All Forums | General Discussion

Guy records himself getting stopped at DUI checkpoint

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2740
Posts: 49
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2009
Posts: 3067
Posted: #1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-WMn_zHCVo
WhiteJerome from MySpace
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2009
Posts: 3067
Posted: #2
Did he deserve to be searched? Was the police officers doing their job correctly? Should he file a huge law suit for violation of constitutional rights?
WhiteJerome from MySpace
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 25165
Posted: #3
I hate seeing stuff like this. Makes me very angry.  
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2007
Posts: 2462
Posted: #4
The guy was basically baiting the officers for his little video.

Their reaction was about what I would expect out of any cop.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 36998
Posted: #5
Quote Originally Posted by Canada_Chris:

The guy was basically baiting the officers for his little video.

Their reaction was about what I would expect out of any cop.
Yep.......he could've avoided all of it by just cooperating........answer a couple questions & if the cop smells no alcohol you move on.

 I understand the cops have a thankless job, but it still irks me when they pull their tough guy, I'm-in-control crap..........& the cop went too far having the dog sniff the vehicle out of anger.

 It's good that incidents like this get recorded.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #6
Good thing he didn't have a dog with him or it would have been shot. 

I wonder if the cops actually stopped the search after they found the camera. They didn't turn it off, but the guy recording it obviously edited it while saying they continued to search for a long time. 

I wonder if this video will overturn any of the prior convictions, because of the dog with the continuous false positive? Would that even be enough to overturn the conviction if that's how they accessed another car through a search like this? 

Or do you think this kid had something to do with the dog indicating there were drugs in the car? I'm not sure how sensitive the dogs are to this, could he have sprinkled trace amounts throughout the car to make the search happen?

Interesting video for sure, thanks for posting it. With the way technology is today and how inexpensive camera equipment is I wish more people would install cameras in their car. I wished the technology was there when I was in my early 20s, because I seemed like I was always getting pulled over for bs. 
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 14428
Posted: #7
wow  the word pig fits here for sure
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2007
Posts: 18777
Posted: #8
Kid did nothing wrong.  Cops did nothing wrong.  Both were in their rights and both acted like asssholes.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2009
Posts: 3067
Posted: #9
Cops did an illegal search on the guy. Also found nothing in the car, didn't ask him if he was drinking which is the whole point of a check point. Really clever video and very interesting .  
WhiteJerome from MySpace
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2009
Posts: 11137
Posted: #10
this coksucker probably only went driving that night because he heard there was a dui checkpoint and he wanted his five minutes of internet fame. Meanwhile a few drunks probably snuck thru the cracks and may have killed someone just because this guy wanted to have a little experiment with the officers. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #11
Quote Originally Posted by Messier-11:

this coksucker probably only went driving that night because he heard there was a dui checkpoint and he wanted his five minutes of internet fame. Meanwhile a few drunks probably snuck thru the cracks and may have killed someone just because this guy wanted to have a little experiment with the officers. 
I completely agree he went out that night to purposely make this video. I can even see him going through it more then once if he didn't get the reaction he wanted, but these little experiments keep cops aware that not everyone is going to put up with their sh*t. 

So they stopped the checkpoint because two cops were dealing with this guy? I doubt it. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #12
And everyone crying about the kids rights need a serious wake up call. The reason why this country is in the shape that it is in is because we have been giving far too much freedom to all of the wrong people. And look where it got us.

That kid could have rolled down his window and he would have been off on his way in a few minutes. What a way to waste your time. While the cops are wasting their time with this Liberal puzzy, they could be missing keeping a drunk off of the street. Why do people always want to make it hard on the people who are trying to keep them safe instead of working with them?

Oh please, the reason this country is in its current shape is because people don't take their rights seriously and/or don't know what their rights are. The cops went way overboard here it's ridiculous. 

Yes he could have rolled down his window, but that was the purpose of him driving through the checkpoint. He rolled it down far enough for them to smell alcohol or any drugs and for them to do their jobs.

 He was obviously baiting the cops, but that doesn't mean they have to take the bait. The cops were either not aware of the drivers rights in this situation or they simply didn't give a sh*t of his rights and both reasons are inexcusable. The sad part about this is the cops will get suspended for a week with pay and nothing will happen to them.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #13
I bet he would have been just fine if he had just rolled down his window. It was a DUI checkpoint and they aren't going to let people get away with talking out of a window only open a few inches.

Once he pissed the cop off with that move, you knew there were going to make life difficult for him.  

