Support NeoGAF

[HeySeuss]

Arizona v Gant suggests that it's possible training hasn't kept up with the law. You are allowed to search the lunge area or wingspan area, but only while the driver is in the car and it would be possible for him to reach a concealed weapon in that area. Arizona v Gant was very specifically about this issue. Same basic case, where the person was removed from the car, then they searched it.



https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default...ch-by-subject/4th-amendment/ArizonaVsGant.pdf

Arizona v Gant is dealing with searches incident to arrest. Officers can no longer search your car after you've been arrested and removed from the vehicle unless probable cause exists. Not the scenario in the OP. That case doesn't apply here for a protective sweep.

 

[captive]

When I go to Burger King, I sometimes leave the bag on the passenger's seat and sneak onion rings on red lights. I don't even have to look over, just stick my hand out. I would think that the passenger seat is in the lunge area for that reason; is that not possible in your car?

Also, where as the laptop bag? Was it in the back seat or further?

floorboard of the front passenger seat. All that was in the front passenger seat was my pie, which they did not open.

 

[StriKeVillain]

Where in Houston did they pull you over?

 

[Forearms]

Yeah even if he's not in the car an officer can search those areas under the reasonable suspicion rationale because the glove box can be accessed from the driver's seat.

I've never owned a car that allows me to access the glove compartment without exaggerated leaning/stretching across the center console/seat. Even then, I'd have to be unbuckled to do so. It would be a pretty obvious movement to catch if these supposed "furtive movements" were noticeable from outside the vehicle.

The OP told them what he was doing - shifting gears and drinking a soda. Can they see the car is a manual by glancing in the car door? Yes. Can they see the can of soda the OP was drinking? Yes. The driver is now out of his car, away from any supposed dangers that may be lurking under his seat, and you can instruct him to stand behind his vehicle while you check his license and registration. If the record looks shady, then move onto questions about possible weapons in the car, etc.

I don't understand why a lot of police officers treat their fellow citizens like shit... it really just boggles my mind.

 

[captive]

It really does not take that long to flick your eyes to the tachometer and back. Should still be checking your rearview to make sure no one is speeding up on your ass.

And why were you ACTUALLY being pulled over? Meaning, what were you being pulled over for before it became about you not pulling over within an acceptable amount of time?

speeding.

After going through what you said it sound like the officers in this encounter thought you were on drugs or had drugs and were looking for the tiniest thing to catch you on. Did anyone of the officers pat you down? because if they thought you had a weapon they would have searched you.

no they did not, they didnt even ask to.

Or... Everything To Not Do If You're Black 101.

Putting your hands in your pockets, in front of an agitated police officer, is suicide around my way.

right?

How long was he trying to pull you over?

again i dont know.

 

[Subpar Scrub]

Officers abuse their power every day. I'm not saying it doesn't happen at all. People should take a stand when that happens. But understand the difference and make sure what you think you know is being applied in the right context. There are so many variables that change things drastically and most people don't understand those things.

Absolutely, I totally agree. Cheers man.

 

[xxracerxx]

Was there anything even in the car to find, is what I want to know.

 

[captive]

Where in Houston did they pull you over?

i wasn't in Houston, I was in East Bernard on 90a, coming back from Halletsville.

Was there anything even in the car to find, is what I want to know.

no, I've never smoked weed, or tried any hard drug, never even smoked cigarettes. If they had searched the car, they would have found my laptop bag with two chargers for my surface and hp pavilion, a half empty 32oz dr pepper, a chocolate chip pecan pie for my wife, an empty RTIC 32oz tumbler, my clothes bag contained toiletries, one pair of used boxers, used sox, and shorts, my camera bag, and a bunch of baby shit my wife is planing to give to a friend.

 

[commedieu]

I've never owned a car that allows me to access the glove compartment without exaggerated leaning/stretching across the center console/seat. Even then, I'd have to be unbuckled to do so. It would be a pretty obvious movement to catch if these supposed "furtive movements" were noticeable from outside the vehicle.

The OP told them what he was doing - shifting gears and drinking a soda. Can they see the car is a manual by glancing in the car door? Yes. Can they see the can of soda the OP was drinking? Yes. The driver is now out of his car, away from any supposed dangers that may be lurking under his seat, and you can instruct him to stand behind his vehicle while you check his license and registration. If the record looks shady, then move onto questions about possible weapons in the car, etc.

I don't understand why a lot of police officers treat their fellow citizens like shit... it really just boggles my mind.

They don't have accountability.

 

[besada]

Arizona v Gant is dealing with searches incident to arrest. Officers can no longer search your car after you've been arrested and removed from the vehicle unless probable cause exists. Not the scenario in the OP. That case doesn't apply here for a protective sweep.

Fair enough.

 

[siddx]

Regardless of whether or not op reacted in the best manner he could have, the bigger and more serious issue is the relationship between citizens and the police have become so degraded and toxic that these kinds of interactions are commonly full of apprehension, fear, suspicion, and mistrust from both sides.

 

[Drifters]

Also, this.

Fuck that. I would've done what he did if that shit happened to me. The fact that it happened to a predominantly white person shows that cops have not gotten the memo that their slogan is to protect and serve not declare guilty until you prove your innocence.

 

[Volimar]

I've never owned a car that allows me to access the glove compartment without exaggerated leaning/stretching across the center console/seat. Even then, I'd have to be unbuckled to do so. It would be a pretty obvious movement to catch if these supposed "furtive movements" were noticeable from outside the vehicle.

The OP told them what he was doing - shifting gears and drinking a soda. Can they see the car is a manual by glancing in the car door? Yes. Can they see the can of soda the OP was drinking? Yes. The driver is now out of his car, away from any supposed dangers that may be lurking under his seat, and you can instruct him to stand behind his vehicle while you check his license and registration. If the record looks shady, then move onto questions about possible weapons in the car, etc.

I don't understand why a lot of police officers treat their fellow citizens like shit... it really just boggles my mind.

Probably because a lot of people might say they were drinking a soda and shifting while instead they were hiding a weapon or illegal substance. You know, like a liar.

 

[Forearms]

Arizona v Gant is dealing with searches incident to arrest. Officers can no longer search your car after you've been arrested and removed from the vehicle unless probable cause exists. Not the scenario in the OP. That case doesn't apply here for a protective sweep.

How is it a protective sweep if the driver is already out of the car, and no longer has access to the weapon which they believe he may have been hiding?

Probably because a lot of people might say they were drinking a soda and shifting while instead they were hiding a weapon or illegal substance. You know, like a liar.

My statements aren't coming from a naive point of view - of course people lie. However, it seems there is no benefit of the doubt given to citizens, even when a police officer can take reasonable actions to ensure the suspect is "secured" and that the majority of their story checks out before going into full on asshole mode.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

Wow. Way to escalate for literally no reason. Oh yeah. your "rights." lmao.

 

[captive]

Wow. Way to escalate for literally no reason. Oh yeah. your "rights." lmao.

thanks for your contribution to the thread, just tremendous.

 

[HeySeuss]

How is it a protective sweep if the driver is already out of the car, and no longer has access to the weapon which they believe he may have been hiding?

Because if that person isn't under arrest then they are ultimately going to return to the vehicle once they are free to leave where they may have hid the weapon. Until those areas are checked, they aren't considered safe.

 

[Jmanunknown]

speeding.

no they did not, they didnt even ask to.

Yeah they assumed you were hiding something most likely drugs because I just noticed they did not search your vehicle until you gave them permission which means they knew they did not have probable cause to search your vehicle they were just trying to intimidate you into letting them and you finally gave up in the end and gave them permission to when you said you would let them search the lunge area if you can record them doing it.

 

[Forearms]

Because if that person isn't under arrest then they are ultimately going to return to the vehicle once they are free to leave where they may have hid the weapon. Until those areas are checked, they aren't considered safe.

So if I have a concealed weapons permit, and I have a gun in my car, I'm a danger before and after the stop? This answer doesn't really make any sense.

