Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: This turned my stomach
Single_Rob Joined Mon 02/04/08 Posts: 8233	Mon 05/19/08 05:50 AM Edited by Single_Rob on Mon 05/19/08 05:55 AM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. Daniel, do me a favor and quit trying to tell me what the law is regarding id. I was state l.e. for years, and my mother is a criminal attorney. This is not Nazi Germany, you are not required to produce i.d., just your name and d.o.b. when asked by a leo unless you are in operation of a motor vehicle. The supreme court has struck this down for those areas that tried. Do not confuse this to the new voting requirements being insituted.

Single_Rob Joined Mon 02/04/08 Posts: 8233	Mon 05/19/08 05:54 AM
http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=53707&sid=82447&bw=hi&cat=2 Do not watch if you do not want to get upset unreal. They will get a slap on the hand and a paid suspension or some bs. they should be tried for sexual assualt in my opinion Going off just this one video and nothing else, no they should not be covicted of assault, sexual or non. They specifically asked if she ahd any objects that could harm her or others, and if she had ever though or tried to harm herself. She got smartmouthed about it and replied, when? now? or in the past? That line right there suggests she has had issues with self harm, and thuis the cops were justified in putting her on a suicide style watchm, which CAN involve a strip search, as people can hide amaziong things anywhere ont heir bodies. As far as men being involved, yes they should not have been, due to company policy. On a personal note however,a s far as I am concerned, if you are being held in jail for something (assuming it is justified inthe first place), You do not have the right to Females with Females, and no men present, or vice versa. What happens if in a small area there happens to be no female officer, and a female is taken into custody and has to be strip searched? Say there is reasont o believe, she shoved some drugs up her koochie in order to hide them form police. Are yo going to make her wait until a female officer from another county can be located and borrowed (which involves a hell of a lot of paperwork) in order to locate the drugs, and thus cause her to risk od'ing? No, as far as I am concenrned, if you are being strip-searched (again, justifiably) then the gender of the person(s) involved should not matter, as long as no misconduct was involved. And as for 7 people in the cell with her? At 125 lbs, if she decided to fight full out, which she probably did, it could very easliy take 7 people just to hold her down enough so she would not be injured by her own thrashing and fighting. there is no stipulation for a strip search for a disorderly conduct charge Daniel. I don't care how smart mouthed a person gets, which imho she didn't, you repeat the questions. Without equal interpretation of the law there is no justice. You cannot arbitrarily use selective enforcement because you do not like a persons answer. You sure sound like you are a proponent of a police state, and act as if constitutional rights are meant to be interpreted at the discretion of law enforcement. Your ideology on i.d., and now this interpretation, both wrong, sure appear to make you appear so.

symbelmyne Joined Mon 01/14/08 Posts: 5356	Mon 05/19/08 07:39 AM
One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. Daniel, do me a favor and quit trying to tell me what the law is regarding id. I was state l.e. for years, and my mother is a criminal attorney. This is not Nazi Germany, you are not required to produce i.d., just your name and d.o.b. when asked by a leo unless you are in operation of a motor vehicle. The supreme court has struck this down for those areas that tried. Do not confuse this to the new voting requirements being insituted. when I left AZ 3 years ago, you were required by law to show id whenever an officer of the law asked you, regardless if you were driving or on the street...every state has its own laws regarding proof of identfication. As a matter of fact, with homeland security in place in border states Immigration officials have the same authority to request proof of identification..

Spidercmb Joined Fri 04/27/07 Posts: 13137	Mon 05/19/08 08:07 AM
This story is a comedy of errors. The woman shouldn't have been taken in, when the officer saw that she had accidentally given him the wrong id. But we don't know the whole story...where was she? Who had assaulted her? Was she drunk? Was she high? Oh yes, there is a great deal of information that was left out of the story. The one thing I know about cops and have told my kids is that you don't fight them. If they are breaking the law, let them and then take them to court. This sort of thing is easily avoided. Here is a short instuctional video on how to interact with the Police, I know it's helped me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvRXw-4mtzE

franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Mon 05/19/08 09:23 AM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. misinformation - no one is required to walk with identification. makes things easier for you and the law enforcement agencies but not a requirement. wrong info.

franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Mon 05/19/08 09:24 AM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. misinformation - no one is required to walk with identification. makes things easier for you and the law enforcement agencies but not a requirement. wrong info. unless operating a motor vehicle as per symblemine states

Single_Rob Joined Mon 02/04/08 Posts: 8233	Mon 05/19/08 09:34 AM
One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. Daniel, do me a favor and quit trying to tell me what the law is regarding id. I was state l.e. for years, and my mother is a criminal attorney. This is not Nazi Germany, you are not required to produce i.d., just your name and d.o.b. when asked by a leo unless you are in operation of a motor vehicle. The supreme court has struck this down for those areas that tried. Do not confuse this to the new voting requirements being insituted. when I left AZ 3 years ago, you were required by law to show id whenever an officer of the law asked you, regardless if you were driving or on the street...every state has its own laws regarding proof of identfication. As a matter of fact, with homeland security in place in border states Immigration officials have the same authority to request proof of identification.. I know that law has been challenged, and if not overturned yet, it soon will be. It has been overturned in many municipalities already

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 05/19/08 12:51 PM
Here is a picture of our future: There will be a national police force. The uniforms will be black. They will drive black cars, black helicopters and round people up in black vans. Avoid them. They are not your friends. The police will be the biggest threat to free Americans. JB

franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Mon 05/19/08 12:51 PM
Here is a picture of our future: There will be a national police force. The uniforms will be black. They will drive black cars, black helicopters and round people up in black vans. Avoid them. They are not your friends. The police will be the biggest threat to free Americans. JB MIB 4?

s1owhand Joined Fri 05/18/07 Posts: 29437	Mon 05/19/08 01:02 PM
They are going to get it and they are soooooooo deserving.

guyguy1225 Joined Sat 09/15/07 Posts: 1936	Mon 05/19/08 01:04 PM
http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=53707&sid=82447&bw=hi&cat=2 Do not watch if you do not want to get upset unreal. They will get a slap on the hand and a paid suspension or some bs. they should be tried for sexual assualt in my opinion Going off just this one video and nothing else, no they should not be covicted of assault, sexual or non. They specifically asked if she ahd any objects that could harm her or others, and if she had ever though or tried to harm herself. She got smartmouthed about it and replied, when? now? or in the past? That line right there suggests she has had issues with self harm, and thuis the cops were justified in putting her on a suicide style watchm, which CAN involve a strip search, as people can hide amaziong things anywhere ont heir bodies. As far as men being involved, yes they should not have been, due to company policy. On a personal note however,a s far as I am concerned, if you are being held in jail for something (assuming it is justified inthe first place), You do not have the right to Females with Females, and no men present, or vice versa. What happens if in a small area there happens to be no female officer, and a female is taken into custody and has to be strip searched? Say there is reasont o believe, she shoved some drugs up her koochie in order to hide them form police. Are yo going to make her wait until a female officer from another county can be located and borrowed (which involves a hell of a lot of paperwork) in order to locate the drugs, and thus cause her to risk od'ing? No, as far as I am concenrned, if you are being strip-searched (again, justifiably) then the gender of the person(s) involved should not matter, as long as no misconduct was involved. And as for 7 people in the cell with her? At 125 lbs, if she decided to fight full out, which she probably did, it could very easliy take 7 people just to hold her down enough so she would not be injured by her own thrashing and fighting. Dude your a sick individual no reason what so ever for any male police or not to take the clothes off a woman involuntarily

symbelmyne Joined Mon 01/14/08 Posts: 5356	Mon 05/19/08 01:42 PM
while there are many facts missing from this story, the one thing that does stand out is the male police strip searching a female prisoner, clearly there was the staff to do a female on female search. And thats just plain wrong. However Ive had female friends tell me they were sexually abused by female officers searching them so, there is no guarantee or protection either way.

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 05/19/08 02:27 PM
Watching the video, I did not get the impression that any of the officers were being cruel or abusive, nor did any of them look angry or emotional. The police officers themselves looked very calm, holding the lady down carefully. Being held down and searched is never a pleasant experience for anyone. I bet if the woman had been calm and cooperative, none of this would have happened. Just because she was the person that called the police does not make her innocent. The woman did seem very uncooperative and was screaming the whole time. So I get the impression that the video does not exactly tell the whole story. I have recently seen a man threaten to kill his mother and brother and he came over to her house with his threats and then he himself called the police and lied about who was threatening who. The police arrested him. .... and they were right. JB

daniel48706 Joined Fri 03/16/07 Posts: 8566	Mon 05/19/08 03:33 PM
One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. Daniel, do me a favor and quit trying to tell me what the law is regarding id. I was state l.e. for years, and my mother is a criminal attorney. This is not Nazi Germany, you are not required to produce i.d., just your name and d.o.b. when asked by a leo unless you are in operation of a motor vehicle. The supreme court has struck this down for those areas that tried. Do not confuse this to the new voting requirements being insituted. when I left AZ 3 years ago, you were required by law to show id whenever an officer of the law asked you, regardless if you were driving or on the street...every state has its own laws regarding proof of identfication. As a matter of fact, with homeland security in place in border states Immigration officials have the same authority to request proof of identification.. Thank you symbel, I have been trying to locate that information for various states, and been going bonkers with over flow on information, lol.

daniel48706 Joined Fri 03/16/07 Posts: 8566	Mon 05/19/08 03:36 PM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. misinformation - no one is required to walk with identification. makes things easier for you and the law enforcement agencies but not a requirement. wrong info. Depends on the state that you are in. Maybe not all states require you to "walk with id", but a lot do. And if asked to provide it, and you don't have it, you can be taken in and booked under a misdeaner.

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 05/19/08 03:44 PM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. misinformation - no one is required to walk with identification. makes things easier for you and the law enforcement agencies but not a requirement. wrong info. Depends on the state that you are in. Maybe not all states require you to "walk with id", but a lot do. And if asked to provide it, and you don't have it, you can be taken in and booked under a misdeaner. In Colorado there was a law (I don't know if it is still in force) that if you went into a bar you had to have an I.D. on you to even be in there. But as far as I know, if I am walking down the street, I don't have to have one. I would challenge any law of that sort, but it is probably coming to that. This is getting more and more like Nazi country.

daniel48706 Joined Fri 03/16/07 Posts: 8566	Mon 05/19/08 04:20 PM
Dude your a sick individual no reason what so ever for any male police or not to take the clothes off a woman involuntarily Tghere is nothing sick about it. It is yhour mind and automatic thinking that is sick and perverted. You have A) officers of the law... B) A detained suspect (specific charge does not matter)... C) Suspect is uncooperative and possible threat to herself or others, thus requiring a search to make sure she has no weapons hidden on her person... This whole scenario has absolutely nothign to do with sex. It has to do with a police force doing their job and protecting everyone concerned. Male/female should not matter. Point blank, if a female does not want to have to be searched by a male officer, then she shoudlnt do anything to get taken in and searched. NOW, if it is shown that there was no need for the search, then yes the opfficers should be reprimanded. but if it comes through that the search was legal and justified, then gender matters not, in my opinion.

daniel48706 Joined Fri 03/16/07 Posts: 8566	Mon 05/19/08 04:23 PM
sensational "reporting" at its best. The only think I saw innapropriate were the two male officers involved. Otherwise, just a hysterical drunk out of control.... the "victim", "accidentally" gives a fake id???? Come on...!! Im sure she'll make a butt-load of money off of this. The Sheriff's department left themselves wide open on this case.... so denying medical treatment, arresting a person who calls for help, breaking department policy, strip searching for a minor offense, those are all "sensationalized"? This is not nazi germany, you do not have to produce identification to an officer unless operating a motor vehicle, you need only give your name, and d.o.b. I carried my brothers d.l. in my wallet for a year after he died. It is ridiculous bs. Welcome to the home of the free One statement is wrong; Yes you ARE required to produce id if asked by an officer of the law, no matter what the situation. Most states anyway, require you to have id on you, or at hand, at all times when you are not in your own home. And obviously if your in your own home it will be at hand. misinformation - no one is required to walk with identification. makes things easier for you and the law enforcement agencies but not a requirement. wrong info. Depends on the state that you are in. Maybe not all states require you to "walk with id", but a lot do. And if asked to provide it, and you don't have it, you can be taken in and booked under a misdeaner. In Colorado there was a law (I don't know if it is still in force) that if you went into a bar you had to have an I.D. on you to even be in there. But as far as I know, if I am walking down the street, I don't have to have one. I would challenge any law of that sort, but it is probably coming to that. This is getting more and more like Nazi country. Nothing to do with "nazi country" or anything like that. It is a way to acsertain who is legal and who isnt. Plain and simple. Now, just cause an officer CAN asj for id, doesnt mean he is going to for no reason. Too much of that would turn into harrasment. But it falls under the same category as doing random vehicle stops on weekends and such. that is perfectly legal too.

franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Mon 05/19/08 05:11 PM
I am truly curious now, I asked a federal agent and he said none of the states have that law, while it is helpful for the officers it is not mandatory to have/walk with identification. I am assuming he is incorrect due to the responses, question, how can I check which states require id on person at all times???

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 05/19/08 05:19 PM
In Colorado there was a law (I don't know if it is still in force) that if you went into a bar you had to have an I.D. on you to even be in there. But as far as I know, if I am walking down the street, I don't have to have one. I would challenge any law of that sort, but it is probably coming to that. This is getting more and more like Nazi country. Nothing to do with "nazi country" or anything like that. It is a way to acsertain who is legal and who isnt. Plain and simple. Now, just cause an officer CAN asj for id, doesnt mean he is going to for no reason. Too much of that would turn into harrasment. But it falls under the same category as doing random vehicle stops on weekends and such. that is perfectly legal too. Eventually laws will be passed (and they always have a "good" excuse for them) that will give them the power to do anything they want, and yes it will be "legal" because they passed a law. They don't need to ascertain if a person is "legal" or not because they don't do anything about it anyway. That is just an excuse to continue to pass laws that will keep track of everyone. When it comes to that, this can no longer be called a "free" country. It does have everything to do with a "Nazi" country. Hitler was just an experiment. The Bush family backed him to begin with. In Germany, a major government building was blown up (by "terrorists") too, ~~just like 9-11. Shortly thereafter, a law like the patriot act was passed that gave Hitler all the powers he needed to be the ruthless dictator he became. Laws like this are just the beginning. They will always tell you it is for your "saftey." The only problem with that kind of tracking is if your government suddenly becomes the bad guy (like Hitler) and then who will protect you from them? In a good country, the government fears the people. In a bad country the people fear the government. Ours is slowly becoming the latter piece by piece, so slow you don't even notice it. Please don't let that happen people. JB