The video of
a 28-year old woman involved in a traffic stop in Texas has been released. The video
was released because days later Sandra Bland, the woman in the video died in
police custody. The trooper in the video was not the direct cause of Ms. Bland’s
death in the sense that he did not cause any injury that lead to her death.
That said, the stop and the resulting escalating actions of both parties which
led to her arrested for “assaulting a police officer” needs to be of concern.
The State
Trooper followed her for about a block or two before. Later in the video she
says something to indicate that she changed lanes to allow the trooper to pass,
which is something most drivers do for who wants to have a state trooper or
other law enforcement cars on their tail. And who of us though going the speed
limit wonder with a degree of nervousness if the following officer is watching
you for you to make a violation. Evidence of this nervousness is demonstrated by
when a police officer is traveling in the traffic flow and how nearly everyone
around a police vehicle suddenly goes 3 to 5 mph below the police officer’s
pace (on I-66 several weeks ago in a 70 speed limit zone a state trooper was
going 62 and everyone followed along without passing. Once one brave soul slowly
passed others did the same.)
As Bland did
not signal her lane change, the trooper pulled her over. He ran her plates and license,
and then issued her a warning. Things should have ended at that point but
unfortunately it didn’t. Rather than recognizing that many citizens have some level
of nervousness when pulled over, the trooper asked Ms. Bland to explain why she
appeared to be nervous. Ms. Bland responded tersely in a tone and verbage that
caused the trooper to push further, and to a request that she put out the cigarette
she was smoking in her car. The request indicates that the trooper had at that
moment intention to make the conversation something much longer, and possibly
use her nervousness as the grounds to do a thorough search of her car.
Why Ms.
Bland responded in a negative tone is unknown for she is no longer in a position
to explain herself. While race is not likely an issue behind the trooper’s
action, racial issues may well be at play in Ms. Bland’s response. As an African
American she may be wondering if the trooper stopped her because of her
race rather than not signaling a lane change, after all from her perspective not signaling lane changes and being stopped is a rarity. Given race is at
play in some policing actions I can understand her defensive and terse response. So while
the stop likely had nothing to do with race, from Ms. Bland’s perspective race
issues is involved for she starts from a position of distrusting the trooper's actions.
Rather than deescalating the encounter, the trooper pushes back. It appears that he feels personally and professionally threatened. His ego and authority has been insulted. So he pushes back.
When Bland
refuses to put out the cigarette, things turn ugly. Both parties have lost
control of their emotions. Bland insults the trooper. He becomes more demanding, exercising his authority, makes a demand that virtually calls for her to submit totally to his commands. He demands
that she exit the vehicle, she refuses saying he has no right to make such a
demand (police officers have such a right). Why does he demand that she exit the car other than to demonstrate his authority over her? The officer pulls a stun gun
threatening to “light her up”, a clear sign that he has lost it. He puts the stun gun away as he likely realized that he was about to go way beyond the pale, and catches his unchecked emotions. He may collect his thoughts, and decides that he no longer can allow her to challenge his authority. He then proceeds to pull her from the vehicle.
All control has been lost by both parties. Reinforcements have long been
called. Language continues to become stronger. He proceeds to positioning her to be handcuffed. Force increases until she is
handcuffed, taken to the ground and then placed into a second officer’s vehicle.
This whole
video is highly disturbing. In sales the saying goes, the client is always
right even when the client is wrong. It is critical that every citizen in the United States must take into account and always remember the equivalent axiom....when dealing with law enforcement in any encounter
during a stop or involving any policing action, the police
officer is always right even when the officer is wrong or doing something
unlawful.
Another alarm for me is that Bland was
arrested for both “assault” and “resisting arrest.” Yes, she did assault the trooper and then resisted arrest. But
when did the offending assault occur? Later in the video, off camera and after the
arrest process had commenced. When did the arrest process commence? If the arrest was for her kicking and pushing
back at the officer off camera then the arrest process started prior to the assault.
Arrest processes are to be subsequent to the violation that calls for an arrest. When did the arrest process commence? The arrest starts the moment she is pulled from the vehicle. If the arrest occurs earlier for an action that had yet to occur, that would be most disturbing.
Arrest processes are to be subsequent to the violation that calls for an arrest. When did the arrest process commence? The arrest starts the moment she is pulled from the vehicle. If the arrest occurs earlier for an action that had yet to occur, that would be most disturbing.
If the assault is her pulling back or trying to move away from his, then that as a definition of assault is also most disturbing. It means that the act of moving away from an officer, a step or leaning away, is taken by law enforcement as an assault. If so what is the difference between "resisting" and "assault"? A citizen flinching and touching an officer as s/he arrests that citizen can be demeaned an assault, and if so the most arrests by their very nature can take place without the officer being assaulted in some manner which is outrageous.
If the assault moment is earlier, and does not involve her leaning away from him or touching him as he pulls her from the car, then the only thing that happens prior to the demand to exit the car is her smoking.
When she refuses to extinguish her cigarette seems to be a critical moment where the encounter escalates out of control. Was her not putting out the cigarette the “assault” that becomes the grounds for her arrest? I would love to see the initial paperwork that describes the assault.
I’m not a smoker and don’t care to be in a smoking environment. While I’m bothered by smoking I must recognize that it is legal to smoke and one has the right do smoke in their own environment, and Ms. Bland’s car is her environment. She has the right to smoke in her car as much as she wishes to do so. Inside her car is no different than being in her home. No one has the right to demand that a smoker stop smoking within their personal and private property.
Still further smokers have the right to smoke in an exterior public space such as a street. They can smoke walking down the street. Ms. Bland was in the public space of the street. The trooper can request her to put out the cigarette out of courtesy, but as she refuses, she cannot be penalized as she doing so in legally permissible space. The trooper clearly looses it when she refuses to be gracious to him and sees it as her refusal to submit to his authority. His credibility being on the line, he demands her to exit the car.
If the assault moment is earlier, and does not involve her leaning away from him or touching him as he pulls her from the car, then the only thing that happens prior to the demand to exit the car is her smoking.
When she refuses to extinguish her cigarette seems to be a critical moment where the encounter escalates out of control. Was her not putting out the cigarette the “assault” that becomes the grounds for her arrest? I would love to see the initial paperwork that describes the assault.
I’m not a smoker and don’t care to be in a smoking environment. While I’m bothered by smoking I must recognize that it is legal to smoke and one has the right do smoke in their own environment, and Ms. Bland’s car is her environment. She has the right to smoke in her car as much as she wishes to do so. Inside her car is no different than being in her home. No one has the right to demand that a smoker stop smoking within their personal and private property.
Still further smokers have the right to smoke in an exterior public space such as a street. They can smoke walking down the street. Ms. Bland was in the public space of the street. The trooper can request her to put out the cigarette out of courtesy, but as she refuses, she cannot be penalized as she doing so in legally permissible space. The trooper clearly looses it when she refuses to be gracious to him and sees it as her refusal to submit to his authority. His credibility being on the line, he demands her to exit the car.
Setting
aside the assault moment, the trooper’s actions which at the outset are professional
turn to the contrary. Law enforcement officers should seek to deescalate
situations like this one, not escalate them. He is the one who is in the best position to control the situation. He could
have accepted her nervousness as being common and allowed her to move on. He could accept her insults as being angry venting, wished her a good day and calmly returned to his car, thereby controlling the event, keeping it professional and demonstrating his ability to be a "peace officer". At no point is the trooper in the "peace officer" mode. He is the law. He is to be respected and when he is not given the respect he believes he is due, then he pushes back asserts his authority, resulting in an escalation, and an arrest.
It appears to me he felt threatened by her insults, that he felt the need to exercise his authority and position as the upholder of the law, and put her in her place. In the process he only added fuel to the growing bonfire of distrust the public has with law enforcement. He may well of been wanting to be respected, but only ended up bringing disrespect upon himself and thousands of innocent officers who too will be tarred by his feathers.
It appears to me he felt threatened by her insults, that he felt the need to exercise his authority and position as the upholder of the law, and put her in her place. In the process he only added fuel to the growing bonfire of distrust the public has with law enforcement. He may well of been wanting to be respected, but only ended up bringing disrespect upon himself and thousands of innocent officers who too will be tarred by his feathers.
No comments:
Post a Comment