 

[The Cool One]

Should have given them a sip of that sweet Dr.Pepper. Defused the situation right then and there.

I think you mean Pepsi

 

[HeySeuss]

So if I have a concealed weapons permit, and I have a gun in my car, I'm a danger before and after the stop? This answer doesn't really make any sense.

That's a completely different scenario. And as a CCW holder, you are required to immediately notify any law enforcement officer that you are a permit holder and that there is a firearm in your vehicle.

 

[captive]

So if I have a concealed weapons permit, and I have a gun in my car, I'm a danger before and after the stop? This answer doesn't really make any sense.

check out this link, i linked it in the third post https://www.usacarry.com/furtive-movement-get-you-killed/

also it got philando castille killed.

 

[Brazil]

No offense but you sound like one of those libertarian idiots who record cops and tell them what right they do or do not have. Just do as they say and defuse the situation quick. Why ask so many questions? Why Fuck with these guys?

Yeah man, you should just be a sheep and let others trample over your rights out of fear.

 

[Volimar]

So if I have a concealed weapons permit, and I have a gun in my car, I'm a danger before and after the stop? This answer doesn't really make any sense.

Wouldn't you tell the officer that you have a permit and concealed weapon pretty early in the stop?

 

[Johnny Cage In The Shower]

I think you mean Pepsi

I think Pepsi owns Dr. Pepper...

Anyhoo, OP I was kind of with you, but you lost me at this very precise moment...(reply)

 

[JackBauer24]

floorboard of the front passenger seat. All that was in the front passenger seat was my pie, which they did not open.

Road pie? That's the tops. But seriously, wow could this stop have gone wrong.

 

[pigeon]

No offense but you sound like one of those libertarian idiots who record cops and tell them what right they do or do not have. Just do as they say and defuse the situation quick. Why ask so many questions? Why Fuck with these guys?

Because they work for us and we literally bought them guns and let them kill people.

 

[IamMattFox]

My pleasure. I don't want people to think I'm of the mindset of "just shut up and let the police do what they want", because a person's rights are very important and should be stood up for. But what I see too often is people who watched that YouTube video on what to do when talking to police and whatever they read in online forms as gospel completely gets applied to the wrong situations and people just don't understand why officers sometimes do what they do and why they can.

Officers abuse their power every day. I'm not saying it doesn't happen at all. People should take a stand when that happens. But understand the difference and make sure what you think you know is being applied in the right context. There are so many variables that change things drastically and most people don't understand those things.

That's a completely different scenario. And as a CCW holder, you are required to immediately notify any law enforcement officer that you are a permit holder and that there is a firearm in your vehicle.

Did you ever make any headway on reporting the Facebook group with all the horrible police officers posting horrible things?

 

[brianmcdoogle]

I read the op a few times to make sure I was getting everything, but it seems like up until you put your hands in your pockets, the cop didn't do anything wrong. You were speeding and not paying attention to your surroundings so it took a while to pull over all the while you're fumbling with a stick shift and a soda bottle. The officer asks why you didn't pull over sooner and asks you to step out of the car because of your earlier movements with the dr pepper bottle, your speeding, and your long time to pull over, and because you weren't paying attention to your surroundings, it's kind of up in the air just how long the cop was trying to pull you over. He didn't illegally search your car, only looked in a window which he's allowed to do, and all the while it seems like you're just pouring fuel on a fire by being snippy and sarcastic and argumentative. So that when you do put your hands in your pockets, after all the other stuff you shouldn't have done, he got hostile.

Also, for clarification, the first officer was recording you on the body cam, but the body cam at some point stopped working, and so only the second officer had a working body cam? Did the supervisor have a body camera as well?

Were you just having a bad day or something?

 

[Forearms]

That's a completely different scenario. And as a CCW holder, you are required to immediately notify any law enforcement officer that you are a permit holder and that there is a firearm in your vehicle.

Sure, but how does that eliminate the danger of the weapon under the seat away from the person? They're going to have it in their possession after the stop, right?

 

[Crosseyes]

All cops just have to be considered your enemy by default in America, because that's what they see and treat you as first when initiating an interaction with a civilian.

 

[HeySeuss]

Did you ever make any headway on reporting the Facebook group with all the horrible police officers posting horrible things?

I referred it to some media people I know on the condition of anonimity, but I've never heard anything since. I don't think they're going to do anything with it. Kinda surprising as they were 2 of the most liberal media contacts I have.

 

[IamDodongo]

It kinda sounds like op needs de-escalation training as well

(and I totally think law enforcement in the US is fucked)

 

[Timeaisis]

No offense but you sound like one of those libertarian idiots who record cops and tell them what right they do or do not have. Just do as they say and defuse the situation quick. Why ask so many questions? Why Fuck with these guys?

If we don't use our rights, we lose them.

Good luck, OP.

 

[HeySeuss]

Sure, but how does that eliminate the danger of the weapon under the seat away from the person? They're going to have it in their possession after the stop, right?

I'm not sure what I can say if you don't see the difference between a valid ccw holder that identifies himself as such versus a person that doesn't pull over right away and looks like he's stuffing something under the seat to hide something. Those are 2 very different levels of potential danger.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

These rules are there to protect the cops. They need that protection. They do, in fact, risk their lives when they make a routine traffic stop. For all they know, you're severely distressed, on edge, and have a dead body in the trunk. You probably don't - but you might.

You were moving around and you took longer than normal to pull over. It doesn't matter why. The officer doesn't know why. You were shifting and drinking soda? Great. Maybe. Or maybe you're lying and you were concealing a weapon or cocaine or alcohol. The cop doesn't know that and they will not and should not just believe you when you've already done something suspicious (taking longer than normal to pull over).

Everything the cop did was for his safety. He did not know you. He didn't want to die because you're a psychopath (not to imply you are, but he doesn't know you).

You can throw all this shit out about cops escalating and what not all you want. It doesn't sound like he did here. The fact that it very rarely goes bad doesn't mean that acting like that doesn't save lives as well.

Good for you for standing up for your rights. You'll be glad to know none of them were infringed. Not a single one. Not even your right to be a jackass, which you obviously were. I know you think you were a hero today, but you weren't. You just made someone else's dangerous job harder and you did it because...well, who knows.

 

[ZOONAMI]

I think it's fucking absurd the police can force you to get out of your car for a routine traffic stop.

If there aren't any warrants or it isn't a stolen car that is fucking insane.

We actually have the Supreme Court to thank for that shit though.

It's the fucking definition of escalating a situation for no reason.

It could just be:

"Please step out of your car."

"No."

"Ok here is your ticket, have a nice day."

 

[IamMattFox]

I referred it to some media people I know on the condition of anonimity, but I've never heard anything since. I don't think they're going to do anything with it. Kinda surprising as they were 2 of the most liberal media contacts I have.

Bummer.

 

[captive]

I read the op a few times to make sure I was getting everything, but it seems like up until you put your hands in your pockets, the cop didn't do anything wrong. You were speeding and not paying attention to your surroundings so it took a while to pull over all the while you're fumbling with a stick shift and a soda bottle. The officer asks why you didn't pull over sooner and asks you to step out of the car because of your earlier movements with the dr pepper bottle, your speeding, and your long time to pull over, and because you weren't paying attention to your surroundings, it's kind of up in the air just how long the cop was trying to pull you over. He didn't illegally search your car, only looked in a window which he's allowed to do, and all the while it seems like you're just pouring fuel on a fire by being snippy and sarcastic and argumentative. So that when you do put your hands in your pockets, after all the other stuff you shouldn't have done, he got hostile.

Also, for clarification, the first officer was recording you on the body cam, but the body cam at some point stopped working, and so only the second officer had a working body cam? Did the supervisor have a body camera as well?

Were you just having a bad day or something?

nope, was having a perfectly fine day until i got pulled over and was immediately asked out of my car, of which has never, ever happened to me. Also having a cop yell at me, and interrupt me at the same time, not a great way to keep things DE-escalated.

