Support NeoGAF

[RoninChaos]

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



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.

If you had a yeti this wouldn't have happened.

 

[Forearms]

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.

LOL, yes, roll over and take it! Don't expect them to take the high ground and try and smooth things over... it's YOUR job to make THEM feel better about doing a job THEY signed up for.

Ridiculous.

 

[UltimaPooh]

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

I think you're mixing up the timeline.

Cop yells at him not to stick his hands in his pockets.

He doesn't.

Cop then asks for his ID.

He then says he's going to reach for it and doesn't want to get shot.

 

[Ri'Orius]

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, the scenario we're worried about is:

-Officer pulls car over
-Driver complies with officer's request to step out of the vehicle
-Officer gives driver a ticket and tells him he's free to go
-Driver gets into car, opens glove box, retrieves weapon and shoots officer

And because of this possibility, a warrantless search of the entire front half of the car is required? Yeah, I'm not buying it. This does not sound like a thing that happens. I can understand the rationale behind shooting an officer at the start of a traffic stop (to make sure they don't find your contraband), but when it's over and you're in the clear?

I understand the need for some warrantless searching to ensure officers' safety, but such searches are easily abused. I would argue that if the officers' safety were truly the primary concern, policy would state that any non-weapon contraband found in such a search would be inadmissible in court.

 

[Wafflecakes]

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

Let be honest. Gaf in no way is mainstream in its views on anything... and I say that as someone who agrees with gaf 90% of the time.

 

[Jenov]

Thanks for the informative posts Heyseuss. Very interesting. I'm sorry you've felt you could not post in other police related threads, I find your input refreshing.

Considering how long it took you to pull over, it seems warranted, OP. I don't think you'll have any legal standing, but I guess you can complain that they were rude? And I rolled eyes at the "i don't want to get shot" comment coming from a white guy driving his wife's audi.

 

[Wafflecakes]

So, the scenario we're worried about is:

-Officer pulls car over
-Driver complies with officer's request to step out of the vehicle
-Officer gives driver a ticket and tells him he's free to go
-Driver gets into car, opens glove box, retrieves weapon and shoots officer

And because of this possibility, a warrantless search of the entire front half of the car is required? Yeah, I'm not buying it. This does not sound like a thing that happens. I can understand the rationale behind shooting an officer at the start of a traffic stop (to make sure they don't find your contraband), but when it's over and you're in the clear?

I understand the need for some warrantless searching to ensure officers' safety, but such searches are easily abused. I would argue that if the officers' safety were truly the primary concern, policy would state that any non-weapon contraband found in such a search would be inadmissible in court.

You are ignoring the part where driver doesn't do his job and pull over like is supposed to because he is a terrible driver and doesn't notice flashing lights and blaring signal behind him.

 

[Surface of Me]

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.

From my point of view, it is you who isn't being objective.

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

Try being a black man like me and getting pulled over. My survival 101 tactics is remain in robot mode, look straight answer everything with a yes sir no sir and ask the officer before making any movement. Saved me so far, I have never been to jail or even got a traffic ticket. Me trying to fight a cop being rude to me is pretty impossible and is actually a blessing because atleast im alive and they didn't kill me.

 

[Kite]

Yep.

You just have to pander to their ego, and move on. *in America*

lol here is a pro-tip, you should "pander to their egos" when dealing with any government workers who can affect your life. Or use common sense and be polite but neutral.

Feel to start shit with cops, irs, child protection services, DMV, food inspectors, and more. Power Trip on them all you want, it's your right as a citizen. But I'll laugh when they power trip right back and you dun like it.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

You did good op. Not everyone can flawlessly execute the calm manuevers that will keep you alive during a police encounter. And black people have magical powers that can subdue the savage cop, so you were at a disadvantage.

Putting your hands in your pocket while white. Can we start a list? I mean, they've already turned on you. I mean, you're no angel and did you have wacky tobaccy, has already been brought up. You can be an honorary The Black for a few hours.

It's been amazing reading this thread.

 

[Ri'Orius]

You are ignoring the part where driver doesn't do his job and pull over like is supposed to because he is a terrible driver and doesn't notice flashing lights and blaring signal behind him.

