Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: Alert! Houston PD unlawfully arrests OCer and attempts to erase evidence from phone

  1. #1
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318

    Alert! Houston PD unlawfully arrests OCer and attempts to erase evidence from phone

    Thankfully, this thug was too stupid to figure out how to work the phone.

    1. Sign up with some sort of legal protection program if you intend to defend yourself if needed, OR, as in this case, if you intend on engaging in political activism.
    2. ALWAYS RECORD, USING AN APP THAT STREAMS AND SAVES OFFSITE. Set your phone to lock and require pin every time you turn the screen off, and verify that whatever app you use continues recording while the screen is off. Additionally, phones withOUT removable batteries are advantageous.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S74z...ature=youtu.be
    Advocate freedom please

  2. #2
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,271
    Ka Ching!
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    47
    Wow, just wow.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    "WHURS YER I-DEE?"

    "I don't have it with me, but I can tell you who I am."

    "YUR UNNER ARREST FOR FAILURE TO I-DEE!"

    What a moron.

  5. #5
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Does Texas have a law requiring all subjects to carry state issued papers??

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Does Texas have a law requiring all subjects to carry state issued papers??
    The Failure to ID is Penal Code 38.02. Many cops have trouble understanding it. I have a lot of experience enforcing this.

    If you are not legally detained you are not committing an offense if you either refuse to identify or lie about your identity (i.e. name, date of birth or address)

    If you are legally detained you are committing a class B misdemeanor (or if you have a warrant a class A) if you lie about your name, DOB or address. Even if you are legally detained refusing to identify yourself is not an offense.

    After you were arrested if you refuse to identify yourself that is a crime, but only a class C misdemeanor (i.e. a ticket)

    The bottom line is if you are legally detained don't lie about who you are. If you want to remain silent that is O.K.

    The first question you want to ask in a police counter is if you are being detained or you are free to go. Cops are allowed and do start consensual encounters.... i.e. chatting with you and if you go along without objections that is acceptable.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    What Count ^^ said.

    But save yourself some time and skip the "Am I being detained?" mumbo-jumbo. Skip right to "Am I free to leave?"

    If you are not free to leave the cop will get around to letting you know what your status is - temporarily detained (as in being suspected of committing a crime and they are actively trying to gather PC) or arrested (as in they now have PC). It used to be you could tell the difference by whether or not you were given a set of matching steel bracelets by the cop (and often on the very first date!), but that seems to have changed to "everybody gets some".

    SCOTUS has pretty much clarified that if you are not free to leave you are arrested, regardless of what the cop wants to call it. They also have said, repeatedly, that the cops do not have to "read you your rights" until and unless they start interrogating you about the crime. Asking who you are and where you live is not evidentiary interrogation.

    If the cops decide they want to know who they have just arrested and you decline to provide that information voluntarily they will most likely take you to the lockup, collect your fingerprints, and make you wait until the FBI gets back to them about if your prints are on file, why they are on file, whether or not there are any known outstanding wants/warrants, and they get around to reading that response from the FBI. It has been known that some departments claim to have only one person authorized to read the responses from the FBI (and in some places only one person authorized to send inquiries to the FBI), and it just might could be that the authorized person is not on duty at the moment. You can hire a lawyer and discuss that in court, but that's not going to happen until after you are released.

    Check your state law carefully to find out just what "identifying" means. Where I'm from it means stating name and place of residence (not address - name of the city/county is sufficient).

    Off hand I can't think of any state that requires "official papers" - if that were so we would not have the Voter ID discussions, would we?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    If the guy would have touched his AR they would have shot him, and got away with it.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    OK, lets try this again.

    The offending cop should be charged with Kidnapping and conspiracy to destroy evidence. He should NEVER be given any form of "authority" over another human being again in his life.

    Yes davidmcbeth, he would have been Murdered and the crime would have been found "justified" with in the SYSTEM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,004
    Just another bad apple(s)

    Almost all of our federal overlords are insulated from the evil "laws" they make by virtue of their tremendous wealth and power. State pols, not so much. When they and their kids start getting harassed by *** *****, maybe things will change? I'm starting to see more middle class TV heads express hatred of the "heroes" in blue.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 12-08-2014 at 04:53 AM. Reason: Take the high road, please
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  11. #11
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    A little news coverage on this.
    http://www.khou.com/story/news/local...tion/20126669/

    Legal analyst is funny.
    Advocate freedom please

  12. #12
    Regular Member HeroHog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Shreveport, LA
    Posts
    653
    I wish he would go back and edit that video for spelling and use of wrong words... makes him look like a goober!
    Speedy: LOCAL League Sec/Treasurer, Information Officer
    AKA: Hero Hog, Dr. Speed, "The Brass Mangler" and "That fat, old, balding, Grey-bearded gimpy guy"

    I don't have NEAR enough ammo on hand. `nuff said.

