Man says he’ll sue Maryland PD for viral arrest, turns out he had two warrants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The refusal to get out of the car and having to be hauled out is resisting. That alone is sufficient reason to be arrested all by itself, irrespective of open warrants or not showing ID.

This is what happens when everyone thinks they’re the reincarnation of Clarence Darrow. Everyone becomes a jailhouse lawyer.

the car was going 5 over. The absence of a warrant would make for a hell of a lawsuit (I'm guessing there are reams of dascam footage where white ladies are not asked to exit vehicles in AAco), but there were warrants and the cops claimed the recognized him, so he really has no recourse

He has recourse since it was illegal search and seizure.

he had outstanding warrants and the cops say they recognized him. That makes it legal for them to arrest and search him.

No it doesn’t read the provided Supreme Court ruling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The refusal to get out of the car and having to be hauled out is resisting. That alone is sufficient reason to be arrested all by itself, irrespective of open warrants or not showing ID.

This is what happens when everyone thinks they’re the reincarnation of Clarence Darrow. Everyone becomes a jailhouse lawyer.

the car was going 5 over. The absence of a warrant would make for a hell of a lawsuit (I'm guessing there are reams of dascam footage where white ladies are not asked to exit vehicles in AAco), but there were warrants and the cops claimed the recognized him, so he really has no recourse

He has recourse since it was illegal search and seizure.

he had outstanding warrants and the cops say they recognized him. That makes it legal for them to arrest and search him.

No it doesn’t read the provided Supreme Court ruling.

Brendlin was an illegal stop- speeding is not an illegal stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This entire time I have missed that he was a passenger. However I still say it was a clean arrest because it is their job to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who have outstanding warrants, he had two.

How many outstanding warrants are there, just in Anne Arundel County? Do beat officers spend a few hours every shift looking at mug shots?

No. The PP thinks she lives in Mayberry.

Her statement is misinformed.

I don’t live in Mayberry and perhaps my statement was misinformed but I truly believed it was the police officer’s jobs to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who had outstanding warrants. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and open to learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This entire time I have missed that he was a passenger. However I still say it was a clean arrest because it is their job to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who have outstanding warrants, he had two.

How many outstanding warrants are there, just in Anne Arundel County? Do beat officers spend a few hours every shift looking at mug shots?

No. The PP thinks she lives in Mayberry.

Her statement is misinformed.

I don’t live in Mayberry and perhaps my statement was misinformed but I truly believed it was the police officer’s jobs to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who had outstanding warrants. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and open to learn.

It wouldn’t be possible to memorize the face of everyone that has an outstanding warrant. But when you are pulled up, the police connect the tags to the registered driver that will have your photo from your license. That would be the extent of them recognizing someone during a traffic stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This entire time I have missed that he was a passenger. However I still say it was a clean arrest because it is their job to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who have outstanding warrants, he had two.

How many outstanding warrants are there, just in Anne Arundel County? Do beat officers spend a few hours every shift looking at mug shots?

No. The PP thinks she lives in Mayberry.

Her statement is misinformed.

I don’t live in Mayberry and perhaps my statement was misinformed but I truly believed it was the police officer’s jobs to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who had outstanding warrants. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and open to learn.

Yes, you are wrong .. passengers have different rights in a car vs out of a car and different rights than the driver.

This came up when Ice was trying to deport passengers. They can’t even if they know they are illegal or have a warrant or know who they are.

It’s illegal search and seizure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The refusal to get out of the car and having to be hauled out is resisting. That alone is sufficient reason to be arrested all by itself, irrespective of open warrants or not showing ID.

This is what happens when everyone thinks they’re the reincarnation of Clarence Darrow. Everyone becomes a jailhouse lawyer.

the car was going 5 over. The absence of a warrant would make for a hell of a lawsuit (I'm guessing there are reams of dascam footage where white ladies are not asked to exit vehicles in AAco), but there were warrants and the cops claimed the recognized him, so he really has no recourse

The driver was going 15 over (or at least the police said that the driver was going 15 over).

I'm all for enforcing speed limits, but I'd prefer automated enforcement via speed cameras, so that everyone going 45 in a 30 gets cited, not just certain people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man says he’ll sue Maryland PD for viral arrest, turns out he had two warrants
Cops have to walk on eggshells even around actual criminals
https://www.wusa9.com/mobile/article/news/local/maryland/maryland-police-arrest-caught-on-viral-tiktok-video-anne-arundel-county/65-fef6ec1a-4e68-4f83-b32a-27a2f0f1ce39

Let's summarize what actually happened.