These rules are there to protect the cops. They need that protection. They do, in fact, risk their lives when they make a routine traffic stop. For all they know, you're severely distressed, on edge, and have a dead body in the trunk. You probably don't - but you might.

You were moving around and you took longer than normal to pull over. It doesn't matter why. The officer doesn't know why. You were shifting and drinking soda? Great. Maybe. Or maybe you're lying and you were concealing a weapon or cocaine or alcohol. The cop doesn't know that and they will not and should not just believe you when you've already done something suspicious (taking longer than normal to pull over).

Everything the cop did was for his safety. He did not know you. He didn't want to die because you're a psychopath (not to imply you are, but he doesn't know you).

You can throw all this shit out about cops escalating and what not all you want. It doesn't sound like he did here. The fact that it very rarely goes bad doesn't mean that acting like that doesn't save lives as well.

Good for you for standing up for your rights. You'll be glad to know none of them were infringed. Not a single one. Not even your right to be a jackass, which you obviously were. I know you think you were a hero today, but you weren't. You just made someone else's dangerous job harder and you did it because...well, who knows.

yes, thats exactly what i said in the OP, that I think my self a hero and that i showed those asshole cops! jackass, sorry i'm not sorry.

 

[Forearms]

I'm not sure what I can say if you don't see the difference between a valid ccw holder that identifies himself as such versus a person that doesn't pull over right away and looks like he's stuffing something under the seat to hide something. Those are 2 very different levels of potential danger.

I see the difference. However, pretend the OP has a valid CCW, and he announces it. He was still making "furtive movements", and tells the same story about shifting the transmission and drinking a soda. The weapon is still in play after the stop is completed... why is he less of a "danger" once he gets back to his vehicle with his weapon compared to someone that may or may not have a weapon under their seat? This is why your answer doesn't make any sense (to me).

 

[ZOONAMI]

But yeah op this probably would have just gone much easier for you if you didn't put your fucking hands in your pockets and just said gee golly as far as I know I wasn't speeding.

 

[EYEL1NER]

If the law was on your side and you didn't have to let them search your car, I don't think that you should have just let them anyway and rolled over for them. But I also don't know that adding things like "I don't want to get shot today" and "Are you trained in de-escalation, because you are being very rude" does anything good for you though and comments like that make me wonder what story the camera footage would show (I would say it makes me wonder what the cop's side of the story was but nah... Better to go with film evidence).

 

[captive]

If the law was on your side and you didn't have to let them search your car, I don't think that you should have just let them anyway and rolled over for them. But I also don't know that adding things like "I don't want to get shot today" and "Are you trained in de-escalation, because you are being very rude" does anything good for you though and comments like that make me wonder what story the camera footage would show (I would say it makes me wonder what the cop's side of the story was but nah... Better to go with film evidence).

thats a good question, can i request the footage?
Doubt there is any from the first officer if his cam truly malfunctioned. He was wearing it, and then when he searched the car he was not.

 

[ZOONAMI]

If the law was on your side and you didn't have to let them search your car, I don't think that you should have just let them anyway and rolled over for them. But I also don't know that adding things like "I don't want to get shot today" and "Are you trained in de-escalation, because you are being very rude" does anything good for you though and comments like that make me wonder what story the camera footage would show (I would say it makes me wonder what the cop's side of the story was but nah... Better to go with film evidence).

They can search everywhere but your your glove box and trunk without a warrant. Pretty sure that's what this lunge search is.

They can usually get away with searching a locked container (glove box or trunk) as well without a warrant. They just have to have reasonable cause that what they are looking for is in there, which sort of makes sense as if you have gone through the trouble of actually locking a glovebox or trunk you probably are hiding something in there lol.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

yes, thats exactly what i said in the OP, that I think my self a hero and that i showed those asshole cops! jackass, sorry i'm not sorry.

Well you stood up for your rights because you were defending the Constitution as part of your duty as an American. "We Americans have rights, contrary to popular belief". What could be more heroic?

No one could objectively read this, consider only the facts that the cop could have possibly known, and considered what you did to be remotely reasonable or proper. You were way out of line. The cop was not. Sorry, hero.

 

[captive]

Well you stood up for your rights because you were defending the Constitution as part of your duty as an American. "We Americans have rights, contrary to popular belief"

No one could objectively read this, consider only the facts that the cop could have possibly known, and considered what you did to be remotely reasonable or proper. You were way out of line. The cop was not. Sorry, hero.

hmm, apparently you are incorrect as there are a number of people in this thread that disagree with you.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

hmm, apparently you are incorrect as there are a number of people in this thread that disagree with you.

Then they aren't being objective. Certainly no one has provided any citation I've seen to prove these actions are illegal in your state. Have you even said where you lived? I'll admit I skimmed the thread the first time but I just did again and I still don't see anything except for someone discussing why certain cases don't apply.

What you should do is send a letter to the police station addressed to the cop apologizing for acting like that and thanking him for his service to the community. Show that he is respected. That's how you groom good relationships with cops. Not by doing what you did.

 

[UltimaPooh]

Ok I'm going to attempt to explain what the officers did and why from my 15 years as a police officer. You can feel free to disagree, and I'm not going to say the officers handled it in the best possible way, but hear me out. I don't normally post in these threads anymore because of the overwhelming anti-cop sentiment (often justifiable, often not) on this board.

A furtive movement is something that appears to a trained officer to be movements that are suspicious and can possibly believed to be trying to conceal something which may be dangerous. You admit that it took you longer to pull over than it should have because you didn't see or hear the officer behind you. Look at this through the eyes of the officer. Most good drivers check their rearview and side mirrors every 5-10 seconds. Couple that with moving to take a drink (which the officer obviously can't see) and you shifting your transmission (again can't see from behind), give the impression that you may be intentionally hiding something before you pull over. That's furtive movement.

Now he asked you to step out of the car because a) the movement could indicate that you were hiding a weapon under your seat (a reasonable assumption based on you not pulling over and your body movement) and b) the officer doesn't need a reason to ask you to step out of the vehicle. We can have ever person get out of the vehicle on every traffic stop if we so choose.

After stepping out of the car, when the officer looked in your window, he was looking at the seat and center console area for anything dangerous or in plain view. He does not need your permission to look in your window. If you were still sitting in your car, would he not be looking in the window to talk to you? Dropping your "I don't consent to any searches" that you learned on YouTube doesn't earn you any points with police.

Now add the fact that you put your hands in your pockets. Officers are trained to watch people's hands very closely. He already believed you might have a weapon in the vehicle, it wouldn't be unreasonable to make the connection that instead of putting a weapon under your seat, you could have also put it in your pants, which is why he yelled at you to not do that. The smartass comment about not wanting to be shot didn't help your case.

There is supreme Court case law on exactly what the officer told you. Just like Terry v Ohio allows pat downs for weapons without probable cause, there is another case that does the same for vehicles. I've never heard of the term "lunge area" but it's more commonly referred to as areas of immediate control. Which from the seat where the person in question was sitting, is anything that is within reach. Typically under the driver's seat, front floor, glove box, center console, and under passenger seat. No warrant or probable cause is needed for these searches for weapons.

The second officer was there because that often happens if another officer happens by during a traffic stop of another officer. Or he could have called for backup since he thought you might have a gun.

So the not pulling over and your body movement from the officers perspective from behind you made him believe you were hiding a weapon. This is called reasonable articulable suspicion and can be used to pat you down or do a protective sweep of your vehicle without your consent.

The key is that the officer has to be able to articulate it. And in this case based on what you admitted to, the officers did meet that threshold of reasonableness.

Now you can argue that they were rude or whatever, but that's secondary to everything else.

Hope that helps

I think this is mostly fair...

But I don't think he was out of line for saying he didn't want to be shot.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

I think this is mostly fair...

But I don't think he was out of line for saying he didn't want to be shot.

Uh, of course he was. He made a threatening action toward a cop. The cop reacted accordingly.

 

[Volimar]

I don't think anyone was in the wrong here. It seems like a fairly routine traffic stop. I do think you're making a little bit of a mountain out of a mole hill here.