    NRA Life Member, LSA, USN-DAV

    "Stay safe..." - Paul "Skidmark" Henick, RIP

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    A little news coverage on this.
    http://www.khou.com/story/news/local...tion/20126669/

    Legal analyst is funny.

    Quote from the "legal" analyst.
    "I think what this individual did wrong is not giving some ID"
    Absolutely WRONG sir!

    The media is 100% complicit in keeping "the sheep" in line. And FALSELY reporting the facts via "analysts" is done media wide.

  14. #14
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Fox reporter open carries his shotgun while reporting on this case. Legal analyst describes officer's action as major blunder and unlawful.

    http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/27...-investigation
    Advocate freedom please

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bainbridge Island, Wa
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Count View Post
    The Failure to ID is Penal Code 38.02. Many cops have trouble understanding it. I have a lot of experience enforcing this.

    If you are not legally detained you are not committing an offense if you either refuse to identify or lie about your identity (i.e. name, date of birth or address)

    If you are legally detained you are committing a class B misdemeanor (or if you have a warrant a class A) if you lie about your name, DOB or address. Even if you are legally detained refusing to identify yourself is not an offense.

    After you were arrested if you refuse to identify yourself that is a crime, but only a class C misdemeanor (i.e. a ticket)

    The bottom line is if you are legally detained don't lie about who you are. If you want to remain silent that is O.K.

    The first question you want to ask in a police counter is if you are being detained or you are free to go. Cops are allowed and do start consensual encounters.... i.e. chatting with you and if you go along without objections that is acceptable.
    Good info, but re-educate me for I seem to have a gray area in my mind (one of many!) regarding legal detainment.
    This particular case does not apply, I am assuming, because no legal detainment was applied, since no crime was committed...?

  16. #16
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by FattyKrack View Post
    Good info, but re-educate me for I seem to have a gray area in my mind (one of many!) regarding legal detainment.
    This particular case does not apply, I am assuming, because no legal detainment was applied, since no crime was committed...?
    IMO, not being a lawyer, whether or not a detainment was legal will probably be decided later in a court, if it goes that far, possibly with consideration of facts that you were unaware of at the scene, or that were made up after the fact. I would not bet on a detainment being unlawful to the point that I'd lie about my identity, there's just no need to do that. Even if you are legally detained, though, you don't have to identify yourself, you're just prohibited from falsely identifying yourself. So, basically, if you're detained and not arrested, feel free to decline to give identification, just don't lie and give false identification.

    In this case, it's pretty clear the detainment (and subsequent arrest) was unlawful.

    There are cases, though, theoretically, where you could be lawfully detained even though you've committed no crime. That's why I say, you probably shouldn't bet on whether or not the detention is unlawful just because you know that you haven't committed a crime.
    Advocate freedom please

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Fox reporter open carries his shotgun while reporting on this case. Legal analyst describes officer's action as major blunder and unlawful.

    http://www.myfoxhouston.com/story/27...-investigation
    That was pretty decent (for the most part). Good on the reporter, showing a bit of solidarity.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Thankfully, this thug was too stupid to figure out how to work the phone.

    1. Sign up with some sort of legal protection program if you intend to defend yourself if needed, OR, as in this case, if you intend on engaging in political activism.
    2. ALWAYS RECORD, USING AN APP THAT STREAMS AND SAVES OFFSITE. Set your phone to lock and require pin every time you turn the screen off, and verify that whatever app you use continues recording while the screen is off. Additionally, phones withOUT removable batteries are advantageous.
    This. I would add that adhering to the buddy system could help as well (two different camera angles which would overlap to show the actions of all those involved, lest someone get "creative" while writing a report.

    Without the recording, it would be the word of an "extremist" () against a "heroic and courageous man with a shiny badge who's sworn to protect and to serve".

    Hopefully the thug is sanctioned, along with the fellow officers who gave tacit consent to his handling of a Lawfully Armed Citizen. Accomplices, the way I see it. Then again, maybe one of them will display some courage and regard for their oath by testifying against the thuggish Opinion Enforcement Officer.

    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    That was pretty decent (for the most part). Good on the reporter, showing a bit of solidarity.
    Cue the feinting horses and stampeding women in 3, 2, 1...
    Last edited by Rusty Young Man; 12-10-2014 at 08:54 PM.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    453
    Quote Originally Posted by FattyKrack View Post
    Good info, but re-educate me for I seem to have a gray area in my mind (one of many!) regarding legal detainment.
    This particular case does not apply, I am assuming, because no legal detainment was applied, since no crime was committed...?