I don't know where it says in the constitution that you can say, "this is good" when an officer says, "roll down your window" at a checkpoint.  

Of course cops can pretty much do what they please.  Why give them a reason?  

As for the scratches on the car, I'd be sending the PD a bill. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #14
Quote Originally Posted by Slovak:



The cops went overboard because the kids was 1.)-> being a jerk and 2.)-> Acting suspicious by not wanting to comply with them.

I honestly don't know understand how people can think this kid is some kind of freedom rights fighter when he is nothing more than a copycat Lib douchebag out looking for trouble. Just like that jackoff that got his dog shot last week. Doesn't want to act like a normal citizen, wants to cause trouble.

And the freedoms that I am speaking of that have ruined this country and those that are given to illegal foreigners who don't belong here in the first place. And of course freedoms for criminals that the Libs are always crying for.
I defend many cops actions when the rest are all fired up about it, but I can't defend these *ssholes. I'm not putting this guy on a pedestal or anything I think he is a moron and was baiting them, but cops are supposed to be on another level and be able to control their actions and not give into their anger. In what f*cking world is it ok to have a dog jump on someone's car just to show them you can do it. It makes me sick. So their actions take away from this guy being a douche.

Oh okay I must have misread what you meant about the freedoms that's my fault. I agree, anyone that is in this country illegally should not be afforded the same rights. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #15
Quote Originally Posted by Slovak:

The cops would have never done what they did if that kid wasn't acting like an azzhole himself in the first place. It isn't like they kicked his azz or anything. Like I said, why cause problems for the people that are protecting you? I just don't understand this at all.
That doesn't give them the right to make a 60 pound dog jump on the hood of his car. Like it or not this country was founded on people challenging authority and yes he was an azzhole, but this country needs more people that can play that role of being an azzhole. He wasn't some punk*ss kid trying to steal from a grocery store or effecting anyone else's life. He was trying to prove a point in which he did. All the cops had to do was continue to speak professionally and treat it like any other stop. He got his message out and good for him and whatever little group he was in.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #16
This is a great piece on this.  Basically, the kid was generally right (the cop even admitted that "he knew his rights" at the end).  But that comment about his window being "OK" where it was is what pissed off the officer, heightened his suspicion, and turned it into the fiasco it was.  That along with the, "am I being detained?" comment got the officer going.  If he had rolled down his window and just answered the questions and indicated he did not want to surrender his rights not to be searched and just left it at that, the officer probably wouldn't have gotten his dik in a curl.  

Officers can use just about anything they want to prove probable cause in something like this (to get you to pull over on the side of the road).  You don't have to give up your rights, but you better know how to communicate them accurately to the officer or they will show you who is boss.

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #17
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG7niM9PzeE

This is another moron who could have easily just said, "I am invoking my constitutional right to not answer any questions."

Instead, it's "no questions."  And then at the end, "I told you no questions."  Yeah, tell a cop what to do....that's a good idea.

Big difference in level of azzholeness.  Another person who can't just respectfully state they want to invoke their rights.  

Even better, just say, "I respectfully am exercising my right to not answer any questions."

Cops work with douchebags all the time....you think they want dik yanking their chain? 
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #18
Now this guy gets it.  Helps he was in law school, but he didn't insult the cop.  He stuck to the facts/law and didn't make it personal. 


This is the type of thing that cops get away with all the time because people are ignorant.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #19
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG7niM9PzeE

This is another moron who could have easily just said, "I am invoking my constitutional right to not answer any questions."

Instead, it's "no questions."  And then at the end, "I told you no questions."  Yeah, tell a cop what to do....that's a good idea.

Big difference in level of azzholeness.  Another person who can't just respectfully state they want to invoke their rights.  

Even better, just say, "I respectfully am exercising my right to not answer any questions."

Cops work with douchebags all the time....you think they want dik yanking their chain? 
Look at the differences in reactions by these sets of cops. That's why I am defending the first guy.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2003
Posts: 36998
Posted: #20
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:

This is a great piece on this.  Basically, the kid was generally right (the cop even admitted that "he knew his rights" at the end).  But that comment about his window being "OK" where it was is what pissed off the officer, heightened his suspicion, and turned it into the fiasco it was.  That along with the, "am I being detained?" comment got the officer going.  If he had rolled down his window and just answered the questions and indicated he did not want to surrender his rights not to be searched and just left it at that, the officer probably wouldn't have gotten his dik in a curl.  

Officers can use just about anything they want to prove probable cause in something like this (to get you to pull over on the side of the road).  You don't have to give up your rights, but you better know how to communicate them accurately to the officer or they will show you who is boss.

Interesting info in that link hutch............but, like you said, "probable cause" is a very vague term. A cop can make up anything on the spot.......bloodshot eyes, claim to smell alcohol, etc..........to get past shiit. I haven't been pulled over in 20 years or more & I'm not the type to get lippy with authority figures unless provoked so I don't worry about this stuff............but it's nice to have a clear understanding of what my rights are should I ever get into a bad situation with an overzealous cop.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2009
Posts: 2235
Posted: #21
Quote Originally Posted by Slovak:



What point did he really prove though other than he showed how to turn a 2 minute DUI check into 15 minutes of uneeded nonsense. What he did was a waste of taxpayers money and will not change one thing.

What I don't like most about this, is the fact that is a just a copycat doing exactly what other people have already done.

Yeah, he got his message out alright, and the next time that that he actually does get pulled over for speeding or something petty and the cop runs a check on him and sees he was involved in this stupid altercation, he probably won't catch a break. Why people like to test the police and get on their bad side boggles my mind.
How doesn't it change anything? It probably won't change the laws behind a checkpoint, but do you really think there isn't a police station in the country not talking about this right now? It reminds them that people are always watching and maybe it will change the reactions some of these *sshole cops are giving to people who wish to peacefully invoke their rights as a citizen. 

Like I said I wouldn't have done it and just complied in the first place, but he served the purpose he set out to do.

What you said in your post number 24 is exactly the reason this sort of sh*t needs to be done every once in a while. Sign his own death warrant? You can't be serious right now. Being a cop doesn't give you the right to seek vengeance or be an *sshole. You're border line condoning these cops to continue to harass this student that cares about his rights. This isn't some thug selling drugs and laughing at the cop for not being able to do anything about it. He's just an average person.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2000
Posts: 4161
Posted: #22
This a guy with looking for trouble with folks in the trouble business, in time he will get more than he handle
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2012
Posts: 43
Posted: #23
I never understand why they do this garbage on interstate highways. I think it really is more about harassing innocent people rather than the safety bullshit that they say it is about.

If it really was about safety and getting drunks off the street they would set up their check points at the parking exit of popular bars and drinking establishments.
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2004
Posts: 38704
Posted: #24
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:

Interesting info in that link hutch............but, like you said, "probable cause" is a very vague term. A cop can make up anything on the spot.......bloodshot eyes, claim to smell alcohol, etc..........to get past shiit. I haven't been pulled over in 20 years or more & I'm not the type to get lippy with authority figures unless provoked so I don't worry about this stuff............but it's nice to have a clear understanding of what my rights are should I ever get into a bad situation with an overzealous cop.

100% agree.  For the MOST part, cops just want a little respect, even if you're asking to invoke your rights.  

Even the cop in the first video admitted at the end that the kid knew the law and knew his rights.....but it didn't stop them from being a pain in his a$$ because he was a dik to that first cop.  

I was a little surprised the kid in that first video didn't ask the cop what the reasonable suspicion was that he might have contraband in the car.  

If he had opened the window, asked to invoke his rights not to answer any questions or give up his ID, and then politely asked the officer what his reasonable suspicion was for pulling him to the side of the road and searching for contraband, he might have just been told to move along.  

Also, the officer threatened to pull him out of the car.  You can't just do that without reasonable suspicion.  He should have reminded him of this.

It was all scripted.  He just ignored a couple of things.  
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 8114
Posted: #25
Quote Originally Posted by manitoba45:

I never understand why they do this garbage on interstate highways. I think it really is more about harassing innocent people rather than the safety bullshit that they say it is about.

If it really was about safety and getting drunks off the street they would set up their check points at the parking exit of popular bars and drinking establishments.

 This.

I don't understand it either, I mean cops could go sit outside of a bar on a random night and probably hand out 5 DUI's a night. What do people think goes on in these bars? DRINKING, THAT'S WHAT (I'm talking about bars that don't serve food/their only means of making money is serving alcohol). Or, cops should just go sit outside of the local Hooters or Buffalo Wild Wing's on an NFL Sunday, MMA fight, etc....they could hand out 15 DUI's all day at these places by pulling people over for all sorts of bs. Hell, drink 2 of those "Big Daddy" beers at Hooters and most people are over the .08 limit easily. Money Racket. 
All Forums | General Discussion
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.