The police pulled over a driver for going 45 in 30. (I wish they did that in my neighborhood.)

Then the police asked the passenger for ID. (Something that has never, ever happened to me during any of the times the police have stopped me either as a driver or a passenger.)

The passenger responded that he did not need to show ID. (True.)

Then the police somehow (how?) found out the identity of the passenger and that there were two warrants out for him: one for failure to appear in court and another retake warrant from the parole commission.

So they asked the passenger to get out of the car, and he said no.

So they hauled the passenger out of the car and charged him with resisting arrest.

Wait a minute, we do not need to show identification or drivers license pulled over? This is the first I’ve ever heard of that.

If you're the driver, you do. If you're a passenger, you don't.

This entire time I have missed that he was a passenger. However I still say it was a clean arrest because it is their job to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who have outstanding warrants, he had two.

No it is NOT a “clean arrest” it was illegal.

not unless his attorneys have some way to prove the police were lying when they said they recognized him. You lose a whole lot of rights if you have outstanding warrants

It is illegal to demand a passenger provide an ID or to detain without cause.

The rest is a red herring. There are a plethora of ways to legally arrest somebody with a warrant, this is not one of them. We don’t live in a police state.

outstanding warrants are cause

You can’t just walk around demanding ID to check for warrants.

If you have probable cause of an offense you can ask for ID.

But you “fit the description “ is not probable cause.

the cops claim the recognized him. It's a blatant lie, but good luck proving that

Yeah, I wish this weren't the case but I suspect it is. No one can seriously think they actually recognized him, but police perjure themselves constantly without any consequence so we wind up with situations like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man says he’ll sue Maryland PD for viral arrest, turns out he had two warrants
Cops have to walk on eggshells even around actual criminals
https://www.wusa9.com/mobile/article/news/local/maryland/maryland-police-arrest-caught-on-viral-tiktok-video-anne-arundel-county/65-fef6ec1a-4e68-4f83-b32a-27a2f0f1ce39

Let's summarize what actually happened.

The police pulled over a driver for going 45 in 30. (I wish they did that in my neighborhood.)

Then the police asked the passenger for ID. (Something that has never, ever happened to me during any of the times the police have stopped me either as a driver or a passenger.)

The passenger responded that he did not need to show ID. (True.)

Then the police somehow (how?) found out the identity of the passenger and that there were two warrants out for him: one for failure to appear in court and another retake warrant from the parole commission.

So they asked the passenger to get out of the car, and he said no.

So they hauled the passenger out of the car and charged him with resisting arrest.

Wait a minute, we do not need to show identification or drivers license pulled over? This is the first I’ve ever heard of that.

If you're the driver, you do. If you're a passenger, you don't.

This entire time I have missed that he was a passenger. However I still say it was a clean arrest because it is their job to familiarize themselves with the faces of people who have outstanding warrants, he had two.

No it is NOT a “clean arrest” it was illegal.

not unless his attorneys have some way to prove the police were lying when they said they recognized him. You lose a whole lot of rights if you have outstanding warrants

It is illegal to demand a passenger provide an ID or to detain without cause.

The rest is a red herring. There are a plethora of ways to legally arrest somebody with a warrant, this is not one of them. We don’t live in a police state.

outstanding warrants are cause

You can’t just walk around demanding ID to check for warrants.

If you have probable cause of an offense you can ask for ID.

But you “fit the description “ is not probable cause.

the cops claim the recognized him. It's a blatant lie, but good luck proving that

Yeah, I wish this weren't the case but I suspect it is. No one can seriously think they actually recognized him, but police perjure themselves constantly without any consequence so we wind up with situations like this.

Same lie as I smelled weed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, you are wrong .. passengers have different rights in a car vs out of a car and different rights than the driver.

This came up when Ice was trying to deport passengers. They can’t even if they know they are illegal or have a warrant or know who they are.

It’s illegal search and seizure.

That's different. ICE has only civil detainer orders, not criminal _warrants_.

The same reason police can't pull you over and arrest you for not paying your rent. That's a civil matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The refusal to get out of the car and having to be hauled out is resisting. That alone is sufficient reason to be arrested all by itself, irrespective of open warrants or not showing ID.

