WPD Sergeant tells Uber Driver/Attorney that recording him is illegal

11B CIB

11B CIB

Administrator
Staff member
Charter Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
6,877
Location
Gilbert, SC
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
Be someone along drectly, to tell us about good cops outnumbering bad ones.
Any policeman that will violate his fellow citizens' constitutional rights, even if he thinks it's his job, is a bad cop.

Dog indicated drugs in the car. No drugs could be found in the car.
So.....The cops doing the search are really bad at finding stuff? Or did they claim the dog keyed on drugs, when he didn't?

There is so much disturbing about this situation.
 
The Sheriff's deputy who backed up the claim of the "new law" was counseled by Sheriff McMahon (what county?) but ultimately no law was broken by him since cops can lie I guess.


The part about the dog not indicating anything but the full search taking place is very disturbing. I think the mere presence of a K9 is basically cause to search because no one can argue the dog didn't hit on something since there is only one K9 handler present. And would it be too Tin Foil Hat-ish to suggest maybe the dogs can hit on command?


I wonder if the passenger gave the driver a good rating and a hefty tip
 
As a driver: The cops seem to think the car has been previously targeted, and did so again. I don't need to be part of that action.

I'm not impressed with his communication skills or his failure to follow basic lawyer advice to simply shut up and deal with it later. I am glad he did not shut off the camera.
 
4MrLifer said:
As a driver: The cops seem to think the car has been previously targeted, and did so again. I don't need to be part of that action.

I'm not impressed with his communication skills or his failure to follow basic lawyer advice to simply shut up and deal with it later. I am glad he did not shut off the camera.
Click to expand...
Hard to argue with that, unless the lawyer was stupid like a fox, specifically saying incorrect things to draw the police into conversation, to act as fodder later when he released the video.
 
11B CIB said:
The Sheriff's deputy who backed up the claim of the "new law" was counseled by Sheriff McMahon (what county?) but ultimately no law was broken by him since cops can lie I guess.


The part about the dog not indicating anything but the full search taking place is very disturbing. I think the mere presence of a K9 is basically cause to search because no one can argue the dog didn't hit on something since there is only one K9 handler present. And would it be too Tin Foil Hat-ish to suggest maybe the dogs can hit on command?


I wonder if the passenger gave the driver a good rating and a hefty tip
Click to expand...

All depends on the handler. There have been independent tests where they have sent units into training grounds telling the officers that there were several drugs to find in the area, where there were in fact none. With near a 100% rate the dogs would do false hits based off the handler's percieved notions.

Handlers told that there was a chance no drugs were in the area did much better by comparison.

The cues from the handler are mostly subconscious too. Slight tensing, small changes in tone. All things a dog can pick up on but the handler himself not notice
 
shadowsbane said:
All depends on the handler. There have been independent tests where they have sent units into training grounds telling the officers that there were several drugs to find in the area, where there were in fact none. With near a 100% rate the dogs would do false hits based off the handler's percieved notions.

Handlers told that there was a chance no drugs were in the area did much better by comparison.

The cues from the handler are mostly subconscious too. Slight tensing, small changes in tone. All things a dog can pick up on but the handler himself not notice
Click to expand...
This, It boils down in the handler not trusting the dog enough and they dog trusting the handler too much.
 
My dad used to be a K9 officer and trained K9s back in the day. We owned a kennel.

If they want to search your car, they are going to search your car.
Any number of ways to get dogs to do any number of things.

Not saying at all that that is what happened in this case.
 
NKD said:
My dad used to be a K9 officer and trained K9s back in the day. We owned a kennel.

If they want to search your car, they are going to search your car.
Any number of ways to get dogs to do any number of things.

Not saying at all that that is what happened in this case.
Click to expand...
Right. Anyone still have any objections to ending the war of drugs?
 
I may be wrong, but I thought it was a civil rights violation to hold a traffic stop for K9. Anyone else?

And upon a little google fu it was in a SCOTUS ruling. These guys will have some explaining to do. No PC, no detain for K9. Rut row.
 
I'm really coming to the conclusion that the proper response to nonsense like this needs to be The People putting an end to it right then, right there. Forget this crap about letting the chain of command reprimand them. Officer Jackwagon needs to be in the ER getting his badge removed from his rectum and the dog needs to be on the BBQ.
 
twofocused said:
Is this a pro 2A forum or an anti cop forum? We all know there are bad cops everywhere but, some of these comments..............
Click to expand...
It is a pro 2A forum that has no tolerance for bad cops.
 
giphy.gif

Waiting for it.
 
shadowsbane said:
All depends on the handler. There have been independent tests where they have sent units into training grounds telling the officers that there were several drugs to find in the area, where there were in fact none. With near a 100% rate the dogs would do false hits based off the handler's percieved notions.

Handlers told that there was a chance no drugs were in the area did much better by comparison.

The cues from the handler are mostly subconscious too. Slight tensing, small changes in tone. All things a dog can pick up on but the handler himself not notice
Click to expand...

Have a link or something showing these independent test? Thanks!
 
chiefjason said:
I may be wrong, but I thought it was a civil rights violation to hold a traffic stop for K9. Anyone else?

And upon a little google fu it was in a SCOTUS ruling. These guys will have some explaining to do. No PC, no detain for K9. Rut row.
Click to expand...

Unless something has changed as long as the time delay is "reasonable" (usually 20 minutes or less) then it is fine to wait for a k-9. Could possibly be longer if the officer can "articulate" that the time delay was necessary because of situation. It is a gray area at best....
 
noway2 said:
I'm really coming to the conclusion that the proper response to nonsense like this needs to be The People putting an end to it right then, right there. Forget this crap about letting the chain of command reprimand them. Officer Jackwagon needs to be in the ER getting his badge removed from his rectum and the dog needs to be on the BBQ.
Click to expand...

So the cop should be assaulted or worse for a bad stop? Some of you people astound me.
 
dave421 said:
So the cop should be assaulted or worse for a bad stop? Some of you people astound me.
Click to expand...
Cops like the one in question here are the face of evil that haunts our nation at various levels throughout its "governing" institutions today, in one of its worst and most raw forms.
 
twofocused said:
Is this a pro 2A forum or an anti cop forum? We all know there are bad cops everywhere but, some of these comments..............
Click to expand...
Can we do this one again? I like this one. I can't remember, have we done one of these on the new forum?
 
shadowsbane said:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/02/animal_behaviour

Story about a related study, with similar results. The one I read and can't find now was done after this. It was several years ago now.

Probably wasn't 100% rate though, but still high.
Click to expand...

I briefed over the article and see the point. The situation with k-9's are not perfect by any means. You have bad dogs, bad handlers, bad training, etc. Any k-9 officer and k-9 program worth their salt want their dogs as accurate as possible. Once a handler starts rewarding a dog for "false" alerts it can be a hard habit to break to fix the dog. It can be a disaster for the program as whole for the department.

Keep in mind I am not defending what happen in this original story. I am just saying that if an officer tries to manipulate a search by "saying" the dog alerted will usually be washed out sooner or later if the department has a k-9 program that is run correctly. Don't get me wrong some are not ran correctly and can cause problems. I am running out the door but might chime in again later.

Just fyi, I used to own a certified dual purpose k-9 (drugs, tracking, area search, handler protection, apprehension, evidence article search, etc) and was an assistant trainer of k-9's at a kennel some years back. I have been dealing with k-9's for years now and currently own (not certified) a German Shepherd and Belgian Malinois.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
noway2 said:
Cops like the one in question here are the face of evil that haunts our nation at various levels throughout its "governing" institutions today, in one of its worst and most raw forms.
Click to expand...

You're advocating assault against a cop because he lied and torturing/killing a K9. You're the face of evil that haunts our nation's antis when they talk about evil gun owners.
 
Don't take long to find the LEO.

Bad cops tend to get badder, not better. Maybe next time officer Lawdog goes big time and has a bad shoot, instead of a bad stop.
Yeah, our rights aren't important enough to fight for.
If he was flipping burgers and was doing a bad job, it wouldn't be dangerous. Since he is toting that badge and gun, I'd say when he does a bad job it is downright f@#$ing dangerous.

I hope the lawyer cabbie makes sure that Lawdog never gets another job toting a gun and badge.....The LEGAL way.
 
Last edited:
dave421 said:
You're advocating assault against a cop because he lied and torturing/killing a K9. You're the face of evil that haunts our nation's antis when they talk about evil gun owners.
Click to expand...
Interesting that you seem to find it acceptable, at least to the point the citizen should willingly comply, that the cop committed a form of assault but then find the idea of using justified force against a perversion of power like was committed abhorrent.

Edit to add:
concepthomes1 said:
These statements read as figurative to me, IMO.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Yes the words are meant figuratively but I am also endorsing using physical force in defense against an illegitimate use of force even when the aggressor is operating under the flag of the State.
 
My own comments to the video are as follows:

The cop and the deputy need a reprimand for telling the guy he could not film. But, they did not push the issue and forcibly stop him from filming. I don't think anyone needs to be physically harmed because of what transpired here.

I'm dicey on the whole get a k-9 thing. Was the passenger just searched or did he get arrested? And if he was arrested, did the passenger have drugs on him when he was arrested? If so, I could see reasonable suspicion that he may have dropped more drugs in the back seat. I don't think the LEO had any reason to doubt the Uber driver's story and suspect he had any drugs on him or in the vehicle.
 
noway2 said:
Interesting that you seem to find it acceptable, at least to the point the citizen should willingly comply, that the cop committed a form of assault but then find the idea of using justified force against a perversion of power like was committed abhorrent.

Edit to add:

Yes and no. Yes the words are meant figuratively but I am also endorsing using physical force in defense against an illegitimate use of force even when the aggressor is operating under the flag of the State.
Click to expand...

Where did I say it was acceptable? It isn't. He should be punished. But you're advocating violence. That's not acceptable either. Posts like yours are what got people riled up and a bunch of cops murdered over the past year. Personally, I don't think you were being figurative but, either way, your post was appalling and shameful. People that make statements like that don't have any right to criticize anyone else in my opinion.
 
concepthomes1 said:
These statements read as figurative to me, IMO.

Officer should receive reprimand from his department and possibly civil litigation if his actions were severe enough. If the canine is trained to alert on command, then the canine is no longer properly trained and should be retired to live as a pet.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. Either way, it's disgusting. As for the officer, I agree.
 
dave421 said:
Where did I say it was acceptable? It isn't. He should be punished. But you're advocating violence.
Click to expand...
And how much do you want to bet that had his victim not obeyed and supplicated himself to these illegitimate demands that the "officer" would have used violence? It works both ways.
 
Actually.....We aren't talking about one officer, we are talking about up to 6 possible bad cops in one spot.

Actually nothing anyone here has ever said has contributed to a policeman's death.
I for one have great respect for peace officers, I have no respect for a law dog.
Noway isn't going around screaming,"death to da Po leese!" No one here has ever done such a thing. It isn't much of a stretch to imagine this seargent in particular, violating someone's rights until they bled. What he has shown himself capable of is extremely dangerous, It is unfortunate that some fail to see that fact.
I guess we are at an impasse. You think shoving a badge up a bad cops @$$ is disgusting. Some of us think violating rights, enumerated in the most sacred documentation of law in our land,....Frankly disgusting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom