Being a cop should probably not be a lifetime profession. Even the ones with brains and no psychological baggage get jaded and cynical. We should probably set up a system similar to military service where people rotate through a 3 - 5 year policing stint. That will do 2 things: it will put more people in the shoes of those with the duty to enforce the law, giving them an appreciation for law enforcement, and it will blur the black and white edge between common sense and blind enforcement.
"I bet I could say you resisted arrest or something..."
- Thread starter SteelCore
- Start date
What baffles me here is this idea that asking "Did I commit a moving violation" and what that moving violation was, is somehow "baiting" the cop, or that any bait at all, no matter how egregious, is deserving of a threat of false imprisonment on the basis of perjured testimony by an officer of the law.
This sergeant should be up on federal charges for deprivation of rights under color of law, and any defense attorney worth his salt ought to be looking at every last conviction secured on the basis of testimony by this cop throughout his entire career.
This sergeant should be up on federal charges for deprivation of rights under color of law, and any defense attorney worth his salt ought to be looking at every last conviction secured on the basis of testimony by this cop throughout his entire career.
Dust Monkey
New member
CopTalk is coptalk, bunch of wannabes that would wash out of any military service, including the Air Force
I dont care what cops put up with, they applied for the job, thus they knew, or should have know, what the job description was.
Don't the police do this as well? Perhaps rephrase it to read like this:
When cops load up a car with recording equipment and then deliberately set out to "bait" people, the people are bound to have unfriendly thoughts about the cops' motivation.
Then you understand how many of us feel about "stings" "DUI checkpoints" and the like. Turnabout is fair play. Don't step out of line, don't break the law, and you have nothing to worry about.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
Amen, DiveMedic. +1 to everything mvpel said as well
I said "LIKE THIS" meaning clearly NOT deserving of any harsh treatment, because they did nothing wrong. I'm quite sure YOU deserved it. That doesn't surprise me in the slightest. But as we can all plainly see, this guy didn't deserve anything at all, and NO ONE, EVER deserved perjured testimony. Period. Ever. What I am submitting or proferring here is that although this type of cop is certainly in the minority nationwide, in certain commuities the attitude of cops that they can do no wrong, you'd better not "give them any "lip" or fabricated charges will be forthcoming, is very common. St. Louis is apparently one of those communities, judging by the responses of this cops' buddies (more than one) on the cop website, showing contempt for the victim here. I know cops who say their rule is "you run, you get beaten, that's all there is to it". I've known cops who called themselves "CCRVs" - certified civil rights violators. Many many cops have this attitude, and are jackasses who break the law routinely, lie routinely, and have no business in law enforcement. Not saying a majority, but many. Many means a significant enough of a minority that its a real problem, and it is exactly what this brave young man did and does that needs to happen to change things. In my experience, in my community MANY cops are like this with young people. But a young adult should be treated NO differently than anyone else, and if he/she is within his/her rights, exercising the RIGHT to remain silent is still, ya know, a RIGHT. See the bill of rights. Yes, we are a product of our experiences, and YES, I AM alleging that YOU, WA, grew up in a white middle class surburban neighborhood, and didn't experience what a lot of people in big cities do, in terms of supreme A-hole cops. Clearly, you're in la la land trying to defend this cops actions, and/or if you think this sort of thing is even remotely an isolated incident. So prove me wrong if I'm wrong. Give me lat & long of your childhood homes to the age of 20.
Oh, wahhhh, cops get lied to and verbally abused. So sad. So lemme get this straight: In their jobs, they have to put up with unpleasant crap? Is that the shocking allegation here? Got news for ya - that's the *definition* of what a JOB is! We ALL have to put up with supreme BS in our jobs.
I said "LIKE THIS" meaning clearly NOT deserving of any harsh treatment, because they did nothing wrong. I'm quite sure YOU deserved it. That doesn't surprise me in the slightest. But as we can all plainly see, this guy didn't deserve anything at all, and NO ONE, EVER deserved perjured testimony. Period. Ever. What I am submitting or proferring here is that although this type of cop is certainly in the minority nationwide, in certain commuities the attitude of cops that they can do no wrong, you'd better not "give them any "lip" or fabricated charges will be forthcoming, is very common. St. Louis is apparently one of those communities, judging by the responses of this cops' buddies (more than one) on the cop website, showing contempt for the victim here. I know cops who say their rule is "you run, you get beaten, that's all there is to it". I've known cops who called themselves "CCRVs" - certified civil rights violators. Many many cops have this attitude, and are jackasses who break the law routinely, lie routinely, and have no business in law enforcement. Not saying a majority, but many. Many means a significant enough of a minority that its a real problem, and it is exactly what this brave young man did and does that needs to happen to change things. In my experience, in my community MANY cops are like this with young people. But a young adult should be treated NO differently than anyone else, and if he/she is within his/her rights, exercising the RIGHT to remain silent is still, ya know, a RIGHT. See the bill of rights. Yes, we are a product of our experiences, and YES, I AM alleging that YOU, WA, grew up in a white middle class surburban neighborhood, and didn't experience what a lot of people in big cities do, in terms of supreme A-hole cops. Clearly, you're in la la land trying to defend this cops actions, and/or if you think this sort of thing is even remotely an isolated incident. So prove me wrong if I'm wrong. Give me lat & long of your childhood homes to the age of 20.
Oh, wahhhh, cops get lied to and verbally abused. So sad. So lemme get this straight: In their jobs, they have to put up with unpleasant crap? Is that the shocking allegation here? Got news for ya - that's the *definition* of what a JOB is! We ALL have to put up with supreme BS in our jobs.
I know there are some jacka** cops but that Darrow is a jacka** also.
He drives around and baits cops. Wow, what a great life story.
I can't think of many things easier than to bait a cop. Well, maybe going to the bathroom when I have cramped bowels.
It took a really imaginative person to park next to a cop at 2:00AM and say "did I do anything wrong" when asked "is there a problem, why are you here".
WTF did he expect the policeman to do for Godsakes? Sure the cop overreacted but the cop had the right to find out what that jacka** was doing next to him late at night. I mean, I'd be worried if someone parked next to me in an empty parking lot at 2:00AM!
What the cop should have said is "I'm taking you in because you're unresponsive to my questions and you're scaring me". That's it, DONE, 30 seconds is all it would have took IMHO.
Of course, that jacka** Darrow, probably wouldn't have shown his video if the cop calmly reacted that way.
The answer, as you all know, is Darrow wanted to piss off the policeman and get him to lose his temper. Wow, what a challenge!
He drives around and baits cops. Wow, what a great life story.
I can't think of many things easier than to bait a cop. Well, maybe going to the bathroom when I have cramped bowels.
It took a really imaginative person to park next to a cop at 2:00AM and say "did I do anything wrong" when asked "is there a problem, why are you here".
WTF did he expect the policeman to do for Godsakes? Sure the cop overreacted but the cop had the right to find out what that jacka** was doing next to him late at night. I mean, I'd be worried if someone parked next to me in an empty parking lot at 2:00AM!
What the cop should have said is "I'm taking you in because you're unresponsive to my questions and you're scaring me". That's it, DONE, 30 seconds is all it would have took IMHO.
Of course, that jacka** Darrow, probably wouldn't have shown his video if the cop calmly reacted that way.
The answer, as you all know, is Darrow wanted to piss off the policeman and get him to lose his temper. Wow, what a challenge!
I wasn't cop bashing, you completely got the wrong impression.
Cops are easy to bait, all we have to do is act suspiciously or out of the ordinary. I don't blame cops for having to act on something that is that easy to accomplish. It's their job.
So it ain't the cops, it's Darrow.
You completely misunderstood me.
How in the world could you read my entire post and think I was bashing the police?
Let me put it to you this way: I'm old and ugly. If I acted the way Darrow did, I'd be surprised if the cop DIDN'T get angry. He should worry if an old, ugly guy like me acted that way. I guarantee you, if I parked next to a cop in a vacant parking lot at 2:00AM, he'd get suspicious.
And then I say "did I do anything wrong?". Come on now, the cop should get angry with that smarta** type of answer. Remember now, I'm old and ugly.
All I'm saying is that would be VERY easy to do IMHO. It wouldn't be the cops fault for getting angry and suspicious - it would be MY fault.
Cops are easy to bait, all we have to do is act suspiciously or out of the ordinary. I don't blame cops for having to act on something that is that easy to accomplish. It's their job.
So it ain't the cops, it's Darrow.
You completely misunderstood me.
How in the world could you read my entire post and think I was bashing the police?
Let me put it to you this way: I'm old and ugly. If I acted the way Darrow did, I'd be surprised if the cop DIDN'T get angry. He should worry if an old, ugly guy like me acted that way. I guarantee you, if I parked next to a cop in a vacant parking lot at 2:00AM, he'd get suspicious.
And then I say "did I do anything wrong?". Come on now, the cop should get angry with that smarta** type of answer. Remember now, I'm old and ugly.
All I'm saying is that would be VERY easy to do IMHO. It wouldn't be the cops fault for getting angry and suspicious - it would be MY fault.
Oh, c'mon, divemedic, that's a little disingenuous isn't it? The recording equipment in PD units is an outgrowth of both civilian complaints and assaults on officers. In most cases the tape will show if the officer's conduct rises to "baiting" someone through verbal or physical abuse or threats, such as those made in thise case. That the tape went missing from this cop's car says volumes about his conduct. I'm sure if you had been on the receiving end of this outrageous and illegal conduct, you would have insisted the missing tape was evidence of the officer covering up.
While I agree with you that DUI "checkpoints" are a violation, I also point out that they have been ruled legal. Since they are legal, if you roll into one with an attitude it will likely take you longer to get going than by being cheerful and saying "no, I haven't had anything to drink tonight, have you caught anyone yet tonight?"
So I guess there is no right to remain silent. If that's all it takes to scare a cop, he has no business in the job.
I wish the kid was better at baiting. I wish when the cop had threatened to make up a charge the kid had said, "Like that would work." Maybe then the cop would have admitted that it always had before.
Actually, it isn't. Any time you are dealing with humans, there are going to be mistakes made, and last time I checked, most cops were human.
There is a county near me named Cobb. Among the 18 to 25 y.o. crowd, the name of the county is an acronym for "count on being busted". Kids are routinely shaken down for no apparent reason. I know, because I have witnessed it on several occasions. I always get my camera out when I see some young adult being accosted for no apparent reason. Justice should apply to all, regardless of age.
One young man I know kept getting tickets for running red lights, claiming that he was not committing the infractions. Finally, he mounted a digital camera on the front of his interior rear-view mirror which recorded timestamps superimposed. After successfully getting the charges dropped the next three times, using his photo evidence, the cops quit hassling him.
In our jurisdiction, cops have an unfair advantage in terms of witness testimony. It's called "friend of the court", and it requires a heavy burden of contrary evidence to cast "reasonable doubt". I am all for recording every aspect of encounters with police. After all, if the police are doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to fear.
CrazyIvan007
New member
Since when was videotaping in public become bad? The government does it all the time.
http://www.dickgilbert.com/coloradocams.htm
http://www.dickgilbert.com/coloradocams.htm
They never said they didn't believe he was baiting. It is regardless though because the actions of the officer where completely unjustifiable baited or not.
It is interesting to see how this case is progressing compared to the FL taserring. There you had a confirmed baiting, except the police responded properly (as I believe it).
The Tourist
Moderator
Ultimately, we pay LEOs to make the best possible decisions under hard circumstances. Remember, they are not soldiers. Their goal is not to kill or quell by force of arms. They are there to protect the citizenry.
The good ones I know apply that strategy 'dispassionately.' I've seen wise-mouth kids like this tear into a LEO that would make you and I take a PR baton to them for fun. Still, they respond "yes, sir" and apply the law.
What I would ask here, discounting the actual circumstance and the kid, is did the LEO act responsibly under law for the community?
He's not to punish the kid. He's not there as security adjunct to protect any political aspects of Kerry or the Democratic party.
To my way of thinking, the kid's only weapon was his mouth. The only real crime I see in a situation like this is would the kid's actions be of a threat to citizens, the kid himself or the responding officers?
That's a question that must be posed to the standards of conduct for that municipal area. If the officers are allowed to use tasers for tools of arrest, then the question is over.
Remember, just like you, a LEO is responsible for every shot he fires and his personal conduct.
Now, my opinion under that code of conduct means nothing. I just have an opinion. What I'm trying to point out is that our opinions of this conduct should also be applied "dispassionately." Sometimes we don't agree with a ruling.
The good ones I know apply that strategy 'dispassionately.' I've seen wise-mouth kids like this tear into a LEO that would make you and I take a PR baton to them for fun. Still, they respond "yes, sir" and apply the law.
What I would ask here, discounting the actual circumstance and the kid, is did the LEO act responsibly under law for the community?
He's not to punish the kid. He's not there as security adjunct to protect any political aspects of Kerry or the Democratic party.
To my way of thinking, the kid's only weapon was his mouth. The only real crime I see in a situation like this is would the kid's actions be of a threat to citizens, the kid himself or the responding officers?
That's a question that must be posed to the standards of conduct for that municipal area. If the officers are allowed to use tasers for tools of arrest, then the question is over.
Remember, just like you, a LEO is responsible for every shot he fires and his personal conduct.
Now, my opinion under that code of conduct means nothing. I just have an opinion. What I'm trying to point out is that our opinions of this conduct should also be applied "dispassionately." Sometimes we don't agree with a ruling.
The Tourist
Moderator
Sorry, not my intention.
I was more commenting on interaction at the street level.
A citizen can "bait" and an officer can apply his personal agenda. Both are wrong and we are debating the level of involvement.
Of course I realize it's not a perfect world. That's why I used the word 'dispassionately.' Don't you think the crux of this thread is agenda?
I was more commenting on interaction at the street level.
A citizen can "bait" and an officer can apply his personal agenda. Both are wrong and we are debating the level of involvement.
Of course I realize it's not a perfect world. That's why I used the word 'dispassionately.' Don't you think the crux of this thread is agenda?
The Tourist
Moderator
Same here, no prob. It's been a bad week.