- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Man dead after refusing to show police ID
Posted on 3/5/14 at 10:15 am to EA6B
Posted on 3/5/14 at 10:15 am to EA6B
quote:
Asking for ID is going to negate this situation, your statement is devoid of logic.
Most wanted murderers first will pretend they are a peaceful law abiding citizen when they are stopped for minor offenses hoping that the police won't find out that they are wanted for murder. If the police officer lets down their guard then the wanted murderer will make a move to incapacitate or murder the police officer in order to escape.
That's why the police have to treat everyone they stop even women as a potential wanted murderer or other type of violent criminal until they ID them and find out they are not.
If the person stopped doesn't have an ID or refuses to show their ID then the police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the person may be wanted for committing a major crime and could attempt to physically injure or murder the police officer in order to escape.
The police officer then has the legal authority to physically restrain the person in handcuffs for the police officers own protection until the identification of the person is determined. If the person still refuses to cooperate with the police officer and identify themselves then that person can be held in custody until they are identified and it is determined that they don't have any outstanding warrants for their arrest.
To require the police officer to do it any other way when it is the police officer's life that is being put in danger is not only illogical but also insane.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 10:17 am
2
Posted on 3/5/14 at 10:19 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Don't you want the legal authority figure who arrives at the scene of a violent incident to do that?
If this incident had been a violent situation you would have a valid point, didn't you already criticize another poster for using hypotheticals?
Posted on 3/5/14 at 10:43 am to MrCarton
quote:
True. I feel like I am taking crazy pills, but I have mentioned at least twice that police cannot demand an ID card or drivers license from a pedestrian. a pedestrian is only required to give some or all of the following depending on the state: name, DOB, address, destination
And if the police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the person is not giving their real name then they can detain that person until their true identity is determined.
I know because it has happened to me twice while I was just walking down the street minding my own business.
Once I was stopped by a police officer who was driving past me because I fit the description of a suspect who had just murdered someone in the area.
I showed my ID and cooperated with the police officer but he still detained me because he didn't know the name of the suspect.
However, he did know that the suspect had a tattoo on his right shoulder so when I showed him that I didn't have a tattoo on my right shoulder he immediately apologized for detaining me and released me then thanked me for fully cooperating with him.
The second time I was walking down the street minding my own business when two plain cloth police officers literally stopped their car on the sidewalk directly in front of me, jumped out and grabbed me.
They said that I fit the description of someone who the day before had robbed a bank in the area.
I showed them my driver's license but they produced a photo of the suspect and said I looked like him so they detained me for about a half an hour until their sergeant came and said that I didn't look anything like the person in the photo and ordered them to release me.
They all apologized and thanked me for fully cooperating with them.
Of course I didn't like being detained by the police for something I didn't do but I considered it my duty as a citizen to cooperate fully with the police officers until it all was straightened out.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 10:46 am
Posted on 3/5/14 at 10:49 am to EA6B
quote:
If this incident had been a violent situation you would have a valid point, didn't you already criticize another poster for using hypotheticals?
I criticized them for using an ABSURD hypothetical.
My hypothetical isn't absurd. It is a very real possibility that could happen every time a police officer stops someone.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:00 am to DawgfaninCa
quote:
They said that I fit the description of someone
They actually had a description?
Really?
They didn't just show up, and accost random folks while hoping to stumble across their perp?
Gosh, had Rodriguez been so fortunate, he'd still be alive.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 1:46 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
They actually had a description?
Really?
They didn't just show up, and accost random folks while hoping to stumble across their perp?
Gosh, had Rodriguez been so fortunate, he'd still be alive.
If Rodriguez had fully cooperated with the police officers like I did then he'd still be alive.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:14 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
If Rodriguez had fully cooperated with the police officers like I did then he'd still be alive.
Not fully cooperating (whatever that means) should not be a death sentence.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:20 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
And if the police officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the person is not giving their real name then they can detain that person until their true identity is determined. I know because it has happened to me twice while I was just walking down the street minding my own business. Once I was stopped by a police officer who was driving past me because I fit the description of a suspect who had just murdered someone in the area. I showed my ID and cooperated with the police officer but he still detained me because he didn't know the name of the suspect. However, he did know that the suspect had a tattoo on his right shoulder so when I showed him that I didn't have a tattoo on my right shoulder he immediately apologized for detaining me and released me then thanked me for fully cooperating with him. The second time I was walking down the street minding my own business when two plain cloth police officers literally stopped their car on the sidewalk directly in front of me, jumped out and grabbed me. They said that I fit the description of someone who the day before had robbed a bank in the area. I showed them my driver's license but they produced a photo of the suspect and said I looked like him so they detained me for about a half an hour until their sergeant came and said that I didn't look anything like the person in the photo and ordered them to release me. They all apologized and thanked me for fully cooperating with them. Of course I didn't like being detained by the police for something I didn't do but I considered it my duty as a citizen to cooperate fully with the police officers until it all was straightened out.
You are the biggest liar on this board. I cant believe you are still doing this. You are not only a liar you are fricking retarded. Please do everyone a favor and stop posting in this thread. I know you are only getting your jollies but you are a sorry excuse for a human. Dumb frick.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:27 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
I know because it has happened to me twice while I was just walking down the street minding my own business.
Once I was stopped by a police officer who was driving past me because I fit the description of a suspect who had just murdered someone in the area.
I showed my ID and cooperated with the police officer but he still detained me because he didn't know the name of the suspect.
