OH come on don't be naive. There are all sorts of video's on Youtube that show police officers abusing their powers. Heck there are video where good police officers catch bad police officers speeding, sleeping on the job etc..... Come on. Police officers are not GOD  neither are they exempt to tribulations humankind has to face. The problem I have with police is their inability to be honest even when caught red handed.  If the C.I.A. had involvement is contra cocaine bust, then you honestly believe that police officers can't be just as crooked? LOL you guys must be officers yourself. 

 

I have a buddy in the police force who in high school we were the best of friends, we both wanted to become police officers it was our dream. Although mine was destroyed, he successfully completed his(which I am seriously proud of him for)  However he stressed to me that things would never be how it was due to the fact that I am a felon. He stated that most officers are not allowed to have relationships with felons of my sort.  In other words he tossed away 8 years of friendship.  What people would suggest this? How can socalled good guys behave that way? 

I'm not a police officer, and I believe in holding public officials and police to a higher standard. I don't, however, believe in the notion that we should label people under a huge umbrella and say that "since x happened everyone who has the same job is also capable of x, therefore we should preemptively assume they will do x given the opportunity". It's an illogical (and frankly un-american) point of view. That's all I'm going to say on this.

I don't want to make assumptions as to the circumstances of your friendships, but I can tell you that I would genuinely rethink who I consider a friend if any one of them was convicted of a felony regardless of how long I knew them.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by nAssailant

I saw some good comments, and some not so much. I actually live in TX and the first thing that struck me was this Trooper was going to give her a warning for something so minor. There's an old joke that goes around that DPS Troopers (as they are called here) never give warnings.

First Id like to address that this entire thing could've been avoided had she just remained calm and accepted her warning or citation. Obviously this officer felt she was sorry or corporative and decided she would give her a warning, so had she remained the same cool demeanor she had at first she would've been on her way. Second is the cigarette, I see two issues with this. A) The officer does have the right to ask her to put it out (anyone can ask for something like that), however she was within the confines of her vehicle with no children present and she was on a public road, therefore she is allowed. B) The officers reaction and her reaction were both wrong in my opinion. The officer does hold the right to ask her to set out of the vehicle to issue a citation or warning if it provides a safer area for both parties. She could've A put out the cigarette and continued on or left the vehicle and move to the site to continue. I do feel though that the officer should've continued with his stop despite her refusing to put out the cigarette. Had she had children in the vehicle or been in a area or business that bans smoking then she would've had to comply with the officers order.

The last thing that Id like to address is that when these situations come up the conversation switches from what happened in the case to the "corruption" of the police force. I feel the best way to get things fixed with the police force (if you feel there are any wrong cause not every city does) is to join or be active in city council meetings. Address your concerns and I'm sure they will be heard, they may not happen immediately but I'm sure they will look into ways of fixing things. Just don't take things into your own hands I.E killing cops, resisting arrest, or failing to comply with simple orders cause that makes things more difficult and stressful for everyone involved. You pay taxes for a reason, so let those people who you pay taxes to handle the situations. They are trained and will handle them professionally. If not then move a little higher up the chain.

 

After watching the video, i don't know why she was asked to step out of the vehicle in the first place, it could've been over and done with a simple citation, although she was arrested (failure to comply, resisting arrest?) idk the American law/State law there.

Judging by the news report (which doesn't share much information) It seems like a suicide at first hand, not a murder. However the officer stopping for 7 seconds and saying "she's fine" is a bit off. Plus you can't really kill someone/make it look like a suicide in 7 seconds. 

Regardless of what her friends or parents say, not everyone can tell if someone is suicidal or not. most people mask their feelings and pretend to be happy. I can't really have a definite opinion or say if it was actually murder until an autopsy is preformed, it's very hard to cover up a murder as a suicide so it'll be on the autopsy what her cause of death is. 

just by looking at the news reports i say it's a suicide, by it's also the media.. they're not always reliable so a murder is still in play. Also, just to point out.. why do people instantly assume that a death in police custody is instantly a homicide/the police did it? not every cop in the world is corrupt and wants to kill people. Right now the evidence is pointing towards a suicide, there is little evidence to suggest a murder took place.

Always follow the evidence, NEVER jump to conclusions! Why? Because conclusions aren't valid and have no fact, Evidence can never lie.