    Excellent question: It seems this cop recognized the guy and knew that he did that before.... This to me points to the fact that he didn't have reasonable suspicion that he just committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime, in fact he knew that the guy with the rifle was just exercising his first and second amendment rights at that corner. In Texas you need reasonable suspicion to temporarily detain.... That is more than just a mere suspicion or a hunch and less than a probable cause (which is the arrest threshold....)
    With that said let me give you this scenario. You are at a street corner with a rifle openly and maybe talking to people or just giving out pamphlets or whatever. Some genius calls cops (mistakenly or maliciously) and states you have a gun and you're about to hold up the convenience store next door. You even have an accomplice and you're planning right now (maybe talking to a guy and giving him a pamphlet). That cop will arrive which a bunch of backup and instead of the hey what's up or show me an I.D. you'll have a bunch of guns in your face. In the cops' mind they are justified in detaining you since the caller called you're about to rob a store and have a rifle and an accomplice..... Suddenly what the cop thinks it is going on is totally different of what you know to be the truth. Moreover the cop has a good faith argument that he had to detain you...... But even like that once he gets the story straight he should abandon the detention. But if he wants to ID you and you lie during that detention...... See where I'm going..... These calls have happened before and you're only hope is that experienced good cops answer that call......

  20. #20
    Regular Member flintknapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Deep East Texas, , USA
    Posts
    30
    All that 'Count' has posted is legally correct and accurate. However, the REAL problem with this incident is not the questionable legal detention/arrest of the subject, but the 'charge' of "failure to I.D." to begin with.

    The Officer demanded physical I.D. (I.E. a drivers license/photo I.D.). As soon as he (the officer) was informed no such physical I.D. was available, he immediately admonished the man and then made the charge of "failure to I.D." even though the man offered to tell officer who he was.

    Texas Law does not require you to carry physical proof of your I.D., ONLY that you provide I.D. (orally or otherwise) when lawfully ordered to do so. IF the officer had taken his name, date of birth, address, etc....he could have 'run it' (which is his job) and quickly determined that the man was NOT "a felon in possession of a gun". Lacking clear evidence or reasonable suspicion otherwise, the officer(s) is/are duty bound to assume no laws have been broken.

    The attempt to erase the recorded altercation speaks volumes...and tells us just about everything we need to know about these cops. I stand behind law enforcement every way that I can, but this was ignorance of the law (at best), abuse of power...at worst.

    Needs to be corrected.
    Spartans ask not.... how many, but where?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,147
    Quote Originally Posted by flintknapper View Post
    All that 'Count' has posted is legally correct and accurate. However, the REAL problem with this incident is not the questionable legal detention/arrest of the subject, but the 'charge' of "failure to I.D." to begin with.

    The Officer demanded physical I.D. (I.E. a drivers license/photo I.D.). As soon as he (the officer) was informed no such physical I.D. was available, he immediately admonished the man and then made the charge of "failure to I.D." even though the man offered to tell officer who he was.

    Texas Law does not require you to carry physical proof of your I.D., ONLY that you provide I.D. (orally or otherwise) when lawfully ordered to do so. IF the officer had taken his name, date of birth, address, etc....he could have 'run it' (which is his job) and quickly determined that the man was NOT "a felon in possession of a gun". Lacking clear evidence or reasonable suspicion otherwise, the officer(s) is/are duty bound to assume no laws have been broken.

    The attempt to erase the recorded altercation speaks volumes...and tells us just about everything we need to know about these cops. I stand behind law enforcement every way that I can, but this was ignorance of the law (at best), abuse of power...at worst.

    Needs to be corrected.
    Bears repeating! OBTW A flint knapper is the quintessential prepper. BZ
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  22. #22
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Count View Post
    ... With that said let me give you this scenario. You are at a street corner ... In the cops' mind they are justified in detaining you since the caller called you're about to rob a store and have a rifle and an accomplice..... Suddenly what the cop thinks it is going on is totally different of what you know to be the truth. Moreover the cop has a good faith argument that he had to detain you...... But even like that once he gets the story straight he should abandon the detention. But if he wants to ID you and you lie during that detention...... See where I'm going..... These calls have happened before and you're only hope is that experienced good cops answer that call......
    What is always missing from these scenarios is the nod towards "Officer Barney Fife, what exactly did you see upon arrival to the alleged..." Giving a pass to what cops see upon arrival as being irrelevant is how cops get sued. Good cops assess a scene based on what they see, right now and then make a decision based on the FACTS evident before them.

    When cops roll up on you while you are OC, start recording, don't say a word, move like molasses in December.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  23. #23
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    This oathbreaker needs to be fired and put in jail. The other officers on scene who participated in his criminal conduct under color of law need to find different careers too.
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  24. #24
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,271
    But But we don't know the whole story...
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  25. #25
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    But But we don't know the whole story...
    lol. If he had succeeded in deleting that video, that's exactly what we'd be hearing. Just another example of the importance of recordings, audio and video if possible.
    Advocate freedom please

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •