MARKED CRUISER wearing a POLICE UNIFORM, state trooper's and city police have different radio frequencies do they not? for all we know he could have been dispatched to a scene in hurry (we obviously know now he wasn't), EVI is right, that is only a traffic felony, nothing more, nothing less, no one can justify even a police officer driving that fast for no reason no light's or siren's, nonetheless, it's still only a traffic felony, and didn't deserve to have a gun pointed at him just for driving to fast..

A felony traffic stop involves taking the suspect out and gunpoint, Slimory. EVI was saying it should have been a misdemeanor reckless driving charge. I'm saying it should have been a felony operating to endanger charge, hence why the gunpoint arrest was warranted. This is what the difference between us would be as individuals on patrols; the kinds of citations or arrests we issue. I wouldn't be forgiving of those kind of traffic violations. And on a separate note, just because somebody is dressed in a police uniform and in a marked car doesn't mean they are a police officer. All signs point to green, but it's not always the case. In a town in the previous state I lived in, a local department arrested a man who had been showing up to briefings and taking a police cruiser out for full shifts for two weeks in a row. Nobody knew that he wasn't actually a police officer, just some guy. It took them two weeks to figure that out. Cops are humans, and humans are often stupid.

Edited May 5, 201213 yr by unr3al

@l3ubba then are you saying i wouldn't make a good police officer because of a judgement call against her action's?, if a police cruiser was stolen and it was called in then of course her actions are justified but if it wasn't called in, then it would seem she did it just because he is a police officer with 2 weapons in the car.

as for your last comment, i have NEVER heard of such a thing happening anywhere, i chuckled a little bit lol as you said "cops are humans, and humans are often stupid" guess that means the cops were stupid in this case.

Well, the Miami guy was certainly stupid...

As a sheriff's deputy in Florida myself I've had more of a front-row seat for all of this drama in the past few months. What many people aren't aware of is the amount of tension between the law enforcement agencies in the Miami area to include FHP. Agencies in the Miami area have a history of corruption that exceeds the "average" found in other areas, and this particular incident only highlights the already poor relations between agencies in the Miami area.

FHP has a pretty poor reputation statewide, including in my general area of Tampa. FHP is known for writing other law enforcement officers tickets in their personal vehicles on a frequent basis, which there is nothing wrong with, but typically we provide a level of professional courtesy to other officers. It is sad that situations like these have come to light, but it really is no surprise due to the terrible working conditions that Troopers have and the relationship between sheriff's offices/police departments with our highway counterpart.

This particular traffic stop highlights terrible tactics, attitudes, and procedures from BOTH individuals and both agencies. I don't know how they operate in Miami in terms of mutual aid agreements, but here in the Tampa area we have procedures in place for situations such as these. If for whatever reason I have an issue with a fellow officer from another agency, our policy is to inform dispatch of the situation and have them contact the other agency and speak to a supervisor. We do NOT stop other law enforcement vehicles unless an exceptional emergency exists. Speeding would not be one of them.

It does raise suspicion when an officer is outside of their jurisdiction and driving in this manner, but the simplest and most professional way to handle this specific incident would have been for the Trooper to contact a supervisor with the police officer's department and provide the license plate or vehicle number. Then a disciplinary process or investigation can be started and any criminal traffic violations, citations, etc... could be filed from that point forward.

It works best this way and I can speak from experience. I passed a Trooper on a county road one night running about 80 MPH in a 45 MPH zone (6 lane divided road) while I was approaching a convenience store robbery in progress, thus no lights or siren. The Trooper apparently noted my tag or vehicle number and contacted my agency to inform them what I was doing. They reviewed my call history and pulled the GPS from my vehicle and determined I was enroute to a priority call. Nothing further came from it, there was no embarrassing traffic stop, and no media coverage. Couldn't have been handled better. Plus, if I'm enroute to a call I'm not stopping for a Trooper anyway and I'll let dispatch know so they can inform FHP's dispatch that I'm enroute to a call.

Edited May 5, 201213 yr by Bailey23

@Bailey23, i would give you +2 if i could! i'm pretty sure (since your a sheriffs deputy) you know more about what happened and the laws in Florida Miami areas, it is pretty sad they have a poor reputation, but that goes for any law enforcement agency, the Halifax Regional Police have a pretty outstanding reputation from the people within the Halifax Regional Municipality, however, the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) do not have a good reputation anywhere in canada, i for one show them respect because they don't harass me.

but they do have a terrible reputation for police brutality and a horrible rep for abusing their power.. sorry going off-topic in my own topic lol

as for your last comment, i have NEVER heard of such a thing happening anywhere, i chuckled a little bit lol as you said "cops are humans, and humans are often stupid" guess that means the cops were stupid in this case.

Truth is stranger than fiction, as they say.

Once, a 14 year old in Chicago went out on patrol. All he did was walk into a police station in a uniform, with no badge or gun (just an empty holster). He then went out WITH A PARTNER. It wasn't until 5 hours later that someone realized that a 14 year old without a badge *probably* wasn't a cop.

I believe it. Chicago is the only major city that wont let the show COPS film there. They mayor says he doesn't want people around the world thinking Chicago is full of crime.

As if it's some kind of rumor or secret... Honestly, the morons we have in our government...

Agreed unr3al, pretty sure detroit has the LOWEST crime rate LOL

chicago? not full of crime and gangs? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHa....I can't go 24 hours without hearing "more shootings in chicago"

@l3ubba then are you saying i wouldn't make a good police officer because of a judgement call against her action's?, if a police cruiser was stolen and it was called in then of course her actions are justified but if it wasn't called in, then it would seem she did it just because he is a police officer with 2 weapons in the car.

as for your last comment, i have NEVER heard of such a thing happening anywhere, i chuckled a little bit lol as you said "cops are humans, and humans are often stupid" guess that means the cops were stupid in this case.

I never said anyone wouldn't be a good cop based off their judgement. I said that if you can't be handle being held to a higher standard then you shouldn't be a cop. Cops are held to a higher standard than normal civilians and people who become police officers need to be prepared for that. And as for the calling it in to see if it is stolen doesn't mean that it would actually return a stolen result. Do you think that as soon as a car is stolen the owner gets some magical signal that it has been stolen and reports it. It takes time to report a car stolen, first you have to find out that your car is stolen, then you have to call the police and have them put it in NCIC/FCIC as stolen.

unr3al: "felony operating to endanger charge" does not exist in Florida, there is no such charge. There is Reckless Driving which is not a felony, it is a civil infraction moving violation, in laymans terms it is just a simple ticket with points on your license and a fine.

Edited May 6, 201213 yr by l3ubba

I believe I also read earlier that someone said the officer did not pull over when signaled originally, which could (depending on the context, I wasn't there to witness it) be interpreted as evading. But I think we're beating a dead horse here. The thread was about whether or not we think her actions were justified, not what charge he should have recieved. I do think they were justified, I see a few of you do not. On a seperate note, I'm sorry to hear 'operating to endanger' doesn't exist in Florida. It can be a useful prosecution tool to get people off the roads who don't belong there. Perhaps I'll see this incident differently if I go through an academy.

Edited May 6, 201213 yr by unr3al

I never said anyone wouldn't be a good cop based off their judgement. I said that if you can't be handle being held to a higher standard then you shouldn't be a cop. Cops are held to a higher standard than normal civilians and people who become police officers need to be prepared for that. And as for the calling it in to see if it is stolen doesn't mean that it would actually return a stolen result. Do you think that as soon as a car is stolen the owner gets some magical signal that it has been stolen and reports it. It takes time to report a car stolen, first you have to find out that your car is stolen, then you have to call the police and have them put it in NCIC/FCIC as stolen.

unr3al: "felony operating to endanger charge" does not exist in Florida, there is no such charge. There is Reckless Driving which is not a felony, it is a civil infraction moving violation, in laymans terms it is just a simple ticket with points on your license and a fine.

Reckless Driving (no property damage or personal injury) is a criminal traffic citation in Florida punishable as a 2nd degree misdemeanor (maximum 90 days in jail and/or maximum $500 fine). It is NOT a civil infraction. It requires a mandatory court appearance. Reckless driving becomes a felony if you cause great bodily injury to another person.

I just had court two weeks ago on a reckless citation I wrote. The judge gave him 30 days in jail and $315 fine.

Unreal: Our version of "operating to endanger" is our reckless driving charge and I can arrest the driver on that offense. Additionally, in Florida I have the option of requiring a driver to retake a driving exam following any citation I issue. I have to have proper justification in doing so, but it is as simple as checking a box in our driver's database (DAVID). I usually do this for elderly individuals or teenagers based on certain offenses and/or their attitude regarding the stop. Florida has a ton of good traffic statutes on the books, so if you're like me and stay proficient with the various traffic statutes then you can find reasons to stop almost anybody. I'm not about writing a bunch of tickets (I usually just give verbal warnings), but I do have certain pet peeves or certain violations that I think are inexcusable.

Oh I know there are plenty of reasons to stop people around here, and I think any officer would be up to his eyeballs in tickets if he wrote everybody up on them. But I agree that there are priority ones. For me I'd say that running red lights are inexcusable unless it happens to be a split second difference (but even then yellow means slow down, not mash on the gas). I think 15+ mph over the limit is inexcusable unless there's a hell of an explanation for it. Racing on public roads is inexcusable. Those are a few big ones I can think of.

Hmmm, just re-read the statute, I guess it is a criminal infraction, but in the Miami officer's case it was only a misdemeanor, not a felony. My mistake, it had been awhile since I had read that statute and it isn't a charge we have used around here a lot.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by l3ubba

I know here in canada if you are having a serious emergency you can blow red lights and drive faster to get to the hospital as long as your 4 ways are on to let people know there is something wrong and if a cop tries to pull you over you can either stop and let him know so he can escort you safely going Code 2 or not stop at all and explain later, i don't know how it works over there but thats how it works here.

I know here in canada if you are having a serious emergency you can blow red lights and drive faster to get to the hospital as long as your 4 ways are on to let people know there is something wrong and if a cop tries to pull you over you can either stop and let him know so he can escort you safely going Code 2 or not stop at all and explain later, i don't know how it works over there but thats how it works here.

I don't believe this for one second. Cite the law or a court case; don't give a newspaper story, because what one cop does in one case doesn't mean that's what the law is.

EDIT: I just looked it up. In Nova Scotia traffic laws. Here it is:

106D (1) In Sections106E and 106F, "emergency vehicle" means

(a) an ambulance;

(b) a police vehicle;

© a fire department vehicle or fire patrol vehicle, including a fire suppression vehicle or fire vehicle operated by the Department of Natural Resources;

(d) a vehicle being used by the chief or deputy chief of a volunteer fire department when acting in an emergency arising from a fire or an accident;

(e) a vehicle being used by a conservation officer appointed under an enactment when the conservation officer is performing the officer's duties as a conservation officer;

(f) a vehicle being used by a motor vehicle inspector or a motor carrier inspector when the inspector is performing the inspector's duties as an inspector;

(g) any other vehicle designated by the regulations made pursuant to this Section.

(2) The Minister may make regulations designating a vehicle as an emergency vehicle.

(3) The exercise by the Minister of the authority contained in subsection (2) is regulations within the meaning of the Regulations Act. 2009, c. 20, s. 2.

From the regulations:

2 In Section 106B of the Motor Vehicle Act, “emergency vehicle” means any of the following vehicles:

(a) an ambulance;

(b) a police vehicle;

© a fire department vehicle or fire patrol vehicle, including a fire suppression or fire vehicle operated by the Department of Natural Resources;

(d) a vehicle being used by the chief or deputy chief of a volunteer fire department when acting in an emergency arising from a fire or an accident;

(e) a vehicle being used by a conservation officer appointed under an enactment when the conservation officer is performing their duties as a conservation officer.

(I think the 106B is a typo there)

From section 93(2):

(e) red light - all traffic facing this signal shall stop at the place marked or the nearest side of the crosswalk but not past the signal and shall remain stopped while facing this signal, provided that vehicular traffic may

(i) if a green arrow light is also exhibited, proceed in the direction indicated by an arrow,

From 93(6):

(6) This Section shall not apply in the case of police and fire department vehicles and ambulances when the same are operating in emergencies and the drivers sound audible signal by bell, siren, compression or exhaust whistle, but this proviso shall not operate to relieve the driver of a police or fire department vehicle or ambulance from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons using the highway. R.S., c. 293, s. 93; 2001, c. 44, s. 2; 2004, c. 41, s. 1; 2004, c. 42, s. 7; 2005, c. 54, s. 2; 2007, c. 45, s. 6.

Please, do tell where in there you are permitted to disobey traffic laws.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by cp702

hmm that's awful funny cp702, i know this is possible because i've done it, so what your telling me is if you are seriously injured or your wife/gf is dying you wouldn't do what was explained to save your life or get your spouse to the hospital? you need a VALID reason to do it, i don't care what that spoiler say's, i will argue it because i already said, i have had to do it.. Sorry but i'm not going to let "traffic laws" or police stand in the way of an emergency especially if i need to get to the hospital NOW, FYI it say's nothing about not being able to do it

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by Slimory

hmm that's awful funny cp702, i know this is possible because i've done it, so what your telling me is if you are seriously injured or your wife/gf is dying you wouldn't do what was explained to save your life or get your spouse to the hospital? you need a VALID reason to do it, i don't care what that spoiler say's, i will argue it because i already said, i have had to do it.. Sorry but i'm not going to let "traffic laws" or police stand in the way of an emergency especially if i need to get to the hospital NOW, FYI it say's nothing about not being able to do it

Please don't speak in a argumenitive tone, you created this thread for a debate/conversation on a certain subject, lets keep it that way...

PS: This goes for everyone.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by JAM-Justin35

hmm that's awful funny cp702, i know this is possible because i've done it, so what your telling me is if you are seriously injured or your wife/gf is dying you wouldn't do what was explained to save your life or get your spouse to the hospital? you need a VALID reason to do it, i don't care what that spoiler say's, i will argue it because i already said, i have had to do it.. Sorry but i'm not going to let "traffic laws" or police stand in the way of an emergency especially if i need to get to the hospital NOW, FYI it say's nothing about not being able to do it

I didn't say they would enforce it, but you presented as if it was the actual law. Four way flashers don't mean "I'm speeding", they mean "I'm stopped/going slowly". Driving through red lights and above the speed limit is illegal; you are expected to call an ambulance (where they can break those laws, and can also treat the person) if it's an emergency.

Also, if you're injured and driving, that's...a really bad idea. What if there's a problem and you lose control?