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

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 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.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Anonymous wrote:

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