:) First off When I said mexico I was referring to New Mexico, sorry didn't know I had to that simplistic. 

License to kill is the official sanction by a government to a particular operative or employee to initiate the use of lethal force in the delivery of their objectives, well known as a literary device used in espionage fiction. The initiation of lethal force is in comparison to the use of lethal force in self-defense or the protection of life.

The legitimacy of deadly force usage from country to country is generally controlled by statute law, particular and direct executive orders, the common law, or rules of engagement.

 

Police are no longer public officials, but rather government officials. They have become a secret society with a secret agenda. The people no longer pay their taxes, the state or government does. :) Didn't think I knew that huh? I have my own fences. 

 

I have found that the culture that exists in the world of police work fosters distrust. They see the average citizen as the enemy. In my experience, I have known very very few police officers who even bother to be polite to people, even when there is no investigation going on. I have personally been subjected to non-justifiable harassment as well as what could only be construed as false imprisonment. The charges were summarily dropped by the DA, because they were transparently false, but they still came back to haunt me later in life. I have come to believe that the only officer of the law who does not abuse their power is the rookie, and he or she simply hasn't had the time to get used to the fact that all the senior officers would rather shoot someone than take a punch.

 

I am not biased, however neither am I blind or ignorant.  I am for any police officer who is pro life, and pro Constitution.  I do favor police officer who put state statues over federal law. 

 

I'd recommend you take a step back and research a bit more before being so quick to judge.

:) Yeah I'll consider this when you show me an officer who does this. 

 

You are all part of the same team. The solution to  these nazi's would be for all Citizens who understand my point to form and fund private police forces. 

 

 

Actually that happened in Mexico the country not the state New Mexico. I've already seen the story on it. However point me to a news article about it in New Mexico and Ill be happy to take a look.

I'm not a police officer, and I believe in holding public officials and police to a higher standard. I don't, however, believe in the notion that we should label people under a huge umbrella and say that "since x happened everyone who has the same job is also capable of x, therefore we should preemptively assume they will do x given the opportunity". It's an illogical (and frankly un-american) point of view. That's all I'm going to say on this.

I don't want to make assumptions as to the circumstances of your friendships, but I can tell you that I would genuinely rethink who I consider a friend if any one of them was convicted of a felony regardless of how long I knew them.

:) Then you were never a friend to began with.  A s a friend I would never suggest you agree with me or except my mistake, however if one is truly a friend and posses a deep love for me as a friend, my mistake should not remove the love so quickly. 

There is one situation in which law enforcement officers have a license to kill: when carrying out a death sentence. Any other time, it must be justified by the officer: self-defense, defense of others, preventing the escape of a dangerous criminal, and preventing the escape of a prisoner (in some circumstances). The first two are options for everyone; I'm not sure about the latter two.

@NYPDDetectiveODonnell: I'm really not sure what you're trying to say about cops, but any cop who prioritizes state laws over federal is violating his oath. The oath taken by every police officer binds them to uphold the United States Constitution, and the US Constitution and laws made pursuant to it are supreme over all state laws and everything in any state constitution. There is little difference between a "public official" and a "government official;" one definition of "public" given by Merriam-Webster is "of or relating to a government," and the OED says "public" in the sense of "public servant" means "Serving the public in a professional capacity; (in later use) spec. employed by local or central government." The term "police" itself literally derives from a Latin and ultimately ancient Greek root relating to government ("police," "policy," "politics," "polity," are all related terms).

I don't find it odd in the least that someone who was a close friend in high school would not remain close once your lives took very different turns. Neither of you is the same person you were in high school, and you are likely not his only friend. I have people I was friends with for 7-ish years in middle and high school who I don't talk to anymore, for the sole reason that we went away to college in different places and are making new sets of friends.

:) I don't find it odd in the least that someone who was a close friend in high school would not remain close once your lives took very different turns. Neither of you is the same person you were in high school, and you are likely not his only friend. I have people I was friends with for 7-ish years in middle and high school who I don't talk to anymore, for the sole reason that we went away to college in different places and are making new sets of friends.

If this is true, then you wasted 7 years. On the other hand he and I were more so brothers. We did everything together, I slept over at his place on weekends and vice versa. Most of his friends now, are police officers. Still don't find that odd?

All-In-all I would never trust a person with power to force a people.  A police officer's job is not to create bad guys, but rather find those who insist on being bad guys.  By creating bad guys I mean certain operation like "bait car" senseless operation. You intentionally leave a perfectly good vehicle unlocked door open keys in the ignition and expect no one to pursuit it?  Then chase them down and arrest them when you could have been solving a woman being beaten by her boyfriend, or a shots fired call? Wow.  Any department capable of this is obvious seeing no action and is bored. 

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by NYPDDetectiveODonnell

He used her irritation to his advantage. He stated in the video that he was going to giver her a warning How? With his ticket book out. Next he already stated I am giving you a citation for failure to yield. What warning? Also notice how he instructed her to put her cigarette out. Why? does she not have a right to smoke in her vehicle? Especially since you were so called only giving her a warning? People trend to smoke when they are either nervous or stressed She already answered his question. From that point I would have simply written the ticket and moved along. He felt he should have been talked to a certain way by that black woman that is why he got angry. Power struggle. These are phys co maniacs in uniform. Sociopaths.

Private police forces. To police the police. Not to arrest or harm them but ensure the follow proper protocol. These deaths need to be reduced. There is no law preventing private police forces.

He used her irritation to his advantage. He stated in the video that he was going to giver her a warning How? With his ticket book out. Next he already stated I am giving you a citation for failure to yield. What warning? Also notice how he instructed her to put her cigarette out. Why? does she not have a right to smoke in her vehicle? Especially since you were so called only giving her a warning? People trend to smoke when they are either nervous or stressed She already answered his question. From that point I would have simply written the ticket and moved along. He felt he should have been talked to a certain way by that black woman that is why he got angry. Power struggle. These are phys co maniacs in uniform. Sociopaths.

Private police forces. To police the police. Not to arrest or harm them but ensure the follow proper protocol. These deaths need to be reduced. There is no law preventing private police forces.

What does race have to do with anything? this situations was never created over the colour of her skin. it happened over an attitude she gave him, which pissed him off. this whole incident still would've happened if she was a different race. 

and honestly, there already is a "private police force to police the police" it's called IA (Internal Affairs). Again it was a death in police custody, but it wasn't caused by police. Don't just watch a video, find out a black person was arrested by police and died in custody and instantly assume it was murder. There is no evidence to suggest it was murder and was deemed a Suicide by the Coroners office. Like i said before, follow the evidence and don't jump to conclusions. 

What does race have to do with anything? this situations was never created over the colour of her skin. it happened over an attitude she gave him, which pissed him off. this whole incident still would've happened if she was a different race. 

and honestly, there already is a "private police force to police the police" it's called IA (Internal Affairs). Again it was a death in police custody, but it wasn't caused by police. Don't just watch a video, find out a black person was arrested by police and died in custody and instantly assume it was murder. There is no evidence to suggest it was murder and was deemed a Suicide by the Coroners office. Like i said before, follow the evidence and don't jump to conclusions. 

First off sir. Your point did nothing but prove my point. He had an issue with her attitude.  This did not give him authority to demand she get out of the car. He's an officer not GOD. Secondly he instructed her to put out her cigarette. Again shouldn't he had of been writing that citation? Funny thing :) I just discussed this same video with a Philadelphia Police officer who said the same thing. The officer should have written the ticket a proceeded on his way. His words were if her attitude didn't posses any sort of criminal behavior or threat to me who cares what she says. This is a clear case of wanting to feel powerful. Again Form private police forces.  IA isn't good enough.  black officers to save black lives. We want nothing that this government backs. Also I will never trust any police officer or any governmental group founded by this country. She was said to be eating at 7 am and dies 9 am. Where's the video of her in her cell.  Also there's a video of the stretcher. Pictures were taken of that probably to show that medics arrived. Where's the pics of inside showing inside the cell? The coroners only determined strangulation not suicide. What I think happened was that African America officer along with others had a tough time keeping her quiet. And an argument broke out where she was abused and murdered. They covered it up to make it look like suicide. I know cells are supposed to have camera's correct? If so who's monitoring them? Shouldn't someone had of caught her  in the act? :) cover up Murder sticking with it.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by NYPDDetectiveODonnell

First off sir. Your point did nothing but prove my point. He had an issue with her attitude.  This did not give him authority to demand she get out of the car. He's an officer not GOD. Secondly he instructed her to put out her cigarette. Again shouldn't he had of been writing that citation? Funny thing :) I just discussed this same video with a Philadelphia Police officer who said the same thing. The officer should have written the ticket a proceeded on his way. His words were if her attitude didn't posses any sort of criminal behavior or threat to me who cares what she says. This is a clear case of wanting to feel powerful. Again Form private police forces.  IA isn't good enough.  black officers to save black lives. We want nothing that this government backs.