I'm not talking about OP specifically. I'm talking about the general rationale for a police officer searching your glove box without a warrant after you've left the vehicle "for the officer's safety." Ultimately I'm saying that "what if he has a gun in the glove box and he pulls it on me after the stop is complete" is nonsense.

Unless you're arguing that failing to pull over should constitute exigent circumstances for such a search, it's not relevant to what I'm talking about.

 

[George Washington]

OP, sucks what happened but I wouldn't escalate the situation; not worth risking your life because you're dealing with a cop who has an attitude. They're all human; some good and some bad.

Also, in some states, they can search without your consent.
Edit: This needs clarity as it seems illegal without a warrant.

Next time, just make life easier for yourself and do as they say before things turn ugly. Whether you like it or not, the judicial system favors them over you.

 

[dallow_bg]

Lucky you were white. All I can say.
I hate rude authority figures so much.

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.

Damn this is making me gag.

 

[ZeoVGM]

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

Maybe you should do a little research on the murders that have been committed by cops because of the type of "threatening action" that the OP was accused of.

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.

Holy shit.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

lol here is a pro-tip, you should "pander to their egos" when dealing with any government workers who can affect your life. Feel free to start shit with cops, irs, child protection services, DMV, food inspectors, and more. Power Trip on them all you want, it's your right as a citizen. But I'll laugh when they power trip right back and you dun like it.

There is a huge gulf between pandering to their ego and expecting professionalism from one of the few trusted professions in the world.

You probably thought you were not disrespecting cops by lumping them in with the IRS and food inspectors but people generally expect more from cops.

It's not a power trip to expect the police to treat you fairly and not intimidate you or assert your rights.

It's legal for cops to lie to you and OP continually repeating he would not allow the cops to search his car was fair. I'm not seeing fault in anything OP does when the cop was power tripping. If our rights are undeniable then they deserve strenuous defense.

 

[videogamephilosopher]

Could have been handled better by all parties involved. Unfortantly it is on the citizen to not consent but comply and keep conversation and body movement to a minimum. Sort everything else out in court. Also mandatory to make multiple car cams a part of your yearly expenses and inform the officers you have them recording. Learn from this and do the due diligence to report this incident. This may be the officers modus operandi of pulling people over without cause but without people filing the work his actions can/may continue.

 

[highrider]

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, in this day and age indignation ain't the move. You need to be on some compliant shit, even if you refuse search and buck try to do it in a respectful way. The way you acted just draws suspicion. Take it from a former criminal, they always win.

 

[brianmcdoogle]

When the cop said you were speeding and that's why he pulled you over, did he say how fast you were going? Was that accurate or do you not know because you were distracted?

 

[Forearms]

When the cop said you were speeding and that's why he pulled you over, did he say how fast you were going? Was that accurate or do you not know because you were distracted?

OP asked to see the radar, which they refused to show him. I don't think he mentioned whether or not they told him how fast he was going, but perhaps it's on the ticket?

 

[L Thammy]

To be perfectly honest, I'm kind of wondering if the OP didn't bring up BLM just to encourage people to view the cop as the bad guy, seeing as how this has nothing to do with BLM.

 

[pigeon]

OP asked to see the radar, which they refused to show him. I don't think he mentioned whether or not they told him how fast he was going, but perhaps it's on the ticket?

It usually is, because in every jurisdiction I've lived in your speed is taken into account when determining your fine.

 

[Kite]

There is a huge gulf between pandering to their ego and expecting professionalism from one of the few trusted professions in the world.

You probably thought you were not disrespecting cops by lumping them in with the IRS and food inspectors but people generally expect more from cops.

Lol I really don't expect much more, if people like you an OP expect cops to be saints and take your shit and always remain 100% professional.. good luck with that. I am under no such delusion, cops are human just like the rest of us.

 

[pigeon]

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

Generally if I get yelled at by an armed person who will suffer no consequences from killing me there's a good chance I will mention that I don't want to be shot. I'll definitely be thinking it!