This is what happens when everyone thinks they’re the reincarnation of Clarence Darrow. Everyone becomes a jailhouse lawyer.

the car was going 5 over. The absence of a warrant would make for a hell of a lawsuit (I'm guessing there are reams of dascam footage where white ladies are not asked to exit vehicles in AAco), but there were warrants and the cops claimed the recognized him, so he really has no recourse

The driver was going 15 over (or at least the police said that the driver was going 15 over).

I'm all for enforcing speed limits, but I'd prefer automated enforcement via speed cameras, so that everyone going 45 in a 30 gets cited, not just certain people.

Exactly. Cops use 15 over to stop black people and fake “evidence” like I smelled weed, I saw a knife, open container to violate their rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, you are wrong .. passengers have different rights in a car vs out of a car and different rights than the driver.

This came up when Ice was trying to deport passengers. They can’t even if they know they are illegal or have a warrant or know who they are.

It’s illegal search and seizure.

That's different. ICE has only civil detainer orders, not criminal _warrants_.

The same reason police can't pull you over and arrest you for not paying your rent. That's a civil matter.

You really are desperate to defend cops illegal activity.

People would support good cops more if they stopped defending/covering for bad cops.

[Anonymous]

These were not Maryland State Police. It was Anne Arundel police. They work a beat. They know the "usual suspects" because they've had run-ins with the all the time. They had cause to pull over the vehicle because it was speeding. They had cause to request ID from this passenger because they recognized him as having outstanding warrants. They had cause to detain (not arrest) him while working out who he is. They had cause to arrest him once they confirmed his identity and located his warrants.

If none of that was justified, then his criminal case will be thrown out of court because there was no cause for the arrest. Let's see what happens.

Think of another scenario -- a parent reports they saw a man exposing himself at a playground. They provide a basic description. Police pull over a car for speeding. They see someone fitting that description in the passenger's seat. Of course they have a right to take them out of the car, request ID, and question them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These were not Maryland State Police. It was Anne Arundel police. They work a beat. They know the "usual suspects" because they've had run-ins with the all the time. They had cause to pull over the vehicle because it was speeding. They had cause to request ID from this passenger because they recognized him as having outstanding warrants. They had cause to detain (not arrest) him while working out who he is. They had cause to arrest him once they confirmed his identity and located his warrants.

If none of that was justified, then his criminal case will be thrown out of court because there was no cause for the arrest. Let's see what happens.

Think of another scenario -- a parent reports they saw a man exposing himself at a playground. They provide a basic description. Police pull over a car for speeding. They see someone fitting that description in the passenger's seat. Of course they have a right to take them out of the car, request ID, and question them.

So you're saying it was a pretextual stop?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These were not Maryland State Police. It was Anne Arundel police. They work a beat. They know the "usual suspects" because they've had run-ins with the all the time. They had cause to pull over the vehicle because it was speeding. They had cause to request ID from this passenger because they recognized him as having outstanding warrants. They had cause to detain (not arrest) him while working out who he is. They had cause to arrest him once they confirmed his identity and located his warrants.

If none of that was justified, then his criminal case will be thrown out of court because there was no cause for the arrest. Let's see what happens.

Think of another scenario -- a parent reports they saw a man exposing himself at a playground. They provide a basic description. Police pull over a car for speeding. They see someone fitting that description in the passenger's seat. Of course they have a right to take them out of the car, request ID, and question them.

So you're saying it was a pretextual stop?

The stop was due to speeding. Then, they recognized the passenger, probably from past encounters with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man says he’ll sue Maryland PD for viral arrest, turns out he had two warrants
Cops have to walk on eggshells even around actual criminals
https://www.wusa9.com/mobile/article/news/local/maryland/maryland-police-arrest-caught-on-viral-tiktok-video-anne-arundel-county/65-fef6ec1a-4e68-4f83-b32a-27a2f0f1ce39

Let's summarize what actually happened.

The police pulled over a driver for going 45 in 30. (I wish they did that in my neighborhood.)

Then the police asked the passenger for ID. (Something that has never, ever happened to me during any of the times the police have stopped me either as a driver or a passenger.)

The passenger responded that he did not need to show ID. (True.)

Then the police somehow (how?) found out the identity of the passenger and that there were two warrants out for him: one for failure to appear in court and another retake warrant from the parole commission.

So they asked the passenger to get out of the car, and he said no.

So they hauled the passenger out of the car and charged him with resisting arrest.

Wait a minute, we do not need to show identification or drivers license pulled over? This is the first I’ve ever heard of that.

I've shown identification while driving. I would assume in America you don't while walking (in many countries you are in fact required to carry ID at all times), but driving? -- white woman