What should a cop do when someone refuses to exit a vehicle?

What should a law enforcement officer do when someone refuses to exit a vehicle?

Thought-provoking question. In the video above, one witnesses several Indiana police officers, identified as Patrick Vicari and Charles Turner, provide a hair-raising response to that questions.

That is, they smashed the vehicle’s window, deployed a taser to stun the passenger, dragged the passenger out of the vehicle and cuffed him while he was on the ground.

The incident capture above occurred back in September during a routine traffic stop. Police stopped motorist Lisa Mahone for not wearing her seat buckle while driving in Hammond, Indiana. They asked for the ID of her passenger, Jamal Jones.

Both Jones and Mahone refused to comply with the request to exit the vehicle, arguing in a lawsuit filed Tuesday that they felt they were in “imminent danger.”

Dana Kurtz, the lawyer representing Jones and Mahone in their lawsuit, said that the “officers engaged in excessive force and were completely unreasonable,” further arguing that, “There was absolutely no basis to engage in the conduct that they did or to arrest [Jones.]”

Jones was charged with failure to aid an officer and resisting law enforcement. Mahone was given a ticket for the seatbelt and was let go.

“I’m really in a state of shock,” Mahone, who was visiting her dying mother in the hospital that day, told ABC News. “It felt like I was just like, it felt like, it felt like it was nothing but gangbangers around me.”

Meanwhile, in a statement, the Hammon Police Department said it was the officers who were fearing for their safety, which justified their use of force.

“Fearing for officer safety, the first officer ordered the passenger to show his hands and then repeatedly asked him to exit the vehicle,” the statement said. “The passenger continued to refuse to exit the vehicle after approximately thirteen minutes had elapsed and upon request by at least three different officers present at the scene of the stop.”

“Fearing the occupants of the vehicle may have possessed a weapon, and seeing the passenger repeatedly reach towards the rear seats of the vehicle, the first officer then broke the passenger side window of the vehicle and the passenger was removed from the vehicle and was placed under arrest,” the statement continued.

Though, with Mahone’s two children in the back seat, 14-year-old Joseph Ivy and 7-year-old JaNiya Ivy, it makes one wonder whether it was reasonable for the officers to fear that Jones would pull a firearm, having said that we should probably refrain from making a judgment at this point in time because all the fact are not yet known. Leave the judgment part up to the jury that will most likely decide whether or not these two officers went too far.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 63 comments… add one }
  • Thor Odinson November 21, 2017, 4:13 pm

    Can comments still be left on this site? Everything seems to be 2014

  • Stefan Smythe June 26, 2017, 7:36 pm

    The police have the right to command anybody to do anything at any time. They have the right to kill you if you do not comply. This is simply common sense. When you are pulled over, you should immediately exit the vehicle, lie face down and put your hands behind your back. I believe it is written in the Constitution.

  • ENIGMA6 January 18, 2017, 8:54 am

    I seem to recall the Supreme Court has already ruled that police can order suspects from a vehicle if the officers have concern for their safety. Guess these two didn’t get the memo to comply with lawful police orders and be on their way. Some people would rather be stupid and get arrested.

  • Ray June 10, 2016, 4:42 pm

    I’m sorry, I must have missed something. Sitting as a passenger in a car equals reasonable concern for the safety of the officers? How? I get it, he didn’t obey. Again what part of this was a danger to the police? This was about pride on both sides, power, and intimidation on the side of the public servants that forgot who they were or who they work for.

    Police have a tough job, they have legitimate reasons to be concerned for their safety and the safety of the rest of the public. But that does not mean that we live in a police state. I expect to see this behavior in a place like Cuba or North Korea. Why did they need him to identify himself? What probable cause existed to focus on a passenger during a traffic stop? What legitimate law enforcement purpose was being served by ordering either out of the car? I have always been told that you are to remain in the car because to do otherwise is considered a threat to the officer. So which is it? I guess the answer here is that the officers wanted to intimidate these citizens into allowing an unjustified search in the hope of finding something more to charge them with.

    Bad cops get good cops killed. To all of the good cops out there, please think. The bad cops are not your brothers in blue they are the reason so many of our citizens view all of you with suspicion. This will not ever change until good cops change it.

  • Chick June 10, 2016, 3:43 am

    The man should have just placed his hands on the dash.

  • Todd September 24, 2015, 1:27 pm

    Before you make ignorant statements as to what right the officers have to order you out of the car, please research Pennsylvania vs Mimms and Maryland v Wilson and you will have your answers. For all of you “Jail house” lawyers on here keep preaching! it makes law enforcement look better everyday!!

    • John May 4, 2016, 9:42 pm

      In Pennsylvania vs Mimms the guy got out of the car, the court never ruled that the police had the power to do that, only that once he DID exit they could search him….

  • RRAUBDDS March 24, 2015, 9:05 pm

    Why didn’t these people cooperate instead of taunting these cops?? Now black folks know that if they taunt a bunch of trigger happy, volatile, and unstable white cops that things will go from bad to worse in a hurry!! SO WHY DID THEY DO IT?? If they cooperated they may have only got their ticket and they’d been on their way!!

  • Wolfgang December 17, 2014, 11:47 pm

    …and yet another generation grows up in fear and loathing of anyone with a uniform or badge.

  • JimG November 18, 2014, 1:09 pm

    I find it interesting that you have an arrogant response to what is in fact a reasonable request on the part of the officer and coincidently there is someone in the back filming the incident. Yet the perpetrators claim is that they were in fear for their lives. This is clearly a case of a group, not an individual, not a couple, but a group of people who intentionally and with forethought set out to provoke a person in authority and are now complaining that their belligerence got them in trouble. If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. My only hope is that the judge or jury chosen to hear this case have more common sense then misplaced indignation and throw this case out to the curb for the garbage that it is.

  • Russ October 13, 2014, 9:01 pm

    Lots of opinions here.
    Lots of disrespect for the law here as well.
    Some sound like Martin Lawrence in the movie “National Security” and your cracking me up.
    Comply you idiots, what do you have to hide?
    Cops are just people we hire to uphold the law, and they don’t have a crystal ball.
    If I were a cop I would have a cam flowing 24/7 for all to see later.

    The question was “What should the cop do”
    He should have called more guys out until the people were comfortable.
    What should the guy in the car do?
    Have respect and calmly COMPLY! (then none of this would have happened)
    instead he blew it and ran across a rookie that may have been scared and also blew it.
    It would have been all over soon and they could have a good laugh about it later, knowing their police are doing their job.
    No big deal and no hard feelings.
    Or was it his intention to make it a big deal out of it and already have hard feelings?
    Martin Lawrence-ish.

  • Matt October 13, 2014, 6:27 pm

    Pennsylvania vs Mimms: cops can legally order all occupants out of the vehicle on a traffic stop.