Actually, the officer didn't instruct her to put out her cigarette. it was a request, not an instruction. he exact words were "Wold you mind putting out your cigarette, please if you don't mind" no point during that sentence did i hear any demanding remarks about the cigarette. to be quite honest many cops would've said the same thing, nobody wants to have cigarette smoke being blown into their face. 

Again, this isn't a race issue. it's a death in police custody issue. there is no evidence to suggest her death was a hate crime. Why was she demanded out of the car and arrested? nobody knows because an investigation is still ongoing, Like i said before, it's hard to make a murder look like a suicide, things would be inconsistent and a Coroner would've noticed it straight away. Regardless if she was black,white, asian or hispanic the race card shouldn't be used, why? because if the victim was white and the officer was black, nobody would be complaining of racism. Until it is proven and officially told her death was a homicide and it was because she was black, then it's not a hate crime/race issue. it's merely an issue on whether or not her death was an accident/suicide or deliberate/homicide. 

Okay, you know what, its time for you to take a break from this topic ODonnell.  You have this amazing ability to consistently deliver your spiel about private police forces despite it being completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Actually, the officer didn't instruct her to put out her cigarette. it was a request, not an instruction. he exact words were "Wold you mind putting out your cigarette, please if you don't mind" no point during that sentence did i hear any demanding remarks about the cigarette. to be quite honest many cops would've said the same thing, nobody wants to have cigarette smoke being blown into their face. 

Again, this isn't a race issue. it's a death in police custody issue. there is no evidence to suggest her death was a hate crime. Why was she demanded out of the car and arrested? nobody knows because an investigation is still ongoing, Like i said before, it's hard to make a murder look like a suicide, things would be inconsistent and a Coroner would've noticed it straight away. Regardless if she was black,white, asian or hispanic the race card shouldn't be used, why? because if the victim was white and the officer was black, nobody would be complaining of racism. Until it is proven and officially told her death was a homicide and it was because she was black, then it's not a hate crime/race issue. it's merely an issue on whether or not her death was an accident/suicide or deliberate/homicide. 

Kinda looks to me like the cop was totally wrong here.  He asked her to put out the cigarette, she refused.  Looks like he got pissed by this refusal and did some "step out of the car" power play.  I can't see any other reason as to why he's ordered her out of the car, and everything seems to point to it being simply an angry reaction. 

No idea what he's talking about when he says he tried to calm her down and de-escalate the situation either?  If that's his idea of de-escalation, he needs to go back to the academy, asap.

 

Kinda looks to me like the cop was totally wrong here.  He asked her to put out the cigarette, she refused.  Looks like he got pissed by this refusal and did some "step out of the car" power play.  I can't see any other reason as to why he's ordered her out of the car, and everything seems to point to it being simply an angry reaction. 

No idea what he's talking about when he says he tried to calm her down and de-escalate the situation either?  If that's his idea of de-escalation, he needs to go back to the academy, asap.

Oh i agree he is in the wrong, His actions were poor and unnecessary. I'm not trying to justify the officers actions, because to be honest the woman didn't need to be treated that way or even be arrested.

he didn't de-escalate the situation at all, he created a bigger problem. he should've asked her to put her cigarette out, she refuses and he just shrugs it off and continue writing the citation. What i am saying though is that it shouldn't be classed as a racial issue, since nothing points to it. What i would love to know is what happened to her between the stop and her death, what was she thinking, because if this was a suicide then she must have felt that she screwed up that badly and needed to take her own life. 

This did not give him authority to demand she get out of the car.

Go read Pennsylvania v. Mimms, I already had this discussion with someone else. The US Supreme Court ruled that it is legal for an officer to ask you to step out of the car and you have to comply.

I'm not even going to bother responding to the rest of your posts as they are absolutely absurd and most likely just a troll attempt to get a reaction from people. The sole piece of "evidence" this case relies on is the family saying "she would never do this". I am sorry for their loss but that is no reason to accuse the officers of a crime with no evidence. If you truly believe the conspiracy theories you are posting then I feel sorry for you.

Go read Pennsylvania v. Mimms, I already had this discussion with someone else. The US Supreme Court ruled that it is legal for an officer to ask you to step out of the car and you have to comply.

I'm not even going to bother responding to the rest of your posts as they are absolutely absurd and most likely just a troll attempt to get a reaction from people. The sole piece of "evidence" this case relies on is the family saying "she would never do this". I am sorry for their loss but that is no reason to accuse the officers of a crime with no evidence. If you truly believe the conspiracy theories you are posting then I feel sorry for you.

Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The order to get out of the car, issued after the respondent was lawfully detained, was reasonable, and thus permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The State's proffered justification for such order -- the officer's safety -- is both legitimate and weighty, and the intrusion into respondent's personal liberty occasioned by the order, being, at most, a mere inconvenience, cannot prevail when balanced against legitimate concerns for the officer's safety.

This basically states, a officer may ask someone to step out of the vehicle for any reason pertaining to the safety of the officer, the occupants of the vehicle, and or both. This could be for a simple pat down and frisk or to avoid traffic. Therefore his order for her to step out of the vehicle was lawful. Was it exactly the right move? Maybe or maybe not but A we weren't in the situation so who knows how he felt or what he might of discovered on her record to warrant him to take extra precautions and B it was a lawful order, so had she complied then she could've taken her warning and move on.

They were both in the wrong here- the officer didn't really need to go on about the cigarette, and the woman should have just shut up and gone through the stop without shooting her mouth off, which just escalated the scenario. If the cop had just ignored the cigarette, then he could have just gave her a ticket or warning or whatever and send her on her merry way, no bother. But the woman's attitude really made the whole thing worse- if there's one thing you never do in a traffic stop, it's mouth off and try to attack the officer, as seen in the dashcam footage: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33613783

So this whole sorry affair could have been avoided if everyone stayed cool and calm through the stop.

Here is the full dashcam video http://www.leoaffairs.com/video/raw-video-full-official-dashcam-video-of-sandra-bland-traffic-stop/

The first 16-17 mins is the actual interaction with the driver, the other 40 mins are just them waiting for a tow truck to take the car. I believe the suspect was transported to the jail by another unit during that time.

You can clearly see that she is being belligerent and uncooperative. The entire time the trooper kept his cool until she started resisting arrest. At no time during the traffic stop was he rude or disrespectful.

Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The order to get out of the car, issued after the respondent was lawfully detained, was reasonable, and thus permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The State's proffered justification for such order -- the officer's safety -- is both legitimate and weighty, and the intrusion into respondent's personal liberty occasioned by the order, being, at most, a mere inconvenience, cannot prevail when balanced against legitimate concerns for the officer's safety.

This basically states, a officer may ask someone to step out of the vehicle for any reason pertaining to the safety of the officer, the occupants of the vehicle, and or both. This could be for a simple pat down and frisk or to avoid traffic. Therefore his order for her to step out of the vehicle was lawful. Was it exactly the right move? Maybe or maybe not but A we weren't in the situation so who knows how he felt or what he might of discovered on her record to warrant him to take extra precautions and B it was a lawful order, so had she complied then she could've taken her warning and move on.

Yep that is right. Basic case law, it is one of the most stressed things in the police academy because it is the courts telling you (the officer) what you can and cannot do. I only wish constitutional law and case law were taught in schools as those are the most important things to study when you want to know what your rights are and what police can and can't do.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by l3ubba

Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977), is a United States Supreme Court criminal law decision holding that a police officer ordering a person out of a car following a traffic stop and conducting a pat-down to check for weapons did not violate the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The order to get out of the car, issued after the respondent was lawfully detained, was reasonable, and thus permissible under the Fourth Amendment. The State's proffered justification for such order -- the officer's safety -- is both legitimate and weighty, and the intrusion into respondent's personal liberty occasioned by the order, being, at most, a mere inconvenience, cannot prevail when balanced against legitimate concerns for the officer's safety.

This basically states, a officer may ask someone to step out of the vehicle for any reason pertaining to the safety of the officer, the occupants of the vehicle, and or both. This could be for a simple pat down and frisk or to avoid traffic. Therefore his order for her to step out of the vehicle was lawful. Was it exactly the right move? Maybe or maybe not but A we weren't in the situation so who knows how he felt or what he might of discovered on her record to warrant him to take extra precautions and B it was a lawful order, so had she complied then she could've taken her warning and move on.

I don't get how you can defend the cop on this one.  It can't be just a coincidence that she's ordered out of the car immediately after saying no to being asked to stub out the cigarette.  He even says "well, you can step on out now" which, to me at least, heavily implies that's a direct response to her refusal.

The cop also clearly doesn't know the law, you can hear when he's on the phone giving his account of the incident (which seems greatly exaggerated), that anyone he pulls over is "technically under arrest".  This is blatantly wrong, a traffic stop is a brief detention, not an arrest.

His attempts at de-esclating the situation are pathetic as well.  "I tried to de-escalate her, it wasn't getting anywhere at all.  I'm trying to put the taser away"

"I'm trying to get her detained, you know, I tried talking to her, just calm her down.  Get her to calm down.."

He says as well his reason for getting her out of the car was "I was trying to get her out over to the side and just explain to her what was going on.  I couldn't even get to do what I was telling her... She just started going this is an MF... I just stepped back to the car and was like "Are you done ma'am, I'm gonna tell you why and what I'm giving you".

Actually pretty horribly inconsistent with what happened.

Here is the full dashcam video http://www.leoaffairs.com/video/raw-video-full-official-dashcam-video-of-sandra-bland-traffic-stop/

The first 16-17 mins is the actual interaction with the driver, the other 40 mins are just them waiting for a tow truck to take the car. I believe the suspect was transported to the jail by another unit during that time.

You can clearly see that she is being belligerent and uncooperative. The entire time the trooper kept his cool until she started resisting arrest. At no time during the traffic stop was he rude or disrespectful.

Yep that is right. Basic case law, it is one of the most stressed things in the police academy because it is the courts telling you (the officer) what you can and cannot do. I only wish constitutional law and case law were taught in schools as those are the most important things to study when you want to know what your rights are and what police can and can't do.

The rest of the video is actually pretty important.  His version of events is seriously exaggerated.  She's not helping any, but he's taking entirely the wrong approach.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by Sam

After reviewing the audio (as once the arrest began taking place she was removed off screen), I can see that one: She was completely disrespectful to the cop and refused to follow his directions, even though telling her to put out her cigarette is a bit pushing his luck. Two: The once the arrest took place the officer didn't seem to care much to calm her down. It is import when policing to not escalated the situation further, and screaming and shouting do not help matters at all. Three: It does sound as if he got a bit rough with her, though of course the video doesn't show this, so please take that statement with a grain of salt. The arrest seemed a bit out of control, but it looked pretty standard when dealing with someone who is disrespectful and out of control.

 

I read an article that said she was a black civil rights leader, which if that is the case then she honestly should have had more respect for the officer. If you don't show the officer respect, how do you expect him to show you respect back. Tony Soprano said it best: "Those who want respect, give respect." Regardless, allow me to get off of this tangent so I may get to her time in jail.

 

I have yet to read more about her time in jail, so once again take what I say with a grain of salt, but if that is the case then it sounds like an issue with jailers rather then the police officers who made her arrest. Should she have been in jail in the first place? Arguably as she was getting out of control, but once again it is all perspective as the video only shows so much. I believe all of this could have been avoided if she just showed respect to the officer. That being said, I believe the video doesn't tell much as her time in jail will. Although, people did say that the video may be edited, so that is something to look at as well. I do hope that Texas authorities find out what happened to Mrs. Bland.

 

Edit: I'd also like to say that I'm not saying disrespect was even a reason for him to pull her out of the car. I don't even understand why he did so, and I feel he only escalated the situation further. They are both at fault, but the officer is more to blame as he allowed the situation to become a shouter match, rather then calming Mrs. Bland down and ensuring she understood what she had done. I do agree with Sam above me.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by Officer Dave

After reviewing the audio (as once the arrest began taking place she was removed off screen), I can see that one: She was completely disrespectful to the cop and refused to follow his directions, even though telling her to put out her cigarette is a bit pushing his luck. Two: The once the arrest took place the officer didn't seem to care much to calm her down. It is import when policing to not escalated the situation further, and screaming and shouting do not help matters at all. Three: It does sound as if he got a bit rough with her, though of course the video doesn't show this, so please take that statement with a grain of salt. The arrest seemed a bit out of control, but it looked pretty standard when dealing with someone who is disrespectful and out of control.

 

I read an article that said she was a black civil rights leader, which if that is the case then she honestly should have had more respect for the officer. If you don't show the officer respect, how do you expect him to show you respect back. Tony Soprano said it best: "Those who want respect, give respect." Regardless, allow me to get off of this tangent so I may get to her time in jail.

 

I have yet to read more about her time in jail, so once again take what I say with a grain of salt, but if that is the case then it sounds like an issue with jailers rather then the police officers who made her arrest. Should she have been in jail in the first place? Arguably as she was getting out of control, but once again it is all perspective as the video only shows so much. I believe all of this could have been avoided if she just showed respect to the officer. That being said, I believe the video doesn't tell much as her time in jail will. Although, people did say that the video may be edited, so that is something to look at as well. I do hope that Texas authorities find out what happened to Mrs. Bland.

 

Edit: I'd also like to say that I'm not saying disrespect was even a reason for him to pull her out of the car. I don't even understand why he did so, and I feel he only escalated the situation further. They are both at fault, but the officer is more to blame as he allowed the situation to become a shouter match, rather then calming Mrs. Bland down and ensuring she understood what she had done. I do agree with Sam above me.

Yeah, you're not wrong.  She did herself absolutely no favours, but even still.  I think this officer was poorly trained to deal with the situation like that.  I believe he has since been suspended for "violations of the department's traffic stop policy".

Okay, you know what, its time for you to take a break from this topic ODonnell.  You have this amazing ability to consistently deliver your spiel about private police forces despite it being completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Kinda looks to me like the cop was totally wrong here.  He asked her to put out the cigarette, she refused.  Looks like he got pissed by this refusal and did some "step out of the car" power play.  I can't see any other reason as to why he's ordered her out of the car, and everything seems to point to it being simply an angry reaction. 

No idea what he's talking about when he says he tried to calm her down and de-escalate the situation either?  If that's his idea of de-escalation, he needs to go back to the academy, asap.

:) Wonderful. I thought I was the only one. 

Go read Pennsylvania v. Mimms, I already had this discussion with someone else. The US Supreme Court ruled that it is legal for an officer to ask you to step out of the car and you have to comply.

I'm not even going to bother responding to the rest of your posts as they are absolutely absurd and most likely just a troll attempt to get a reaction from people. The sole piece of "evidence" this case relies on is the family saying "she would never do this". I am sorry for their loss but that is no reason to accuse the officers of a crime with no evidence. If you truly believe the conspiracy theories you are posting then I feel sorry for you.

:) Dude who gives a lying rats behind. I am all for following the law if its necessary however, for what reason did he have to order her out of the vehicle? If she was suspicious looking he would have surely ordered her out sooner. His only reason was because he didn't like the way she spoke to him and refused to circum to his power struggle. Now where in the law does it condone that? You know I am so happy GOD took my opportunity away to join these guys. I honestly think I was way to good for them anyhow.  I would have been a real officer not a thug. But again private forces are coming to a state near you so far  we have:

a team called "copblock"

"Open carry texas"

we are trying to get occupy wall street states except NY of course.

and all other of the "open carry" states.

 

In other words:

 

:) see ya soon.

Edited July 22, 201510 yr by NYPDDetectiveODonnell

:) Wonderful. I thought I was the only one. 

:) Dude who gives a lying rats behind. I am all for following the law if its necessary however, for what reason did he have to order her out of the vehicle? If she was suspicious looking he would have surely ordered her out sooner. His only reason was because he didn't like the way she spoke to him and refused to circum to his power struggle. Now where in the law does it condone that? You know I am so happy GOD took my opportunity away to join these guys. I honestly think I was way to good for them anyhow.  I would have been a real officer not a thug. But again private forces are coming to a state near you so far far we have:

a team called copblock

Open carry texas

we are trying to get occupy wall street states except NY of course.

and all other of the open carry states.

 

In other words:

 

:) see ya soon.

I don't think at this point in time that anyone really takes anything you say seriously, if anything reading your spiel is a bit of a giggle.