White cops harass and pepper spray Black Army Lieutenant in Windsor, VA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bullshit. The police only have the authority to act reasonably in proportion to the reasonable suspicion they used to justify the traffic stop. Without probable cause of a crime, they don’t have authority to order you out of your car or to search your car or to pepper spray you for asking why they stopped you or to threaten to shoot you for questioning their instructions.

Police don't need PC to order you out of your car. You have no idea what you are talking about.

You think you know what you are talking about. See comment above.

y'all are throwing around legal terms that have specific legal meanings without understanding. Probable Cause is not needed to pull you over. That is what is needed to arrest you. Reasonable suspicion of a violation of law is all that is needed to pull you over. Reasonable suspicion means something you can point to. That is all. "I thought he had no tag based on what I could see at night." That is enough to pull this guy over. The stop was legal. In fact there is no plate. It was affixed inside in the window. But once the stop is made, they get to investigate it. Even is they see the paper tag, they get to look at it, run it and see if it is legal. Once you are pulled over, the police can require you to leave you car if they have a reason to be concerned about their safety. Again, they just need something to point to. Here, the combo of the no plate, not stopping right away, and some hesitation on the part of the driver would justify removing him from the car. The place where this all goes off the rail and becomes improper and illegal is the use of the chemical agent. That cannot be justified no way, no how. Then they rough him up. Then they try to coerce him to give up his First Amendment rights in exchange for letting him go.

Different poster here. Unless the police had received a call about a stolen vehicle from a local car dealership, why did they assume that a new-looking car driven by a black man was possibly stolen? And as soon as they saw the paper tags, why didn't they just let him go? Why engage further, especially when it is now pretty widely known that many minority drivers do not feel safe when stopped by police? How does this overzealous policing help the public?

How many vehicles do you think are stolen in a day? It’s well over 25 in Richmond. How many for the whole state? It’s a massive problem. Sometimes thieves break into a dealership after dark and steal multiple cars with no plates because new car keys are left on a rack but temporary license plates are stored in a safe. How do you tell the race of a vehicle driver after dark? You seem racist if you can tell. The stop was valid but almost everything after the stop was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

Calling for backup is standard procedure when a vehicle fails to yield for a long period of time. This is a red flag and sometimes escalates into a pursuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

Calling for backup is standard procedure when a vehicle fails to yield for a long period of time. This is a red flag and sometimes escalates into a pursuit.

The problem is the "sometimes." Who gets the benefit of the doubt and who doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

Calling for backup is standard procedure when a vehicle fails to yield for a long period of time. This is a red flag and sometimes escalates into a pursuit.

It wasn’t a “long period of time,” it was less than two miles and there’s no shoulder on that road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

This is wrong. Once the tag is visible he still needs to check it out. It is inside, where it should be, in a highly tinted window. Who knows what it says. No impact on the stop at that point. Always better to have more cops. Makes it safer for everyone. I wish a sgt. could go to every stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was coming on here to say that since these pretextual stops profiling black drivers seem to be a permanent facet of policing, laws need to be changed to discourage traffic stops for minor offenses. That may prevent some civil rights abuses or unnecessary deaths of drivers.

I did a little digging and, amazingly, such a law actually did pass in the state of Virginia where I live. I had not heard about that law until now. Basically, as of the beginning of March 2021, the police cannot stop drivers for such minor offenses as a loud exhaust, tinted windows, or things dangling from your mirror.

Here is a summary:

"no law-enforcement officer may lawfully stop a motor vehicle for operating (i) without a light illuminating a license plate, (ii) with defective and unsafe equipment, (iii) without brake lights or a high mount stop light, (iv) without an exhaust system that prevents excessive or unusual levels of noise, (v) with certain sun-shading materials and tinting films, and (vi) with certain objects suspended in the vehicle.

No evidence discovered or obtained as a result of such unlawful stop shall be admissible in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding. The bill also provides that no law-enforcement officer may lawfully stop, search, or seize any person, place, or thing solely on the basis of the odor of marijuana, and no evidence discovered or obtained as a result of such unlawful search or seizure shall be admissible in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding.

https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?202+sum+SB5029

Apparently Northam passed a number of other policing reform laws in the wake of the G. Floyd incident and other similar incidents, including a ban against no-knock warrants:

https://www.governor.virginia.gov/newsroom/all-releases/2020/october/headline-861097-en.html

Wouldn't apply to this stop because stop was for no license plate and tinting.

Actually, tinting is included (see V) but, you're right, the tag/plate issue is not. But I wasn't saying it was or that it would have made a difference in this situation. I was saying that we need to change the laws surrounding traffic stops...and apparently VA, for one, has.

Unfortunately the police can always make up a reason. See this case where they stopped him for not having a license when he in fact had a license plate.

This was a bad stop so I am not trying to justify it. But he did not have the tag where it was supposed to be. Car dealers have special paper that these are printed on and they are made to go right where the plate it and be exposed to the elements. They are not on copy paper. Nothing wrong with pulling him over. It is what happened next that is the problem.

That’s BS. I had my temp tag on the window. That’s where the dealer put it. I never got pulled over. I see them on windows all the time. Maybe it’s not correct but it’s incredibly common. The difference is I’m a middle aged white guy who the cops would never think stole a car.

Maybe the temp tag wasn't visible to the officer at night. Didn't he also have tinted windows? Yeah, cops are always picking on black guys and always let the white people do whatever they want :roll:

Eyeroll all you want but what happened after they stopped the driver was clearly not the way they would treat just any citizen. Do you really think that cops would say to white drivers "You're fixin' to ride the lightning, son" and "You should be!" when the driver said he was afraid to get out of the car? Do you think they would respond to non-minority citizens by pepper spraying them repeatedly and then knocking them to the ground?

Or do you think they would "threaten Lt. Nazario's job and his commission in the United States Army if he spoke out knowing the harm criminal charges would cause him" of the Lt. had been white? I mean, if what they were doing was so standard and normal, why would they need to extort the Lt. to begin with? They knew they were doing something wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

This is wrong. Once the tag is visible he still needs to check it out. It is inside, where it should be, in a highly tinted window. Who knows what it says. No impact on the stop at that point. Always better to have more cops. Makes it safer for everyone. I wish a sgt. could go to every stop.

The window wasn’t excessively tinted. It is clear enough in the video. All of that is bullshit to justify pulling over him over. After he pulled over they could check on the validity of the paper tag without guns in his face or pepper spray or making him get out of the car. There was no cause to treat the driver as a dangerous criminal except the cops were racists who assume any black guy driving through their dipshit town is a criminal and a deadly threat. They don’t treat white drivers like that. The problem with calling for backup is that the old asshole showed up ready to shoot the driver and kept trying to make it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

This is wrong. Once the tag is visible he still needs to check it out. It is inside, where it should be, in a highly tinted window. Who knows what it says. No impact on the stop at that point. Always better to have more cops. Makes it safer for everyone. I wish a sgt. could go to every stop.

The window wasn’t excessively tinted. It is clear enough in the video. All of that is bullshit to justify pulling over him over. After he pulled over they could check on the validity of the paper tag without guns in his face or pepper spray or making him get out of the car. There was no cause to treat the driver as a dangerous criminal except the cops were racists who assume any black guy driving through their dipshit town is a criminal and a deadly threat. They don’t treat white drivers like that. The problem with calling for backup is that the old asshole showed up ready to shoot the driver and kept trying to make it happen.

You are like a broken record, accusing everyone of racism without any proof. How do you even know the officer could see the driver when he was driving down the road at night?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once he stopped at the gas station the tag was visible and there was no reasonable suspicion for the insane reaction of the cops. The young cop started the fiasco by calling for backup because the driver didn’t immediately pull over.

This is wrong. Once the tag is visible he still needs to check it out. It is inside, where it should be, in a highly tinted window. Who knows what it says. No impact on the stop at that point. Always better to have more cops. Makes it safer for everyone. I wish a sgt. could go to every stop.

The window wasn’t excessively tinted. It is clear enough in the video. All of that is bullshit to justify pulling over him over. After he pulled over they could check on the validity of the paper tag without guns in his face or pepper spray or making him get out of the car. There was no cause to treat the driver as a dangerous criminal except the cops were racists who assume any black guy driving through their dipshit town is a criminal and a deadly threat. They don’t treat white drivers like that. The problem with calling for backup is that the old asshole showed up ready to shoot the driver and kept trying to make it happen.

You are like a broken record, accusing everyone of racism without any proof. How do you even know the officer could see the driver when he was driving down the road at night?

Can you tell? I can't. Unless PP is making a judgement about the brand and style of the car, he can't either. Then he's the bigot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was coming on here to say that since these pretextual stops profiling black drivers seem to be a permanent facet of policing, laws need to be changed to discourage traffic stops for minor offenses. That may prevent some civil rights abuses or unnecessary deaths of drivers.

I did a little digging and, amazingly, such a law actually did pass in the state of Virginia where I live. I had not heard about that law until now. Basically, as of the beginning of March 2021, the police cannot stop drivers for such minor offenses as a loud exhaust, tinted windows, or things dangling from your mirror.

Here is a summary:

"no law-enforcement officer may lawfully stop a motor vehicle for operating (i) without a light illuminating a license plate, (ii) with defective and unsafe equipment, (iii) without brake lights or a high mount stop light, (iv) without an exhaust system that prevents excessive or unusual levels of noise, (v) with certain sun-shading materials and tinting films, and (vi) with certain objects suspended in the vehicle.

No evidence discovered or obtained as a result of such unlawful stop shall be admissible in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding. The bill also provides that no law-enforcement officer may lawfully stop, search, or seize any person, place, or thing solely on the basis of the odor of marijuana, and no evidence discovered or obtained as a result of such unlawful search or seizure shall be admissible in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding.

https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?202+sum+SB5029

Apparently Northam passed a number of other policing reform laws in the wake of the G. Floyd incident and other similar incidents, including a ban against no-knock warrants:

https://www.governor.virginia.gov/newsroom/all-releases/2020/october/headline-861097-en.html

Wouldn't apply to this stop because stop was for no license plate and tinting.

Actually, tinting is included (see V) but, you're right, the tag/plate issue is not. But I wasn't saying it was or that it would have made a difference in this situation. I was saying that we need to change the laws surrounding traffic stops...and apparently VA, for one, has.

Unfortunately the police can always make up a reason. See this case where they stopped him for not having a license when he in fact had a license plate.

This was a bad stop so I am not trying to justify it. But he did not have the tag where it was supposed to be. Car dealers have special paper that these are printed on and they are made to go right where the plate it and be exposed to the elements. They are not on copy paper. Nothing wrong with pulling him over. It is what happened next that is the problem.

That’s BS. I had my temp tag on the window. That’s where the dealer put it. I never got pulled over. I see them on windows all the time. Maybe it’s not correct but it’s incredibly common. The difference is I’m a middle aged white guy who the cops would never think stole a car.

Maybe the temp tag wasn't visible to the officer at night. Didn't he also have tinted windows? Yeah, cops are always picking on black guys and always let the white people do whatever they want

Um, yeah they are. Without the eye roll.

[Anonymous]

Are cops supposed to pepper spray everyone they pull over for tag/window/traffic violations? Did the cop who pepper sprayed the Army LT have any history of using the same approach on white people he has pulled over? I don't think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are cops supposed to pepper spray everyone they pull over for tag/window/traffic violations? Did the cop who pepper sprayed the Army LT have any history of using the same approach on white people he has pulled over? I don't think so.

But we don’t know, do we?

I have been pulled over myself. And what I have not done is be argumentative. Nor have I had the mental wherewithal to video the interaction. I feel too intimidated. I am not excusing the cop’s actions - I am trying to understand the escalation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are cops supposed to pepper spray everyone they pull over for tag/window/traffic violations? Did the cop who pepper sprayed the Army LT have any history of using the same approach on white people he has pulled over? I don't think so.

But we don’t know, do we?

I have been pulled over myself. And what I have not done is be argumentative. Nor have I had the mental wherewithal to video the interaction. I feel too intimidated. I am not excusing the cop’s actions - I am trying to understand the escalation.

Exactly. If a white person took 2 minutes to pull over and didn't comply for this long (notwithstanding the legitimacy of this guy's reasons for doing so), I'm pretty sure the cops would get rough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are cops supposed to pepper spray everyone they pull over for tag/window/traffic violations? Did the cop who pepper sprayed the Army LT have any history of using the same approach on white people he has pulled over? I don't think so.

But we don’t know, do we?

I have been pulled over myself. And what I have not done is be argumentative. Nor have I had the mental wherewithal to video the interaction. I feel too intimidated. I am not excusing the cop’s actions - I am trying to understand the escalation.

Exactly. If a white person took 2 minutes to pull over and didn't comply for this long (notwithstanding the legitimacy of this guy's reasons for doing so), I'm pretty sure the cops would get rough.

+1
I don't know their dept policy on the use of pepper spray, but they were in a weird situation. Obviously guns weren't giving them the desired result and he refused to obey MANY verbal commands to exit the vehicle. Basically, he was passively resisting the officers. So the other option would be to go hands on with someone who is a decent sized guy and unlikely to comply. As a police officer carrying a gun, you always want to avoid wrestling with people because it's not that hard for someone to take your gun. The cops also looked bad because it shouldn't have been a felony stop and the one cop was kind of unhinged. But people are worked up about this video because they are pushing their little agenda. Nobody would care about this video if the cop was black and suspect was white.