  • George Jetson October 13, 2014, 6:18 pm

    A vehicle investigation is considered an “investigatory stop”. During the stop which could be for just about anything under the sun ie: fit the description of something they are looking for, motor vehicle violations etc. YOU are being detained. Not free to leave. For the Officers safety (maybe he saw you make a movement in which he BELIEVES you are concealing a weapon) OR to examine the vehicle due to other observations he made he can ask you to exit the vehicle at which time again for his safety can before a “frisk or pat down search” because he can not examine what he needs to and watch you without determining that you are not in control of weapons. This is why he can ask you out of the car and do his investigation. No you do not have a right to refuse this action. I do not care for the Police much BUT it is logical and makes sense. Also an investigatory stop means you are not free to leave but are not under arrest. You are detained for a reasonable period time for the investigation to be done. If the period of time becomes excessive (usually about 30 minutes depending on the stop) it could be determined that you were arrested. At this point you probably are and your attorney will be arguing that issue. My advice is to drive like an old lady and stay away from the Police who mostly should not be armed. Then again I do trust the FBI with machine guns BUT do not give them a pack of matches! LOL!

  • Bob October 13, 2014, 5:53 pm

    The fundamental breakdown of this whole incident was that when the passenger of the car asked for a “white shirt”, (supervisor) to come to the scent, which was his right to do so, and was refused.
    Cooler heads and a supervisor on the scene would have probably prevailed with no “incident” Sure the passenger was being an ass but he had broken no laws. The reason there was an incident was that a tin horn cop got mad and decided to show the passenger who was the boss. Looks like a anger management class should be in his future as a cop, if he has one.
    We have some very professional police in Indiana, and I’m proud of them but it’s disconcerting to have one asinine officer lose his cool and give Indiana law enforcement a black eye to the whole nation.

    • Cultural Marxism Kills October 15, 2014, 6:14 pm

      Who shall the police make out that citation to? The law says that the police have the duty to haul you in front of a magistrate immediately if unwilling to cooperate or violate any of these…
      IC 35-44-3-2
      Assisting a criminal
      Sec. 2. A person not standing in the relation of parent, child, or spouse to another person who has committed a crime or is a fugitive from justice who, with intent to hinder the apprehension or punishment of the other person, harbors, conceals, or otherwise assists the person commits assisting a criminal, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is:
      (1) a Class D felony if the person assisted has committed a Class B, Class C, or Class D felony; and
      (2) a Class C felony if the person assisted has committed murder or a Class A felony, or if the assistance was providing a deadly weapon.
      As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.4. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.60.

      IC 35-44-3-3
      Resisting law enforcement
      Sec. 3. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
      (1) forcibly resists, obstructs, or interferes with a law enforcement officer or a person assisting the officer while the officer is lawfully engaged in the execution of his duties as an officer;
      (2) forcibly resists, obstructs, or interferes with the authorized service or execution of a civil or criminal process or order of a court; or
      (3) flees from a law enforcement officer after the officer has, by visible or audible means, identified himself and ordered the person to stop;
      commits resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, except as provided in subsection (b).
      (b) The offense under subsection (a) is a:
      (1) Class D felony if:
      (A) the offense is described in subsection (a)(3) and the person uses a vehicle to commit the offense; or
      (B) while committing any offense described in subsection (a), the person draws or uses a deadly weapon, inflicts bodily injury on another person, or operates a vehicle in a manner that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person;
      (2) Class C felony if, while committing any offense described in subsection (a), the person operates a vehicle in a manner that causes serious bodily injury to another person; and

      Suppose Jones gives a false name or happens to give your name and address to avoid supplying his. Regardless of what you believe he was incorporative for a reason and that is probable suspicion requiring a Terry stop and to be brought in for purposes of establishing identity to receive the seat belt citation. Then he is also subject to several new misdemeanors failure to assist and resisting. As it turns out another police department recognized him and it so happens they reissued a warrant for drug dealing and failure to appear. He is a “Great Father Figure” but those aren’t his kids. Their last name is Ivy, his is Jones and hers is Mahone. It turns out that Ms. Mahone pleaded guilty to having 485 grams of cocaine in US District Court in Hammond in Case No 2:11-CR-114. According to Court documents, her sentence included 3 years of supervised release after a 16 month prison term. Court records show that Mahone was released from prison on November 28, 2012 which would mean she will remain on supervised release until November 2015.”

  • obamisthesonofsatan October 13, 2014, 4:12 pm

    If they were so in fear for their lives and so sure he was reaching for a gun in the back seat, please post everyone here a photo of the gun that they found in the vehicle !!!!

  • Tom October 13, 2014, 2:09 pm

    Another example of Police out of control on the streets of America. How/why should a seat belt violation rise to such a dangerous situation ? These police feared for their safety ? What a crock. Three officers, countless hours of self defense training, carrying all kinds of weapons and there still afraid of a family of 4 ? Protect and serve ? I think not.
    Write the ticket and move on.

  • Davidio Flavio October 13, 2014, 1:43 pm

    Am I the only person to remember the history of the seatbelt laws??

    They were passed as a “Secondary Crime” meaning, that they would not be used as a primary reason to pull someone over, as in, this is only a crime that can hurt you, so, we aren’t going to ticket you just for not wearing a seatbelt, only if you do something else first like speeding or running a red light, and if you don’t have a seatbelt on, we add on another ticket, just because we can.

    Sure, that lasted a whole year or two, and then all the states began making seatbelt violations a primary violation that gets you pulled over.

    What we have is a law, which serves no overwhelming need, or, does anything for public safety, its strictly a your right to be as safe as the government feels law, another intrusive slap at privacy, because just like this, its an easy way to get your face into somebody elses car, to look for other things.

    And, when that happens, its now a bend over festival, while they look for any other reason to harass you, to look for drugs, on anything else to help create the “Probable Cause” to get you out of your car, to pat you down.

    In essence a government created “Dragnet”, looking for anything, when no real crime has been committed to justify the stop and search.

    And this is what you damned sheeple don’t seem to understand, this has nothing to do with your safety, it has everything to do with another right being taken away all in the name of the “LAW”. Remember “Judge Dredd” when he shouts, “I AM THE LAW”, and then sentences the perp to death and executes him?

    That wasn’t done to show how good LE is, it was done to show you how scary allowing cops to be a judge, jury and executioner should be. And thats exactly what we have allowed to happen.

    EVERY killing done by a cop, should be treated as murder, and he should face due process like the rest of us do, and be tried and found guilty or innocent of that crime, again, just an any other citizen would do.

    Would that make them hesitate to pull that gun and pull the trigger?

    Damn right it would, just as I or you do, when we carry and have to decide whether to pull our gun and pull the trigger.

    For some reason, its ok to murder with a badge, and I can show you lots of cases where its apparent, as in the case of the Albequeque flash bang a homeless guy for no reason, and shoot him while he is running away from them up a hill.

    Why shoot the guy? Where was he going? What harm could he have done with the small knife they point to as the fearful weapon the police were afraid of?

    I could understand if he had a knife out, and was charging the police, but, they never even were considered to be charged because the DA accepted the internal police report that said it was justified.

    Bottom line, if you don’t listen to the police, even if they are wrong, they can execute you with absolutely no fear of being prosecuted as it stands now.

    Every life is as precious as the next, its time to take away the “Get off a murder charge” card, that gets issued with every damned badge.

