telling him he had permit when other office tried to use it as excuse!
This fine Sargent is the best LEO I've ever seen. He should be chief of the department. I actually have tears because this gentleman is so honest and transparent. There is hope out there folks this officer is proof.
I wonder how different policing would be if they extended academy's by months and force them to pass law comprehension classes. Making law enforcement certification state by state. Not allowing officers outside the state to transfer in. Also requiring all departments to attend the same training.
I am left with the impression that these are 2 honest men acting with integrity. More such are needed. I have been told there is a standard in law stating “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” I am left with 1 question. Is it not applicable to all persons?
The call to 911 is not evidence, it's just hearsay, and all it should be used for is to measure response in terms of time, risks while driving, number of units etc... But they turn up with everything from the call in their head as if it's absolute reality, and all too often refuse to accept anything that challenges it until after they've taken action against the person the complaint is against.
@Nick Nitro That is true about any evidence. The call should be verified to a reasonable degree, which didn't really happen in this case. But I mainly was correcting them cause people don't really understand what hearsay is and then they misinform, just saying something is hearsay doesn't mean much. LegalEagle made a thorough video about the matter about 2 years ago.
@@glee21012 So you've skipped past the time between arriving at the scene, investigating, confirming the information from the call to be accurate, then using the call handler to add weight to the case by being another person telling the same story. Lacking the confirmation of the information being accurate, lacking any investigation, the information gathered from the caller is not evidence, and it's only use is to assess the required response. We're dealing with a situation of officers arriving at the scene, not the court room, so why are you being irrelevant other than to play virtual lawyers and pretend to have achieveed something?
Crazy right!? Investigating a call for service of an individual suspected of asking for money from customers. And the Officer is “In Over his head.” What calls would he be considered capable of handling and not over his head???
This assistant manager(Sergeant) is 1000% on your side! That's the way it's supposed to be, just the truth!!! Call him as a witness in your lawsuit!!! BIG RESPECT FROM SERBIA EUROPE ACAB
It's funny because if the people said that they didn't know they were breaking the law the officer's would say ignorance of the law is no excuse to break it, but the second it comes to law enforcement when they break the law even if they have multiple ways of getting help they think it's not my fault I thought I was doing the right thing. This is a prime example of why cops need better and definitely more extensive training as well as yearly testing because laws always change and are expanded up on, ignorance of the law is no excuse to break them.
as a general matter, ignorance of the law SHOULD be an available excuse; or at least a factor in mitigation of punishment. the law is so voluminous and complex that no one can possibly know it all. certainly, crimes that are malum in se (cognizable as criminal by their very nature, e.g., murder) should not be easily excused by ignorance. but crimes that are malum prohibitum (actions that are criminalized, well, just because) are a different story. for example, it is not obvious that panhandling should be criminal. and a reasonable person might not know if it were. rousting, arresting or jailing someone for an action when they had no idea it was illegal is, from the standpoint of meting out justice, simply absurd. the problem with allowing ignorance as a defense is administrative only since essentially everyone would at least attempt to use this as an excuse; and this would bring the criminal justice system to a screeching halt. nevertheless, allowing ignorance as a defense best serves the interests of fairness. the real moral here is that we have criminalized far too many activities. it is probably better to just tolerate some unwanted behaviors; and to minimize their occurrence by other means than criminalization. to wit: do we really need a law against selling loose cigarettes? doubtless better to tell the cigarette manufacturers to go fuck themselves than give the police another excuse to roust the poor. with regard to the police, the matter is more complicated. the police should know whether frequently encountered conduct is legal or not, notwithstanding the complexity of the law as a whole. moreover, they will generally have the opportunity to check first before enforcing any specific law. and with modern search features of computers, the process will, as a rule, be fast and accurate. therefore, in contrast with the public for whom ignorance should be an excuse, the police in general should be denied this defense. sorry the long response. but i believe that your statement is both wrong and important.
"Let me look at the report, to verify my lies!" Check the notes to verify we're screwed. Check the employment histories to verify if there is any disciplinary questionable actions.
Props to the Sergeant for knowing the statutes, too bad he wasn’t summoned during the situation, and too bad that the officers weren’t informed to begin with
I guess at 7:00 p.m. on Christmas Eve they wanted to go home. Maybe if they trained their officers better they wouldn't have to do IA reports on Christmas Eve.
It also bothers me they only record the person talking and not the whole room. Officers behind the camera could be holding up anything or making gestures and we would never know.
If you break the law and are detained because of what you did, and then try to say that what you were doing, that you didn't know you were breaking the law, the cop will, every time tell you, ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law.
Sometimes I wonder how some of these cops even have license to even drive as ignorant of the laws they are,,, based on this here andplus the way I've seen how some of em drive a patrol car !
Awesome job on this Sargents part. Well done. It's sad that seeing an officer just tell the truth rather than blatantly attempting to slither their way through it shocks us.
This video is very instructive about the poor quality of training cops receive. Of course, it needs to be said that many cops would go ahead and violate people's rights even with excellent training but there are a significant number who wouldn't. If better training was given then qualified immunity could be 100% abolished because there'd be no excuse for it (truthfully, there's no excuse for it now anyway).
Although the interview was reasonable it is very disturbing that there are officers on the street that are ignorant of the laws. Poor training and command should be held accountable.
