Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Abuse? Maybe, Maybe Not.

ARE THEY ALL YOURS ?!??: border patrol abuse

A pastor claims the DHS / Border Patrol beat him for no reason. Watch the video and then read my take on it below.

The DHS Officer says something like "A drug dog alerted on your car, you need to get out of the car and we are going to search your vehicle." If a drug dog alerts on a car a peace officer has probable cause to search the car. A peace officer has probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, possession of drugs, and probable cause to arrest the occupants for possession of drugs. That is established law, and not unusual at checkpoints and also not unusual for agencies who have drug dogs to bring them on traffic stops and have them sniff the car. Agencies don't need probable cause to have the drug dog sniff the car because it is not an invasive search. Just like the officers can look in the windows of the vehicle and see drugs on the seat or open beer bottles on the floor.

I also get the impression that this was the second time the "Pastor" was stopped as he says "...that did not happen" and other phrases that lead me to believe that the drug dog hit was not at the same place as this confrontation. Perhaps it was in a long line of cars going through the checkpoint and the drug dog hit was at the tail end of the line and now that he is at the front the officers are stopping him.

It seems strange that he would have this on two video cameras, as if he was intending to create a confrontation and wanted to tape it. He also is debating with the officer about the authority the officer has to both order him from the car and to detain or arrest him. The side of the road is not a place for debate. Debate and your legal defense takes place in front of a judge. The lawful orders at a traffic stop made with probable cause that a crime has been committed are required to be obeyed. The stop and detention are lawful even if the person inside did not commit a crime. The officer only needs probable cause which is a far lower standard of proof than beyond a reasonable doubt.

The suspect was verbally resisting and passively resisting the orders of the officer and the use of a Taser would be appropriate under those circumstances. The fact that he is white or a pastor or whatever does not give him the right to resist an arrest. It is his duty to submit to arrest, which he did not do. Also remember, video is everywhere, that's what the SGT Says.


Protect_and_Serve said...

Seems like a pretty obvious set up to me.

Bunkermeister said...

The fact that the "Pastor" had TWO video cameras and then immediately put all his information on the web seemed rather odd to me.

*Goddess* said...

Can you explain what this is all about? I thought an ambulance had right of way when running lights and sirens? Thanks.

Bunkermeister said...

Okay, just because you asked for it. Check out the May 30 issue of SGT Says!