 

[ZeoVGM]

To be perfectly honest, I'm kind of wondering if the OP didn't bring up BLM just to encourage people to view the cop as the bad guy,

That doesn't make sense. I'm not sure how you got to point A from point B on that.

seeing as how this has nothing to do with BLM.

It very much does. Because if he was black, there would be a higher likelihood of this having a different outcome.

 

[Brakke]

It usually is, because in every jurisdiction I've lived in your speed is taken into account when determining your fine.

My dude, how many speeding tickets you've racked up?

 

[pigeon]

My dude, how many speeding tickets you've racked up?

I mean, two, but I haven't lived that many places either.

 

[rc213]

Was the OP douchey sure seems like it. But hearing from the law enforcement stans in this thread. They need to change Protect and Serve to Comply or Die and treat any interaction with law enforcement as a legal shakedown. I mean it's not like you don't hear stories everyday about law enforcement lying their asses off constantly and still escaping punishment.

 

[L Thammy]

That doesn't make sense. I'm not sure how you got to point A from point B on that.



It very much does. Because if he was black, there would be a higher likelihood of this having a different outcome.

But he isn't black, and this didn't have that outcome. That's a different situation than this one.

 

[Forearms]

Lol I really don't expect much more, if people like you an OP expect cops to be saints and take your shit and always remain 100% professional.. good luck with that. I am under no such delusion, cops are human just like the rest of us.

They're public servants. Would you expect a customer support person at company XYZ to escalate a situation if you were getting upset with the way they were handling your issue? How about their supervisor if you asked to speak with them? No, they more often than not attempt to deescalate the situation.

I'm not saying this gives citizens the right to be disrespectful to police officers, but the number of people in this thread defending shitty public service is amazing.

 

[ZeoVGM]

But he isn't black, and this didn't have that outcome. That's a different situation than this one.

You very much missed the point of what I said.

 

[L Thammy]

You very much missed the point of what I said.

Okay, let me clarify my thinking. The OP is a white man who got into a fairly routine traffic stop which he proceeded to escalate for some reason. Then he posted a thread about it, and when some people suggested that he shouldn't have escalated it, his defense that was it was that it's okay to for him to escalate it because it's the cop's responsibility to deescalate it.

What I feel is that this is probably someone trying to gain sympathy after doing something that they know was irresponsible and is only bringing up BLM because they know it's a shortcut to gain that sympathy. The OP never intended a discussion on how these officers' behaviour would affect black people or how their behaviour would likely be different, the OP is about how these officers' behaviour affected a white guy.

Of course a different situation would be a different situation, but the OP is barely even touching that hypothetical.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

Assuming your accounting is accurate, which I have no reason to believe otherwise, the officers at the very least are obligated to give you their names.

Also furtive movement is one of those purposefuly vague laws that basically allows an officer to justify infringing on a persons rights. It's nonsense, and just further shows how screwed up our justice system is.

 

[TheShocker]

It's called a "terry frisk" and falls under Terry v. Ohio. Legally yes, they can search the area of a furtive movement. Me personally, I like to have a little more articulation before conducting said search. Sounds like the dude handled it poorly though.

 

[Zoggy]

DONT EVER MOVE YOUR HANDS OUT OF THEIR SIGHT OR MOVE THEM QUICKLY.

TBH I went "you gonna die" mode as soon as I read you out your hands in your pockets. That's suicidal

 

[Sunster]

biggest crime in America, talking back/disrespecting a police officer. a cop FREAKED out when I was hesitant to show him my ID. It's my right not to when I'm not driving a car. But he said he'd take me to jail right then and there so I folded. I needed to get to class.

 

[MetaCircular]

Prior probability suggests that the OP's 'suspicious movements' are extremely unlikely to be anything dangerous. Using the stick-shift is much more probable than hiding a weapon.

If police are really trained to constantly assume the worst about a situation, then I think, paradoxically, they actually put themselves in more danger.

All it does is put everyone on edge during a traffic stop, and leads to unnecessary escalation.

 

[siddx]

On a different note, every time I see this thread title I think it's some kind of dark souls reference, before reminding my poor old brain that I've already responded to it and know that isn't.

 

[Tertullian]

Good old Terry frisks of your car. One of the many ways the supreme court has managed to water down your fourth amendment rights into a watery puddle.

 

[GaimeGuy]

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

It's the cops' job to explain all this to him as it's happening.

 

[Spladam]

Some of the OP reads as a "what not to do when you get stopped by the police". We want to go about our day and they want to do their jobs, both parties can do things to make it this happen, but sometimes you have to just comply. Empathy works both ways.

 

[SeanR1221]

OP it sounds like you did everything right except you should have said 'you can search this lunge area' while furiously grabbing your crotchal area

 

[RumblingRosco]

DONT EVER MOVE YOUR HANDS OUT OF THEIR SIGHT OR MOVE THEM QUICKLY.

TBH I went "you gonna die" mode as soon as I read you out your hands in your pockets. That's suicidal

This is very true. Honestly, I somehow learned this as a kid. I was pulled over as a 16 year old for two busted tail lights (turns out, the fuse blew - easy $2.00 fix once I got to a store to buy a new packet of fuses). Officers pulled me over and when they came to my car door they asked for my license and vehicle registration. I told the officer that my registration was in my glovebox and my license was in my wallet in my back pocket and asked him if it was OK for me to retrieve both items from those locations. He gave me permission, and I went ahead and got everything out without making any sudden movements.

This was what I did as a white, male, 16-year old in the mid-00s. It's terribly unfortunate that people have to be so cautious around cops, but man, it's just the way it is. OP throwing his hands in his pockets suddenly and without warning is a really dumb thing, regardless of your skin color.

 

[NegroNinja]

Some of the OP reads as a "what not to do when you get stopped by the police". We want to go about our day and they want to do their jobs, both parties can do things to make it this happen, but sometimes you have to just comply. Empathy works both ways.

Empathy for a public servant part of a gang that knowingly harasses and extorts other citizens with the authority to end my life at a moments notice and have no repercussions whatsoever?

Ok.

 

[UnluckyKate]

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 read this, and I and I can't help to think how far general population's idea of cop work (traffic stop) is.

I can't help to think that all these precautions and training and deduction and chains of thoughts come ONLY from one thing : he probably had a gun.

Now if there weren't guns everywhere... How would that situation go ? If you knew there were 0,1 per habitant in your country, how much easier your job as a cop in basic traffic stop interaction would be

 

[n64coder]

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.

Thanks for sharing your insights. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on what you should do if an officer asks you questions knowing what you say can be used against you in a court of law. In other words, you want to give the police as little evidence or cause as possible.

For other readers in this thread who are from another country like in Europe, are traffic stops like the OP done in a similar way? Or is it mostly a US thing because of our gun laws?

 

[BHK3]

I read this, and I and I can't help to think how far general population's idea of cop work (traffic stop) is.

I can't help to think that all these precautions and training and deduction and chains of thoughts come ONLY from one thing : he probably had a gun.

Now if there weren't guns everywhere... How would that situation go ? If you knew there were 0,1 per habitant in your country, how much easier your job as a cop in basic traffic stop interaction would be

It being America it would probably be the same thing. "If there's even a 1% chance has a gun we have to take precautions to protect our boys in blue"

 

[ultratruman]

Congratulations OP on doing just about everything wrong. Good thing you're a white dude.

Protip: Don't give them a reason to hate you. Do whatever you can to end the encounter as quickly as possible.

Yep. This seems to be commonly the case with these 'horrible cop' experiences.

 

[ironmang]

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?

Have you even seen any of those videos? They don't even give over their license and definitely don't get out of their cars. OP complied to a point but he doesn't need to let the officers walk all over him. "Why ask so many questions?" Why the fuck not?

In fact I don't care that those libertarian clowns make it tough on cops. They deserve to be challenged since many of them think everybody they talk to will just bend the knee before the almighty badge.

 

[RionaaM]

Assholes on a power trip. You're lucky it didn't get worse, we all know how these situations can end if your skin tone is outside a very narrow range and the cop considers themselves untouchable. Please complain all you need, this shit should not be accepted. Also, the phrase "My body camera suddenly stopped working" should be grounds for immediate termination, but sadly it's not.