However, he did know that the suspect had a tattoo on his right shoulder so when I showed him that I didn't have a tattoo on my right shoulder he immediately apologized for detaining me and released me then thanked me for fully cooperating with him.
The second time I was walking down the street minding my own business when two plain cloth police officers literally stopped their car on the sidewalk directly in front of me, jumped out and grabbed me.
They said that I fit the description of someone who the day before had robbed a bank in the area.
I showed them my driver's license but they produced a photo of the suspect and said I looked like him so they detained me for about a half an hour until their sergeant came and said that I didn't look anything like the person in the photo and ordered them to release me.
They all apologized and thanked me for fully cooperating with them.
Of course I didn't like being detained by the police for something I didn't do but I considered it my duty as a citizen to cooperate fully with the police officers until it all was straightened out.
You should make your fairy tales a little less obvious.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:28 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
That's why the police have to treat everyone they stop even women as a potential wanted murderer or other type of violent criminal until they ID them and find out they are not.
Man, I'm glad I don't have your outlook on life. Holy crap.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:29 pm to Sevendust912
quote:
Not fully cooperating (whatever that means) should not be a death sentence.
Fully cooperating means showing the police officers a valid ID if he had one on him when they asked for some identification and obeying the lawful order of the police officers not to walk away from them when they told him to stop walking away from them.
If he had done those two things then the police would not have had to resort to physically restraining him and he would still be alive.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:40 pm to Sevendust912
quote:Relative to this case, we have no idea what it means.
Not fully cooperating (whatever that means)
No idea.
We don't know because until we see corroborating evidence -- theater video, witness descriptions of the encounter from its initiation -- we have no idea what occurred until NR's video kicks in. By that point, LR is at least in extremis.
We can each speculate, as Dawgnitwit does.
We can foolishly claim our speculations as fact, as Dawgnitwit does.
But until the Popo make more info public, which they seem inclined not to do, that is all we can do.
There remain significant gaps in the account.
How did the cops single out the deceased?
What was the deceased's command of the language?
What was the nature of police interaction?
What were the nature of police questions?
What was the appropriateness of the deceased's response to requests?
Did the deceased possess an ID?
etc.
The police certainly have evidence to offer regarding the above questions.
So far, they do not seem forthcoming.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:40 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Man, I'm glad I don't have your outlook on life. Holy crap.
If you ever become a cop and have to confront someone because you saw them commit a crime or reasonably suspected that they committed a crime then you can assume they couldn't possibly be a wanted violent criminal who might seriously injure you or even kill you in order to escape.
It's your own life that you are risking but don't expect other cops to be as stupid as you.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 4:42 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:43 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Fully cooperating means showing the police officers a valid ID if he had one on him when they asked for some identification and obeying the lawful order of the police officers not to walk away from them when they told him to stop walking away from them.
Right, comply with the officers and nothing wrong will happen.
LINK
quote:
New Jersey police allegedly hid dashcam video from prosecutors showing they beat an innocent man on the side of the road and made up a host of false charges to try to get him imprisoned. After the video was retrieved through an open records request, all charges were dropped and the police were instead charged with falsifying evidence and assault.
The shocking video shows out of control cops cross the median line of a road driving against traffic to crash into 30-year-old Marcus Jeter's vehicle after he had already pulled over on the side of the road, then police swarm his car with guns drawn, break his windows, punch him in the face while he's holding his hands up in surrender, then pull him out of his car and viciously beat him while screaming "stop resisting" and demanding he "stop going for their guns."
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:46 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
It's your own life that you are risking but don't expect other cops to be as stupid as you.
Thousands of cops handle routine incidents like the one in this story without violence.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:50 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Relative to this case, we have no idea what it means.
No idea. We can each speculate, as Dawgnitwit does.
We can foolishly claim our speculations as fact, as Dawgnitwit does.
But until the Popo make more info public, which they seem inclined not to do, that is all we can do.
bullshite.
I just stated in a previous post what it means in this case.
You are just playing your deny, deny, deny game again.
However, at least one good thing that has happened as a result of our discussion is that you have finally learned not to split an infinitive.
quote:
How did the cops single out the deceased?
What was the deceased's command of the language?
What was the nature of police interaction?
What were the nature of police questions?
What was the appropriateness of the deceased's response to requests?
Did the deceased possess an ID?
etc.
The police certainly have evidence to offer regarding the above questions.
So far, they do not seem forthcoming.
Since you obviously are asking those questions because you don't know the answers then how can you conclude it was the police officers fault that the man was killed?
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:53 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
Since you obviously are asking those questions because you don't know the answers then how can you conclude it was the police officers fault that the man was killed?
They took a routine call and made it worse.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:53 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Thousands of cops handle routine incidents like the one in this story without violence because the person being stopped and questioned fully cooperates with the police.
FIFY
Posted on 3/5/14 at 4:57 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
They took a routine call and made it worse.
How can you be so certain the cops were the ones who made it worse until you know the answers to NC_Tigah's questions?
It sounds to me like you have an irrational bias against the police.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 7:03 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 5:00 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
How can you be so certain the cops were the ones who made it worse until you know the answers to your questions?
Forcing an innocent man, who was going through personal emotional distress, to do something he didn't want to do?
Maybe the man felt not only wrongly singled out, but cornered? All he did was walk away.
I'd say violence on an innocent man makes things worse.
I say he would still be alive if the cops would have listened to him when he told them what happened, instead of trying to accost him. Innocent people don't like being cuffed.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 5:01 pm
Page 53 of 58
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News