  • Jhim J. October 13, 2014, 1:06 pm

    We are getting slanted versions of the story as can be found by checking original source material. Wait until someone takes this to court and it is finished then comment on whether the cops or citizens are right. Judging based on what a reporter decides in his opinion is news worthy and trying the case without all the facts is ludicrous. I’m sick of the Ferguson protestors and sensationalism journalism. Wait till the grand jury come out and all the evidence has been reviewed. We all talk about civil rights but it seems we are quick to throw them out based on a story told from only one perspective.

  • Blasted Cap October 13, 2014, 12:50 pm

    Indiana has a stop and identify law. Indiana Code §34-28-5-3.5. Show them your licence, ask if you are being detained, and if so what for? If they tell you you are being detained, ask what for and their probable cause. Be sure to note their badge number and name, they are required under Federal law to provide you that information. If they say you are not being detained you have no obligation to provide any information. In states that do not have stop and identify, you do not have an obligation to show ID. ask if you are being detained, and what for, etc. If you are being detained THEN you show your ID, if not you have no obligation to be cooperative.

    It is not my job to make an officers life easy by giving up my rights. They take an oath to protect and serve. Maybe they need to understand what that means. If you don’t like being referred to as Nazi, jackbooted thugs, etc. take off the black gloves you put on at the start of any encounter. Stop violating peoples rights because “I was afraid for my safety”. Stop demanding, Sam, just do what I tell you and file a complaint later. Filing a complaint lasts as long as it takes to get out the door, then the Blue Wall, throws it in the garbage. For years Departments have resisted citizen oversight. Why is that? I think we all know. Citizen oversight is not a typo. Unless they are active duty military and in uniform the police are civilians too. So stop calling that term as well, (I was active duty and that really pisses me off.) Maybe keep that in mind as well.

    • Sam October 13, 2014, 6:32 pm

      In NY if you are stopped by the police in a traffic stop you are being detained reason being for the violation you committed so yes you need to identify yourself and in this situation the passenger also was being detained for the violation of not wearing his seatbelt so yes he did need to identify himself.
      As to filing a complaint I said, “then file a complaint, lawsuit or what you feel you need to do” if you feel a complaint will not be taken serious then I also gave the suggestion of filing a lawsuit I’m not telling what to do I’m just saying the time to do it is after the fact your not gonna win a confronting with the officer by going head to head on the street

  • Michael D October 13, 2014, 12:25 pm

    While I understand the letter of the law says a police officer needs probable cause to insist the passenger exit the vehicle, the simple fact is, far too many black people are brainwashed with an idea that they are victims, that they and all white people are out to get them. So much of their music is filled with hate and disrespect for authorities, that they have absolutely no respect anyone or anything.Cops today have NO IDEA what they may encounter during a simple routine traffic stop, and are justifiably on edge during every stop. I am a 54 year old white man, with a CHL, so I am always carrying. Anytime I am stopped ( my right foot is made of lead, and weighs about 500lbs), I make sure to have my ID and my CHL out and held up for the officer, and my hands either on the top of the steering wheel, or on the window sill where the officer can always see them. I have NEVER had an issue with an officer. Conversely, even though as I stated, I’m 54 years old and white, I have no doubt that if I were to refuse the officer’s requests, not keep my hands where he could see them, and otherwise act in a manner which suggests I have something to hide, I stand a very good chance of having the officer become more physical, draw his weapon, or worse, shoot me. This is no way is to suggest I think the police are using too much force. We simply live in a society where too many people no longer respect the badge,or the law for that matter, and thus, today’s police officer’s are in far more danger than ever before.
    I’ve never cared much for country music, but there’s a line from a Toby Keith song that says, “It’s time for the long arm of the law to put a few more in the ground.”
    I agree.
    Too many people want to gripe and complain about high crime rates, or constantly complain that the police didn’t do enough to protect them,yet whine and cry, screaming police brutality and/or racism when a cop acts to protect themselves. Well, what do they expect? You can’t have it both ways! Crime will continue to rise as long as liberals continue to tie officer’s hands.
    Bottom line: if a cop pulls you over, comply with their requests, do as you are told, and you’ll quickly be on your merry way.

  • BRASS October 13, 2014, 12:25 pm

    This is serious business….
    At first glance my immediate response upon seeing the video in the news was the police were over the top. After hearing that the police asked, repeatedly asked the passenger to keep his hands visible and that he repeatedly was reaching around the vehicle and this exchange escalated over fifteen minutes it is easy to see how and why it ended as it did.
    We have had several incidents in recent weeks where police officers making routine traffic stops were executed by the subject of the stop or passengers. Unfortunately, routine is never routine, and never ever can any situation be taken for granted. Recall if you will the two police officers executed while sitting and eating in a Las Vegas restaurant, in uniform, just months ago without provocation by a lunatic who left home that day for that purpose. Situational awareness is incumbent upon all of us but a matter of absolute survival for uniformed officers whom are targets by vulture of their sworn duties and easy identifiability.
    While I am greatly concerned by the seemingly increasing police state we hear of and see in the news daily, I am also cognizant of the increasingly violent nature of our modern society and the danger posed to our police officers, particularly uniformed officers. Among the reasons for the right of citizens to be armed is self defense and as we can all see, correctly so. This also creates more danger for police, not from law abiding citizens, but from those whom at that moment of confrontation are not lawful in purpose and in rare cases, victims of misunderstandings. Just as the overwhelming number of Muslims are peaceful their sheer numbers assure the tiny fractional minority whom are not are significant; by the fact that the US has a population approaching three hundred and seventeen million people with an estimated one hundred and fifty-million gun owners, even a small minority whom are of ill intent or grossly irresponsible insures that violent confrontations with our police are not uncommon.
    It would be ill advised for any officer or officers involved in any interaction with anyone to assume that all are sober, level headed and responsible people with nothing but peaceful intent. The line between an uneventful and peaceful interaction becomes difficult to maintain and control when citizens become belligerent and refuse to comply. Neither the officers or those who are the object of the interaction may be one hundred percent positive that the other will behave as intended although I would say that the odds are in favor of the officers in that regard. I certainly would not consider agitating and refusing to comply when confronted with a request to keep my hands in sight and act in a non-threatening manner.
    The individual who was tazed and dragged out of the car sealed his own fate by his failure to obey and suspicious if not threatening behavior. Did the officers involved act beyond that which was reasonable? I guess that decides which vantage point one has and how much common sense one has.

  • Perimeter October 13, 2014, 11:19 am

    Interesting to see all the opinions. I agree that if an officer makes a reasonable request relevant to the supposed violation that occurred and caused him to stop my vehicle I would comply. If the officer has a duty to ticket me for a seat belt violation then so be it, I deserve the ticket. If the officer makes a decision to go on a fishing expedition and ask unrelated questions of my passengers or children without probable cause then in America I have a right to respectfully refuse the request unless he choses to place me under arrest and states the charge.
    I have been in and around law enforcement most of my life and can only say that the quality of officers in general is improving but Rambo still lives in the minds of some when you give them a little authority. I hope incidents like this will lead to more common sense being employed and a weeding out of the cowboys with badges. I understand that wearing a badge makes you feel like a target but the police are beginning to believe that they are a paramilitary force and not an employee of the citizens who they have taken an oath to protect and serve. It’s all fun and games till someone gets hurt, just my opinion.

  • ibjj October 13, 2014, 11:00 am

    If the chicken cop is so scared of being confronted with a weapon ( of any sort) then he needs to quit and become a truck driver or lawn maintenance person. That seems what he is more qualified for.

  • lawrence mundt October 13, 2014, 10:26 am

    If I am stopped for any reason I don’t care what it is I will do as asked by the police I have nothing to hide and I figure that the sooner I do as asked the sooner I can be on my way. I have never meet an unreasonable police officer, do as they ask be pleasant and respectful and don’t give them a hard time and your experiance will be a swift and pleasant one. put yourself in their shoes, what would you want?

  • dj kennedy October 13, 2014, 10:20 am

    where are brave veterans of color who served in iraq and afghanistan
    where are the police of color
    if white persons were continuously treated this way -not only presently but since people of color
    have been forcibly ”immigrated ” as forced labor
    one would wonder how white skinned people would react if all the police were people of color
    after furgeson missouri the occupants may have felt they would be shot multiple times
    just think –if one of the children –had a squirt gun
    open up justified perceived threat hostile actions
    above all ”protection” of citizens –police protect themselves
    increasingly unaccountable -difficult to prosecute -militant
    and perhaps afraid of dark shadows
    the prisons themselves as well as law enforcement
    have changed very much
    ////written from a prison town–maximun prison//minimum prison// facility for criminally insane and unfit for trial //
    big business
    i am ashamed at the changes made to the prison which one had officers living in brick cottages –the warden living in near palatial quarters–greenhouses–farms and industries run by convicts
    guards then were not paid that much–unionized not
    making more than school teachers
    if you are not deathly afraid of the police –you are deeply mistaken
    just as occupants of this car were
    they should have all immediately exited the vehicle and placed their hand on the roof
    or lay on the ground face down
    and been beaten tazed maced and beaten with batons
    before being summarily executed

  • lilbear68 October 13, 2014, 9:54 am

    the cop in fear of his life excuse is wearing thin, when asked for id how does one reach for the id without appearing to be reaching for a weapon? this puts everyone in danger of being shot when in the process of getting ones wallet out to get their license/insurance card. god help you if you need to get the registration out of the glove box. so everyone is in danger no matter how minor a stop may be, tail light out or tinted windows or a lane change

    • Sam October 13, 2014, 11:01 am

      You keep your ID under your rear seat? If so I suggest you wait for the officer to approach while leaving your hands in plain view. When he/she asks for your ID you tell them it’s under your rear seat and ask can you get it. If the answer is yes you retrieve it and hand it over to the police, if the answer is no you allow them to retrieve it. How difficult is that?

  • Sam October 13, 2014, 9:51 am

    Did you guys read the article and see the news story’s? The cops asked for the passengers ID because he wasn’t wearing a seatbelt, the passenger continued to reach into the back seat causing the police to fear that the passenger was concealing a weapon. I don’t care what color the persons skin is the passengers actions cause the police to escalate the situation. If he just handed over his ID and didn’t make suspicious movements appearing to conceal a weapon he would have maybe given a ticket and been on his way. The passenger refused to give the police his ID, made suspicious movements appearing to conceal a weapon and refused to get out of the vehicle. What would you do? Stand around for 20 min? 30 min? Asking him repeatedly to exit the vehicle? Or have this unidentified man remain in the vehicle with a possible weapon and wait for him to shoot you? It’s very simple do what your told and later if you feel your rights were violated then file a complaint, lawsuit or what you feel you need to do. The driver and passenger are just looking for a payday

    • MickD October 13, 2014, 10:56 am

      My simplistic idea, applicable to this particular type of situation: if the cops have a legal right to ask for their ID, and they’re not providing it, put a boot on their car and drive away. They can show up in front of a judge later and explain why they refused to show ID during a traffic stop.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 7:19 pm

      Dude, did YOU watch the freaking video? The guys was only reaching around for the ‘I.D.’ he was illegally asked to display, In his nervousness he might have been looking for the seatbelt end to attach it in compliance also. and if you SAW the video he attempted to hand a ticket through the window but the officer refused to accept it unless he got out of the vehicle and handed it to the officer! This guy did nothing wrong except legally defy the abject tyranny and delusional authority ego of these cops. And he was illegally attacked for it. I’m surprised that a supervising Lt gave the order to smash into the car.

      And he was right to be afraid of them, now wasn’t he?

      You desperately need to wake up to reality, Sam. Just because you’re a suspicious cop, doesn’t make you legally correct.

  • Daniel October 13, 2014, 9:26 am

    I have mixed feeling here on the one hand I believe the officers need to be able to control a situation during the stop
    but on the other hand the officer did not have a real reason to believe that this man was a treat. What we have these days are officers that are profiling black men an believing they are going to harm them before they even walk up to the car. If this right or wrong I really can’t say. A few black males in this country have brought this fear about with their actions . I have seen a few training films that have been used to show officers what can happen during a stop and in 90% of those cases the occupant of the vehicle was a black man. I am not sure I can blame an officer for protecting himself but at the same time I can’t condone an officer over stepping his bounds and acting like judge,jury and such. I think this situation could have been handled in a much different manor. You could see that this man was in no way a threat to the officers but they were upset that he was not going to get out of the vehicle and the how dare you not listen to my authority was written all over the officers face and in his voice. The officer handled this incorrectly and has a power issue that is for sure. These officers are here to protect and server but in reality officers years ago were respected but today the are feared and that is where the bottom line of the issue lies. the General public attitude has become fearful of officers because even if you are doing nothing wrong many times the judicial system tend to side with the officer and if you don’t have a good lawyer or a video to prove them wrong they can say and do what they want an know they will get away with it. This has been going on for years it is just in the last few years that more people are videoing these stops and they are becoming public which makes the officers accountable for their actions. I have been stopped an have had an officer inform that having a video camera on during my stop was illegal ask me to turn the video off which I told him that I would not because it was there for my protect and his . The idea of officers having cameras on their person is a good idea and on their dashes. We have seen many cases where an officers was caught doing things improperly and also correctly so they are a good thing. The officers on the street today are there for two reason lets be realistic. They are there to generate money for the jurisdiction which they work and respond to crime seances to restore order an clean up the mess. Yes they are there to prevent crime that they see but it becoming less and less of a priority for the jurisdiction what is become the priority is making money by giving out traffic violations . This attitude by the power to be has to change and we need to stop blaming the officers. Now are there officers out there that over step their authority yes there are and do we need to get better control of that sure we do but bottom line is we need to change the mindset of the officers and also the public. Things will only get worse until we do this . America you hear everyday has become a police state and in some ways it has because of lack of respect of the officers for the public and also lack of respect by the public toward the office to do the right thing. Maybe it is time for American to think about what is important and that is staying free and fighting the people that are trying to take that freedom away from us. One more thought here an that is the black community has to get control over there young black men . I have a lot of black friends that I would be proud to have my back and trust like I trust my own family but that said those people are not as easy to find. It seems like when a black man goes bad and he gets out of hand we have political opportunist who take advantage of it for their own gains and really don’t give a damn in private about the black man. It is called exploitation an we know who those people are. What needs to be understood here is that black or white you threaten an officer he is going to what he needs to do to protect himself. An officers need to know that if they over step their authority they will be held accountable for their action

  • PudbertSavannahGA October 13, 2014, 7:48 am

    “Fearing the occupants of the vehicle may have possessed a weapon” ? ? ?

    It is our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to own and possess a weapon ! ! !
    It’s called the 2nd Amendment ! !

    If these corrupt cops are using THAT as their only excuse to use this hack-booted excessive force,, then they are in BIG trouble..

  • Steven t. Wall October 13, 2014, 6:57 am

    If your black they think your guilty, I have no idea what’s going on in this world you might want to stay out to Hammond Indiana.

  • Mike Washburn October 13, 2014, 4:48 am

    Well I hope the public outcry for this one doesn’t include widespread riots where persons, only remotely related to the involved people, break into and loot local businesses. Something that never made any sense to me. Also I find it strange that people that have no actual knowledge of the incident make statements like “those incriminating videos were faked” or “this is just another case of cops hassling _________ (fill in the blank) people, etc.
    In the recent past if a cop stopped a car for a valid minor violation he could at least make a cursory examination and respond to such situations as finding drug paraphernalia, drunk driving, illegal weapons, suspicious behavior like appearing to reach for a weapon and so on.
    In this particular case I am guessing that the cops were under trained and possibly not acting according the exact letter of the law. Also, when cops start wearing personal cameras this will be good for everyone.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 7:02 pm

      Yes, Mike, in the past, and still in the present, cops can and should be a trained observer with better than average awareness of their observation and carry forward any reasonable suspicions to a ‘cursury; investigations. As long as it doesn’t cross the threshold of Constitutional protections and Civil Rights.

      But instead they do self proclaimed mandatory stops and searches for no apparent reason except in a paid routine ‘sport fishing’ expedition. They keep doing it because they keep getting away with it.

      But you just exemplified in your easily stated context, how the thought process in actual application fails to measure up to the standard. All you could ‘at least’ do is think about what you see IN PLAIN VIEW while conducting other legal police business. Not what might or possibly be concealed in your profiling imagination. Otherwise Direct physical search of private property requires a specific warrant.

      That’s why some states outlaw very darkly tinted car windows

      Merely APPEARING to be something illegal is NOT enough to validate a search. There has to be additional probable cause.

      ‘Appearing’ to ‘reach’ for a weapon is NOT enough for a cop to have ‘fear for his life’ and shoot you down. That’s why that other video last week of a cop shooting a driver whom he ordered to produce his licence after the guy got out and reached back into the car to get the licences, before the cop ever saw what he was reaching for!

      By that logic, every time you moved in front of a cop he could ‘interpret’ that in his delusional cognizance as ‘reaching for a weapon’ and kill you. That’s why the aforementioned cop is now fired and arrested.

      What the cops in this incidence here did, Mike, was totally wrong. And they were caught at it. It clearly demonstrates the need for re training of cops because they have been getting away with this so long that as you also mistakenly understood that they really believed they could get away with violating your rights, mainly because they always did!

      But it’s not entirely the cop’s fault. It has become a culture of acquiesced tyranny. The government has conveniently created a para military police state environment for most law enforcement agencies no longer based on ‘serve and protect’, but lately only on ‘search and destroy’.

      But you’re right, it’s simply a matter of training to regain the liberty equity we have lost. Most cops came from the average pool of citizens who simply do not really know their civil rights.

      But We all better learn the reality pretty fast.

  • E.Sisson October 9, 2014, 6:00 am

    I feel the officers actions were unjustified.The article mentioned that the traffic stop was for not wearing a seatbelt.I do not believe it was reasonable for the officers to do any more than write a ticket and check I.D. for wants and warrants. Had there been an issue after that then I can see having the occupants exit the vehicle. I see no reason for the officers to fear for their safety. Clearly an abuse of authority.

    • Mike October 13, 2014, 7:26 am

      The story said that the two occupants would NOT comply with giving their ID’s to the officers. So, what would officers do then, if there is no compliance? (1) Drive away to the next car stop and let them get away with the violation, (2) Call for a supervisor to assist in the car stop, or (3) The above outcome with the breaking of the window, being tazed and arrested. If the police were there initially to issue a ticket for a “No Seat Belt Violation”, how would the officers had issued the ticket, if the driver did NOT want to give them her ID to the officer? Was it exessive force maybe? But we all know that once we decide to NOT comply with law enforcement officer at any given time, then the police immediately are going to think that the person is either trying to conceal their identity for reason of being arrested or they are trying conceal a forbidden weapon or contraband, especially if the person has had a prior felony conviction. Criminals would do anything and everything to get out of that situation including refusing to cooperate with police orders. I am not saying that people were criminals, but not wearing a seat belt is now considered a violation and a reason for car stop in most states.

      • RPJ October 13, 2014, 11:35 am

        No, the article stated that the passenger would not produce ID. The driver did & was ticketed. The passenger is under no legal obligation to present ID. Neither was willing to exit the car. The police were simply being abusive. They displayed the us against them attitude that has become prevalent within law enforcement today.
        If they are constantly in fear of not being able to go home at night then they need to find a new profession. Their fear should not and does not trump my Constitutional Rights. That is not an excuse for abuse, plain & simple. Before anyone starts with “you have no idea what these guys go through”, spare me the speech, yes I do.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 6:24 pm

        First of all, Mike, The initiatory details of this are still up for grabs in the absence of verifiable facts of the ‘story’ here,

        The dash camera of the police vehicle should tell enough to verify whether or not the driver produced her licence on request.
        But that wouldn’t matter anyway in this situation for a minor traffic violation. This should answer your question although i believe i already mentioned this here already.

        “License please?, you’re driving without your seatbelt on”

        “I don’t have it officer”.

        Are you sure? Why don’t you look closer in your wallet or purse, see if you can find it. otherwise i’ll have to issue you a citation for failure to carry/produce/ or driving without one.”

        “oops, there it is, okay, sit tight, i’ll just have to check for warrants and i’ll be right back”

        (comes back to the car) “okay, you’re clear. I’m just giving you a warning ticket this time, but if see you again r not wearing it, it’ll be a cash fine, okay? have a nice day”

        If she didn’t have it he could have wrote her two tickets then, one for the seatbelt and one for driving without a license and let her be on her way.

  • Mark N. October 9, 2014, 1:37 am

    Questions abound. Why did the officer ask the passenger for ID, when all he was there for was to write a ticket for a seatbelt violation? As far as I know, the passenger had no obligation to provide ID–though many officers seem to think that we “citizens” do. Instead, the obligation to identify oneself exists only if being arrested. (On top of which, the victim had provided his ID.) Second, what right did the officer have to order the passenger to exit the vehicle? Since when do citizens have a duty to “assist” police officers, and why is that a failure to “assist” can be prosecuted as a criminal violation? Third, why were the police ordering him to exit the vehicle when the driver had already been ticketed? Last but not least, if there is no duty to “assist” the police (in this case by giving up one’s constitutional rights), what arrest was being made that this gentleman was “resisting”? The claim that the occupants of the vehicle “may have had a weapon” is absolutely bogus, a post hoc rationalization; the mere presence of a firearm does not, standing alone and as a matter of law, constitute reasonable cause to believe a crime has been committed. This looks like, and will presented to the jury as, these civilians of being guilty of no more than driving while black.

    • Paul October 13, 2014, 7:42 am

      Are you for real? I think not. How does the cop know said person is not the worst of the worst and not armed??? BOGUS??? He or she needs to go home later too. Listen to them and DO WHAT YOU ARE TOLD. I am dead sick of the BLACK excuse. Facts are facts, and BLACKS are the highest, highest, highest rate of criminal violent activity. So YES, profiling is justified! It is like pulling over a bear and saying it is a deer. Even people like Bill Cosby rant about how “we are doing this to ourselves”. I could not agree more.

      If the officer says get out of the car, get the F out of the car meat had. Sort out your rights later. If you are on the level, what is your worry anyway?

      • PudbertSavannahGA October 13, 2014, 7:51 am

        YOU need to move to China where you are a SUBJECT of the government,,,,
        *I* have a LEGAL Concealed Weapon Permit here in GA, which is fully recognized in IN,,, and I am under NO obligation to get out of a car if I am not breaking the law,, where I have my LEGAL Gun on me or not ! !

        Get a clue already

        • Larry October 19, 2014, 1:24 pm

          And I am retired law enforcement & have carried for my entire adult life & am right now. Do what you say & see where that gets you. Why not just comply? What is so damn difficult about that?

          • itlbob December 16, 2014, 1:44 am

            Here is the long and short of the situation. You are right, the man was being difficult. I would give the officer my ID b/c I don’t want to deal with the hassle. Essentially I would be choosing to forfeit my rights for convenience.This man is choosing not to forfeit his rights. No, handing over your ID is not difficult, but he isn’t required to do it. Yes it was confrontational and made the officer’s job more difficult. But being confrontational and not making a cops job easier isn’t illegal. He can resent it. He can be pissed off about it, He can rack his brain for every possible minor infraction the guy might be guilty of and write him a ticket for them all. What he can’t do is shatter the glass window by his head, tase, beat and pepper spray him.These officers seem to be operating under the delusion that their power is absolute.The guy didn’t legally have to show his id, period.There is no gray area there, it is what it is. And the cops don’t get to retaliate by beating the holy hell out of someone just b/c they are pissing them off. The law doesn’t require him to produce id otherwise you would have charged him with failure to id,right? Think about it. He didn’t need to be charged but he definitely needed to have the shit beaten out of him for it? What kind of backward jackass mentality is that? This isn’t just my opinion people. It is right here in black and white. When it is all said and done they beat the shit out of this guy for something they didn’t feel the need to even charge him with!I would like to actively encourage anyone reading this to find a logical explanation for that simple yet vitally relevant fact. Go ahead and convince me. Educate me.You couldn’t bully the id out of the guy,sorry guys, tough luck, move on.The law wasn’t on your side on this one. Get over your giant ego and self important attitude and just let the innocent man go on with his day. I mean, “what is so damned difficult about that”?

      • Mark Are October 13, 2014, 8:25 am

        How does? What if? Maybe they? Maybe we should arrest everyone with a penis because they MIGHT rape someone. Whatever happened to INNOCENT until proven guilty? Whatever happened to PROBABLE CAUSE. Being black isn’t probable cause. I agree with the other response to your drivel…Move to China where you can be a good “citizen”…errr SLAVE.

      • goldstar1963 October 13, 2014, 9:22 am

        Just because an asshole has a badge and gun doesn’t give him the right to play god. The officer was in fear of his life?! There were three of them there! Isn’t that enough firepower? No, we’ve lost our rights for the pursuit of happiness along time ago. I’m surprised the passenger wasn’t taken out of the car in a hail of bullets! Cops….Nazi… is there any difference between the two anymore? Oh, look Franz, he doesn’t have the proper papers….call the SS, they vill sort this vun out! Just the fact that you see nothing wrong with the cops dragging the passenger out because the cops demanded him to exit the car, tells me that the people don’t know that according to the constitution, we have the right to refuse to comply with demands made of us when we are safe in our homes and vehicles. That’s why they don’t teach the constitution in schools anymore! Live in fear is the government motto!

      • Juneko Marrano October 13, 2014, 9:56 am

        So what you’re saying is, all citizens – even you have no recourse whatsoever, when a cop tells you to do anything? We’re just fodder and ATM’s for their little whims? Really? Wow, our Republic is NOT a police state yet. But with good little minions like you, we’re getting there.

      • Bill McGraw October 13, 2014, 11:20 am

        I would get out of my car without any question.
        Earlier there was a question about shooting a burglar with or without a deadly weapon. The best policy is to convince the bad guy to leave and then call police with a description. Killing a bad guy legally may make you have to leave town if his family continually harasses, threatens you and files a lawsuit. That has happened here with just testifying about a robbery. Most cops and judges get the same treatment and they have to live with threats but maybe we can’t tolerate the same.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 2:33 pm


      • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 3:17 pm

        No,, PAUL, You’re NOT for real! Besides the fact that the cop’s idea of ‘Reasonableness’ in terms of ‘fear’ for their lives resembles the idea of a Camp Guard being afraid of a naked old women he was leading to a gas chamber, they wouldn’t have to BE afraid if they didn’t violate these victim’s Constitutional rights in the first place!

        I do my duty by teaching classes to rookie cops the subject of which i casually refer to as ‘Idiot police work prevention’ studies. But I don’t know if it’s already so out of control that it’s too late to change the long standing status quo of the mythical notion that police orders are not to be ‘disobeyed’ under any circumstance, Even if they are obviously unconstitutional.

        And even in a case where as a cop you think you can get away with it, in this case where there was only ‘passive resistance’ and relatively non confrontational reciprocation to the officers’ obvious excessive force stance, And considering that in the current social climate where it’s well known that cops are steadily going out of control by tasering 85 year old grandma’s for refusing to cooperate in non criminal traffic stops, like this one. that it is a perfectly reasonable to have terrible ‘fear’ of the cops as they came on so heavily by the driver and passenger to be afraid for their lives!

        But no way, a ‘fear for their lives’ excuse for the cops under these clear and obvious condidtions. If they insisted upon being Civil Rights violating gestapo morons and further harassing them for a non criminal mnor traffic violation, no less, they could have simply ‘contained’ the vehicle at location and ‘negotiated’ until the people agreed to get out or until a superior of some civil sanity and knowledge of 4th Amendment rights arrived and took control of the scene, and either issued them a ticket–or gave them a pass–and let them go. NOT violently attacking and smashing into their car. What if a piece of shattering glass struck one of the kids in the eye. and blinded them for life?! Would you think that’s okay Paul boy?

        Maybe you would like me and my partner to come over to your house because as we drove by we ‘sniffed’ pot coming from your basement window, got out to investigate, and had ‘reasonable suspicion’ of our own subjective delusion like these nazi cops here had that you and others were having a drug party and when we looked through your window, we could see what ‘looked’ like people hiding or trying to grab things in the living room, and being in ‘fear of our lives’, we kicked in the front door and did a number on You!

        Would you like that, Hitler Boy? Maybe i’d pepper spray you even though you were just sitting there then in your own ‘fear’ of us and not really doing anything but i ‘believed’ you had a weapon even though i never saw one, And thats all i need to violate your rights, according to you?

        “If you’re on the level, what is your worry anyway?” You wouldn’t mind that according to what you just said, would you? You, dude, and your weak stupid lamb to the slaughter mentality are part of the problem of the growing tyranny in this country. And eventually you’ll get what you deserve, and deserve what you get if you don’t get your head screwed on properly real soon.

        If I’m on the lawsuit jury I’ll vote these SS storm troopers guilty on all accusations and award enough millions of dollars to each of the victims to break that two bit police department’s back.

        Police are there to obey YOUR orders to serve and protect you, not to violate your Civil Rights with their ‘police orders’. Police like these give the rest of us a bad name.

      • Mac October 14, 2014, 12:54 am

        In that case, no police officer can ever know that anyone he meets, under any circumstances, isn’t armed or dangerous. So I assume this means that he may order every citizen he happens upon to show is hands, get down on his knees, lean against the wall and spread them … just so he can assure himself this citizen isn’t dangerous. Right?

        I think the thing you’re missing here is called “probable cause”. Arrests are made based on probable cause. Lacking probable cause to believe the occupants of the vehicle were a clear and present danger, the police went too far.

        And, just so you know, I was a cop for 21 years.

        • Russ October 14, 2014, 2:32 pm

          You were a good cop, but that one wasn’t.
          And the dumbass in the car shouldn’t have tested him to find out.

    • MARK October 13, 2014, 1:57 pm

      first of all a drivers license is issued by the state. it give you permission to drive on paved roads that were constructed by tax payer money which obviously an idiot questioning a police officer’s reason to stop a motorist. There is also a law that says you can be locked up for lying to a cop or refusing to comply with a lawful order to identify yourself for the cops safety as well as citizens around the incident. After 911 the country passed a law called the “PATRIOT ACT” which gives law enforcement kinda the right to legally check anyone who looks suspicious. And, in 30yrs being a Chicago cop. any idiot who is stupid enough not to comply has something to hide and should be investigated further. Years ago when we worked the inner city and ran into a goof like yourself who refused to exit the vehicle. We would simply grab him by the neck and pull him through the window at which time he was handcuffed and placed under arrest for disorderly conduct and failure to comply to a lawful police order. The great thing about today is the liberal trouble makers concerned more about criminals rights than their victims have cause most police to become complacent, especially when it comes to the ghetto. Now, its like watching a contest to see if the murder rate in Chicago will top 1000 in a year. Well, when they kill 20 of their own slobs in one weekend. That’s a pretty good indication the record will be broke. Its Gods way of purging society of the garbage. personally, I would round up every gang banging slob in the city. Put them all into Soldier Field and give them all a gun and as much ammunition they want. Then lock all the doors and save the city and society millions they wont cost the good taxpayers in committing future crimes!
      We will save a spot for all the bleeding hearts like yourself and you could either sit in a skybox and watch or participate? that’s your call!!!!

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 5:02 pm

        Hey Mark, i remember those days well. Started on the West side, specifically the 11th district Filmore area, then citywide SOG, then 15 Tac, and so on. Knew the black ‘ghetto’ better than my own hood around Harlem and the Kennedy. You must have had a lot of brutality ‘beefs’ before they put you somewhere ‘safe’, lol! wow, 30 years? We had to cross paths at one time or another. I had a partner like you once who was a good dude but also had the police god complex like you had. I never let him ‘handle’ difficult people in traffic stops. I took over and usually could ‘reason’ with them without excessive force. Otherwise he’d always tie us up in totally unnecessary paper when we had better things to do. I tried to teach him the reality of life and human interaction. After learning his past, it didn’t take a psychiatrist to see why he abused his ‘authority’ for his own ego. I learned the hard way about power and authority with three purple hearts to show me how to treat people after 3 tours as an 18 B in another very dangerous ‘green’ ghetto and i tried to help him but i didn’t get his on the job ‘therapy’ done in time to where one night when i was off he was put with another psycho case cop, they stopped one of the ‘pimp rides’ you remember which almost always was a guarantee of drugs or or whores or something.

        It was a hot summer night and when the black pimp looking driver refused to immediately get out of the car as ‘ordered’ even though he immediately handed over his license and didn’t say much, they suddenly grabbed him by the neck and literally dragged him out through the window body slamming him on the street causing his chrome .45 to fall out of his waistband.

        My partner then made the bad mistake of beating him with a sap even though he wasn’t resisting and was on the ground posing no threat and pleading for them to stop. They cuffed him and beat him more, cracking ribs and seriously injuring a knee joint.

        So while it’s true what you say about ‘extracting’ unwilling participants from locked cars to an unfortunately large extent back in the day, that didn’t make it legal. And it didn’t make it right under any distorted caricature of police authority on the street. Today it is quite different with the Free American citizens now knowing their rights and the extent to which police can harass or detain them. Times have changed and police simply can’t do what they used to. And why would they want’ to be so stupid as we used to be and risk everything worked for just to pump your power fetish. These days you’re lucky to not go to jail but you’ll certainly be sued out of existence by shark lawyers always swimming in these waters.

        Who would be so absurdly stupid to smash a window and force someone out of their car for nothing apparent and clearly articulated in terms of probable cause after a stupid traffic stop?

        So as you know, Mark, you couldn’t process a bleeding/wounded subject in the station lock-up without first taking them to the ER and getting them patched up. Aafter the ‘prisoner’ was being sutured and cuffed to the gurnee my partner and his replacement ‘partner in crime’ were laughing with the nurses at the control desk drinking coffee when the field Lt. came in to have a look at the subject and then came out to the promptly relieve the two officers of their tour immediately sending them to the Captain’s office back at the station.

        The skinny black ghetto pimp happened to be a deep undercover narcotics Lt. working on a serious case.

        Surprisingly, the undercover LT. didn’t press charges on my partner or his cohort! They were still suspended for a couple days without pay for the minimum obligatory wrist slap for ‘aggravated stupidity’ and left with a warning by the district commander.

        Having had some undercover experience myself at that point i told my now ‘ex-partner’ that they were lucky that wasn’t me when i was working undercover. I carried an ankle holster that i could have reached when they were beating me and i would have shot them in self defense and ‘fear for my safety’. I told him you better learn to treat people as you want to be treated so you can avoid this stuff.

        As it turned out some weeks later my partner and this other Nazi nutjob started regularly working together and one day after work on the 4-12 watch they hit their usual post shift watering hole and had a few drinks. Afterwards when approaching their cars in the lot two carloads of about seven men both blacks and whites in plain clothes pulled up, identified themselves as police, and demanded they get up against the wall. They didn’t obey quickly enough–maybe because they had a few drinks–and my partner reached for his wallet to identify himself as a cop but it was too late.

        The plain clothes cops knocked them down and beat them with saps until they begged for mercy. Concentrating the main force in the testicle area of my ex partner and his buddy.

        When they stopped moving and became unconscious, the one skinny pimpy looking plainclothes officer who was the teams boss sitting in the car watching the situation calmly called in two men drunk and down in a parking lot on his radio and to send an ambulance, and then they all left. Nothing further ever came of it.

        My ex partner and his twin eventually left the ‘job’ not too long after they recovered.

        So I don’t know, Mark, I never had to beat people just for Not obeying my ‘police orders’. The only time i ever had to break windows and drag people out was from an accident when the car was on fire to save them. And my record was not too shabby in terms of taking out the real slimeballs who are a serious menace to all of us.

        But it hurts me when cops stoop to the criminal level to supposedly ‘do the job’. Then you’re right. We might as well just round up Everybody, including the idiot power trip Civil Rights violating cops, and throw them in Soldier Field all together.

        But we all know that would never really solve the problem.

      • A_Free_Man October 18, 2014, 12:28 pm

        You ARE the reason citizens fear cops. Your attitude of “just pull them through the window and arrest them”is sickening to anyone who values freedom.

        Fuck you and your better than thou attitude.

    • Greg October 13, 2014, 2:03 pm

      Many states have passenger identification laws that require upon request of a law enforcement officer the passenger of a motor vehicle being operated within the state, provide reasonable identification. In some states this is as simple as providing verbal name, address and date of birth which is usually enough to verify identity, and check for a warrant. Sometimes anything with some of that information to confirm the information is enough. It varies from state to state, the simple solution is to listen to what officers are trying to tell you if you are stopped. If you are told you are required to provide identification, you can bet there is a law supporting that requirement. If you are told to provide the identification or be arrested you should assume that this is going to happen. What ever happened to common human courtesy? I have never dealt with an officer who was not polite if I was first polite with him! Those thinking they have no legal requirement to provide information and to get out of the car once informed you are under arrest because you did not provide the identification need to have zero deductible glass coverage and an attorney on retainer, you ARE going to jail, I hope after you step out of the now open door instead of getting pulled through the broken out window! I totally agree with Paul, “I have rights” does not give you the right to be stupid on the roadside with an officer who knows your rights and has sworn to protect them, Listen to him, if he was wrong you can take remedy later.

      • Mahatma Muhjesbude October 13, 2014, 5:55 pm

        I think you’re completely wrong on that. Otherwise name the state and the statute. If you are driving the only identification requirement is the documentation of your driver’s license, and some places, your insurance card requirements and vehicle registration. . If you can’t produce either, you get a non criminal citation. that’s it. No mandatory search or seizure of your property or person.

        If you are a passenger and questioned by the officer for some arbitrary reason, not related to any immediate commission of any crime you have a right not to answer and even ignore the cop. Otherwise any forceful reciprocity by the cop would be a violation of your constitutional right to remain silent and your Constitutional protection against unreasonable and unwarranted search, seizure, or arrest while being questioned by ANY Authority and the cop would be prosecuted and convicted for that. The stupidity of the American masses never fails to astonish me.

        And i’m sorry about your ‘stupidity’, Greg, but being ‘stupid’ is still protected by the Constitution and is NOT breaking the law. When that ‘stupidity’ makes the transition to a crime, then we at least know the ‘motivation’. In this case these people were genuinely in fear and did the right thing. And could you blame them after seeing the actual behavior of the police, then?

        And for your further enlightenment and edification, It is NOT required by any law for you to get out of the car for nothing but a minor traffic violation. In fact, the department polices of many departments actually discourages it, especially on interstate patrols, for obvious reasons. Litigation sharks otherwise ask the officer the obvious question of the officer who ‘ordered’ the driver out into traffic after she appropriately produced her driver’s license upon request through the opening of her window, as to Why it was necessary to search the driver’s car when there was no practical articulated probably cause? Which placed her in the dangerous situation of getting hit by traffic, which she was , and now requires millions in damages for her injuries which you, the officer, negligently and unnecessarily caused?!

        Duh, uh, um ah, well, i uh, smelled pot or i thought there was a strange object that looked like a weapon in her car. But besides, isn’t just giving her a direct ‘police order’ good enough?

        In fact, If a cop stops you for a minor traffic violation and has no probable cause to search your vehicle and you tell him you Don’t have a license on you, all she/he should do is run the plate and Vin, and if its that all you are doing wrong, they can only issue you a citation for failure to produce or carry your driver’s license. And then you should be allowed to drive away.

        Of course we know that this almost never happens, and anything they can use to ‘theoretically’ justify a search especially for drugs.because of the corrupt little state laws of something known as ‘civil forfeiture’. Everybody should check this out if they want a cold look at tyranny.

        Also, because it is not that rare anymore and more than too many people, especially women, have been attacked and ravaged by psycho’s POSING as cops and pulling them over, departments now answer the ‘fear’ of being pulled over by a cop who is really Not a cop, especially by unmarked cars with flashing lights as so many highway patrol cars now use, including the Dodge Challengers in my area, complete with very dark windows, by telling women who fear this to simply call 911 while you are driving giving them a location asking for a back up marked car, or simply drive into a police station if you are in a city and know where it is.

        Here’s the bottom line end all discussion, people. A cop cannot ‘legally’ order a person not doing any criminal activity out of their vehicle for a search unless their is serious probable cause and an arrest is imminent, or reasonable professional suspicion that must be Well articulated on paper. If they are about to be arrested, then to affect that arrest it becomes necessary to break into the car and pull them out, then that could be ultimately justifiable.

        Not for any other reason. These cops later on tried to cover their asses on this by writing specious charges because they knew they crossed the line; These are the kinds of cops that would shoot through the window if the kid pointed a toy gun at them.

        The problem got worse over the years because people became overly compliant and cops naturally filled the void with overly intrusive behavior.

    • What i know October 14, 2014, 1:26 pm








      Yes you are required to give your ID when asked!

      Lawful order of an officer!

      Its has become almost standard for all parties in the car be ID for officer safety!

      As far as being asked to get out of vehicle that is for the officer safety again!

      There is many people setting the passenger seat in vehicle with big felony warrant’s that refuse corporate anyway with the officer!

    • Cultural Marxism Kills October 15, 2014, 5:44 pm

      Who shall the police make out that citation to? The law says that the police have the duty to haul you in front of a magistrate immediately. Suppose Jones gives a false name or happens to give your name and address to avoid supplying his. Regardless of what you believe he was incorporative for a reason and that is probable suspicion requiring a Terry stop and to be brought in for purposes of establishing identity to receive the seat belt citation. Then he is also subject to several new misdemeanors failure to assist and resisting. As it turns out another police department recognized him and it so happens they reissued a warrant for drug dealing and failure to appear. He is a “Great Father Figure” but those aren’t his kids. Their last name is Ivy, his is Jones and hers is Mahone. It turns out that Ms. Mahone pleaded guilty to having 485 grams of cocaine in US District Court in Hammond in Case No 2:11-CR-114. According to Court documents, her sentence included 3 years of supervised release after a 16 month prison term. Court records show that Mahone was released from prison on November 28, 2012 which would mean she will remain on supervised release until November 2015.”

      • ENIGMA6 January 18, 2017, 9:02 am

        Bingo! That’s exactly why police ask for ID. My experience was someone without ID had a reason to not have it.

    • Michael May 18, 2015, 10:56 am

      And people wonder why the police are feared and hated!
      They had no reason to ask him for id much less ask him to step out as he was not the driver!
      All they were attempting was to “teach him a lesson” in obedience!
      Do as we say or we will kick your ass!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend