Guy Records Cops Allegedly Lying & Illegally Searching His Car Threatening To Take His Kid!
www.youtube.com/embed/FprG_DIasOw
www.youtube.com/embed/FprG_DIasOw
Guy Records Cops Allegedly Lying & Illegally Searching His Car Threatening To Take...
- Thread starter Reasonable Doubt
- Start date
Video of a Sandusky traffic stop circulating on social media this week has spurred debate citywide, and beyond.
Watch the video
A local man is outraged by police behavior, a Sandusky attorney deemed it a bogus stop, and the assistant police chief stressed that officers' actions were in accordance with proper procedure.
On Wednesday, at 7:07 p.m., Andre Stockett, 34, of Huron, was a passenger in a car that was stopped by Sandusky police at Remington Avenue and Cleveland Road.
The driver was Kathryn Said, 30, of Taylor, Mich., with the couple's two-week-old infant tucked in the backseat.
Read the police report below
Sandusky police Assistant Chief Phil Frost said Officer Christopher Denny stopped Said's car because her Ohio license plate number showed she had an expired Ohio driver's license.
Legal traffic stop, or not?
Said handed over her valid Michigan license, and it was at about that point Stockett flipped on his phone's video recorder.
According to Denny's police report, he'd watched Said pick up Stockett outside an apartment building and suspected he was Jeremy Newell, a man wanted on felony warrants.
In Stockett's video, Denny is seen re-approaching the car on Stockett's side. After Denny seemingly asks for Stockett's ID, or for him to step out of the car, the conversation goes roughly as follows:
Stockett: “No, for what?”
Denny: “Cause you look exactly like a person that has warrants, OK?”
Stockett: “But that's not me.”
Denny: “OK, then you can ID yourself.”
Stockett: “I don't have to ID myself.”
Denny: “Yes, you do.”
Stockett: “I'm not answering none of your questions.”
Denny threatens Stockett with arrest for obstruction, and shortly thereafter addresses him as “Mr. Newell.”
“I'm not Mr. Newell...I have done nothing wrong, you have no probable cause, I'm not coming outside the car, I'm scared for my life,” Stockett said. “I haven't done anything wrong, I haven't broken the law... I don't have to get out the car, I don't have to tell you who I am.”
“It's a lawful stop, understand that. You match the exact description,” Denny said.
“It doesn't matter, I'm not him,” Stockett replied.
In an interview with the Register, Stockett said police had no probable cause to either ID him or have him exit the car.
“They said I looked like someone they had a warrant for. I'm not...Mr. Newell, I know exactly who I am,” Stockett told the Register.
Frost, on the other hand, said both he and city prosecutor Lynne Gast-King agreed that Stockett and Newell bear a striking resemblance, according to their photos in a police database.
Frost also said he reviewed dispatch recordings of Denny's radio traffic when he was checking Said's license status — the officer inquired about Newell's felony warrants, thus, according to Frost, showing that Denny believed Stockett was indeed Newell.
Other points of contention
Stockett also expressed concern at the multitude of, and in his opinion, conflicting, reasons Denny — and later Officers Evan Estep and Adam West — gave as to why the car was stopped and why Stockett needed to exit:
Both in Denny's report and Stockett's video, Denny said Said was driving without head lights.
•Attorney Geoff Oglesby said due to the brief amount of time between Said stopping the car and the official sunset, driving without headlights was perfectly legal.
•Frost said he was unsure on that rule and thought the cutoff was dusk, but would look into it. He did note the sun that appears to shine behind Denny's head in the video is the actually the reflection of Stockett's flash.
*
Stockett told Denny he then didn't have probable cause to run a K9 unit around the car,
•Denny, however, justified it by citing Said's “nervousness” and Stockett not producing an ID.
•Stockett contended she wasn't nervous, and Said herself said she was upset.
•“To establish probable cause, (police) say, 'Oh, the person's nervous.' It appears now this is a script,” Oglesby said.
•“Let's say...she wasn't nervous at all. You have a legal reason to be there and a legal reason to identify him, how much more do you need? All of it could've been solved if he just shows his ID,” Frost said.
*
And the point that most outraged Stockett, and perhaps Oglesby, was Denny's eventual mention of Children's Services.
“Then your children will go to Children's Services,” Denny said, after the K9 alerted to drugs and Stockett refused to exit the car, instructing Said to do the same.
“This baby is not about to be taken from me,' an emotional Said responded.
•“I don't look at (the mention of Children's Services) as a threat; I would rather it not be taken as a threat,” Frost said. “Could that ultimately happen to someone being arrested, yes...we do not want to displace a child from their mom or parent.”
Officers were spoken with Thursday night about issue, however.
“They were counseled on their use of that last evening,” Frost said. “I don't like the way it was used personally and it was already addressed.”
•Oglesby took issue with the mention of social workers in particular.
"The utilization of Children's Services to further the interest of the drug task force...is a problem," the attorney said.
After the stop
Stockett and Said ultimately exited after about five minutes, and the pair were arrested on obstruction charges, the police report stated.
“It was so unprofessional,” Stockett said. “I tried to compose myself as long as I could....my girl takes the baby out of the car, and they search the carseat. I'm sitting in a police car, and I can't do nothing about that. He's two weeks old. I don't know where it goes from here.”
Frost, meanwhile, ordered a thorough review of the matter.
A formal complaint has not been filed, but Sandusky police received numerous calls Thursday about the video.
“I got ahold of our prosecutor and she said 'I want a report that says every little detail',” Frost said.
As for Stockett, he said he's taking it to trial — he appeared in Sandusky Municipal court in a preliminary hearing Thursday.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/traffic-stop-video-epitomizes-wrong-police-today/
http://www.sanduskyregister.com/news/law-enforcement/6222396
Watch the video
A local man is outraged by police behavior, a Sandusky attorney deemed it a bogus stop, and the assistant police chief stressed that officers' actions were in accordance with proper procedure.
On Wednesday, at 7:07 p.m., Andre Stockett, 34, of Huron, was a passenger in a car that was stopped by Sandusky police at Remington Avenue and Cleveland Road.
The driver was Kathryn Said, 30, of Taylor, Mich., with the couple's two-week-old infant tucked in the backseat.
Read the police report below
Sandusky police Assistant Chief Phil Frost said Officer Christopher Denny stopped Said's car because her Ohio license plate number showed she had an expired Ohio driver's license.
Legal traffic stop, or not?
Said handed over her valid Michigan license, and it was at about that point Stockett flipped on his phone's video recorder.
According to Denny's police report, he'd watched Said pick up Stockett outside an apartment building and suspected he was Jeremy Newell, a man wanted on felony warrants.
In Stockett's video, Denny is seen re-approaching the car on Stockett's side. After Denny seemingly asks for Stockett's ID, or for him to step out of the car, the conversation goes roughly as follows:
Stockett: “No, for what?”
Denny: “Cause you look exactly like a person that has warrants, OK?”
Stockett: “But that's not me.”
Denny: “OK, then you can ID yourself.”
Stockett: “I don't have to ID myself.”
Denny: “Yes, you do.”
Stockett: “I'm not answering none of your questions.”
Denny threatens Stockett with arrest for obstruction, and shortly thereafter addresses him as “Mr. Newell.”
“I'm not Mr. Newell...I have done nothing wrong, you have no probable cause, I'm not coming outside the car, I'm scared for my life,” Stockett said. “I haven't done anything wrong, I haven't broken the law... I don't have to get out the car, I don't have to tell you who I am.”
“It's a lawful stop, understand that. You match the exact description,” Denny said.
“It doesn't matter, I'm not him,” Stockett replied.
In an interview with the Register, Stockett said police had no probable cause to either ID him or have him exit the car.
“They said I looked like someone they had a warrant for. I'm not...Mr. Newell, I know exactly who I am,” Stockett told the Register.
Frost, on the other hand, said both he and city prosecutor Lynne Gast-King agreed that Stockett and Newell bear a striking resemblance, according to their photos in a police database.
Frost also said he reviewed dispatch recordings of Denny's radio traffic when he was checking Said's license status — the officer inquired about Newell's felony warrants, thus, according to Frost, showing that Denny believed Stockett was indeed Newell.
Other points of contention
Stockett also expressed concern at the multitude of, and in his opinion, conflicting, reasons Denny — and later Officers Evan Estep and Adam West — gave as to why the car was stopped and why Stockett needed to exit:
Both in Denny's report and Stockett's video, Denny said Said was driving without head lights.
•Attorney Geoff Oglesby said due to the brief amount of time between Said stopping the car and the official sunset, driving without headlights was perfectly legal.
•Frost said he was unsure on that rule and thought the cutoff was dusk, but would look into it. He did note the sun that appears to shine behind Denny's head in the video is the actually the reflection of Stockett's flash.
*
Stockett told Denny he then didn't have probable cause to run a K9 unit around the car,
•Denny, however, justified it by citing Said's “nervousness” and Stockett not producing an ID.
•Stockett contended she wasn't nervous, and Said herself said she was upset.
•“To establish probable cause, (police) say, 'Oh, the person's nervous.' It appears now this is a script,” Oglesby said.
•“Let's say...she wasn't nervous at all. You have a legal reason to be there and a legal reason to identify him, how much more do you need? All of it could've been solved if he just shows his ID,” Frost said.
*
And the point that most outraged Stockett, and perhaps Oglesby, was Denny's eventual mention of Children's Services.
“Then your children will go to Children's Services,” Denny said, after the K9 alerted to drugs and Stockett refused to exit the car, instructing Said to do the same.
“This baby is not about to be taken from me,' an emotional Said responded.
•“I don't look at (the mention of Children's Services) as a threat; I would rather it not be taken as a threat,” Frost said. “Could that ultimately happen to someone being arrested, yes...we do not want to displace a child from their mom or parent.”
Officers were spoken with Thursday night about issue, however.
“They were counseled on their use of that last evening,” Frost said. “I don't like the way it was used personally and it was already addressed.”
•Oglesby took issue with the mention of social workers in particular.
"The utilization of Children's Services to further the interest of the drug task force...is a problem," the attorney said.
After the stop
Stockett and Said ultimately exited after about five minutes, and the pair were arrested on obstruction charges, the police report stated.
“It was so unprofessional,” Stockett said. “I tried to compose myself as long as I could....my girl takes the baby out of the car, and they search the carseat. I'm sitting in a police car, and I can't do nothing about that. He's two weeks old. I don't know where it goes from here.”
Frost, meanwhile, ordered a thorough review of the matter.
A formal complaint has not been filed, but Sandusky police received numerous calls Thursday about the video.
“I got ahold of our prosecutor and she said 'I want a report that says every little detail',” Frost said.
As for Stockett, he said he's taking it to trial — he appeared in Sandusky Municipal court in a preliminary hearing Thursday.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/traffic-stop-video-epitomizes-wrong-police-today/
http://www.sanduskyregister.com/news/law-enforcement/6222396
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,143
- 10
- 81
year its all over that cop should be fired. also while it would have been avoided just showing the ID. the use of the threat of taking the kids away should get the officer fired and charged
there are some things you never do. threaten a mans children? fuck you. he should be fired.
edit: i expect the charges against the man to be dropped asap since this is getting to be huge
there are some things you never do. threaten a mans children? fuck you. he should be fired.
edit: i expect the charges against the man to be dropped asap since this is getting to be huge
Last edited:
Hugo Drax
Diamond Member
- Nov 20, 2011
- 5,647
- 47
- 91
Another uppity african American person trying to bring himself more problems. All he had to do was show ID and none of this would be an issue.
Obviously they were looking for a show so they can get youtube famous.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/traversing-the-inner-terrain/201102/the-victim-identity
Obviously they were looking for a show so they can get youtube famous.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/traversing-the-inner-terrain/201102/the-victim-identity
Last edited:
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,735
- 17,383
- 136
The passenger was already in the wrong mindset, the cop was calm when asking for his ID, the cop identified himself when asked. The whole thing could have ended a lot quicker had he cooperated.
Lately the overstepping cop threads have been valid and the cops are clearly overstepping their bounds or are not handling the situation well, I feel this is not the case here.
Lately the overstepping cop threads have been valid and the cops are clearly overstepping their bounds or are not handling the situation well, I feel this is not the case here.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,735
- 17,383
- 136
When someone is arrested, where do you think the child goes? It wasn't a threat, it was a fact.
The guy looks very similar to someone the police are looking for in connection with a felony warrant. The police think he's the guy and ask for ID, which he refuses to provide, based on the logic that "I'm not him". How the hell is the cop supposed to confirm that you're not the guy they're looking for, you expect him to just take your word for it?? Just hand the guy your ID, problem solved. The whole thing could have ended right there.
As for the social services "threat", when the parents get arrested, where do you suppose the kid would go? To social services. Stating a fact doesn't seem like a threat to me.
As for the social services "threat", when the parents get arrested, where do you suppose the kid would go? To social services. Stating a fact doesn't seem like a threat to me.
Lol.. I guess white people are the only ones that should be allowed to have rights. Lol.
It's Ohio, the police pull over everyone, even whitey.
My first point of contention is the argument it was a bogus stop.
Last time I was driving through Ohio there were at least twenty cars pulled over by officers while I was driving the turnpike that morning.
It's Ohio, you are going to be pulled over for anything and everything no matter your skin color.
Living in Illinois (so, very infrequently traveling through Ohio), my brother's been pulled over twice. Good friend of mine three times. My dad twice over the years. Seriously, we get pulled over more frequently in Ohio than Illinois despite the fact that 99.9% of our driving is in Illinois.
Show your ID and move on with your life.
My first point of contention is the argument it was a bogus stop.
Last time I was driving through Ohio there were at least twenty cars pulled over by officers while I was driving the turnpike that morning.
It's Ohio, you are going to be pulled over for anything and everything no matter your skin color.
Living in Illinois (so, very infrequently traveling through Ohio), my brother's been pulled over twice. Good friend of mine three times. My dad twice over the years. Seriously, we get pulled over more frequently in Ohio than Illinois despite the fact that 99.9% of our driving is in Illinois.
Show your ID and move on with your life.
Last edited:
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Cop is fucked imo.
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. __, 127 S. Ct. 2400 (2007)
Denny stopped the vehicle because he believed the driver's license was invalid based on the license plate. When he verified she did indeed have a valid driver's license, he no longer has a basis to detain the vehicle and the inhabitants. This explains why Denny's reasoning for stopping the vehicle kept changing throughout the video: invalid driver's license, headlights not on, driver's nervousness, dog hit on something, etc. Imo, Denny cased the vehicle and was inventing a reason to stop it to question the passenger.
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. __, 127 S. Ct. 2400 (2007)
Denny stopped the vehicle because he believed the driver's license was invalid based on the license plate. When he verified she did indeed have a valid driver's license, he no longer has a basis to detain the vehicle and the inhabitants. This explains why Denny's reasoning for stopping the vehicle kept changing throughout the video: invalid driver's license, headlights not on, driver's nervousness, dog hit on something, etc. Imo, Denny cased the vehicle and was inventing a reason to stop it to question the passenger.
Last edited:
The Merg
Golden Member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 1,210
- 34
- 91
Let's just assume the reason for the stop was valid...
Once a vehicle is stopped for a valid reason, the police can have the driver or passengers exit a vehicle for any reason. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania v. Mimms (driver) and Maryland v. Wilson (passengers).
If an officer believes a crime has been committed or is being committed, a person can be detained (and identified). In this case, the officer believed the passenger was a wanted felon.
What I don't get is the K9 search. A K9 can be run around a vehicle without consent from the owner of a vehicle. However, I have never heard of running a K9 around a vehicle with the people in the vehicle. It is done with the vehicle empty since most K9's are aggressive hit dogs, in that they bark, scratch, and bite when hitting on something. They don't want people around so that there is not an accidental bite. If the K9 indicates on the vehicle, that is probable cause to search the vehicle. That doesn't mean that there is something definitely in the vehicle. The K9 hits on the odor of the narcotics, so it's possible that the drugs were there previously and are now gone.
That being said, even after the officer determined that the driver was still licensed, he can still detain the people there as he believed that the passenger was a wanted felon. Once the passenger was found to not be the wanted subject, he would have been let go. However, by refusing to comply by getting out of the vehicle or showing ID, he is committing obstruction.
- Merg
Once a vehicle is stopped for a valid reason, the police can have the driver or passengers exit a vehicle for any reason. This has been upheld by the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania v. Mimms (driver) and Maryland v. Wilson (passengers).
If an officer believes a crime has been committed or is being committed, a person can be detained (and identified). In this case, the officer believed the passenger was a wanted felon.
What I don't get is the K9 search. A K9 can be run around a vehicle without consent from the owner of a vehicle. However, I have never heard of running a K9 around a vehicle with the people in the vehicle. It is done with the vehicle empty since most K9's are aggressive hit dogs, in that they bark, scratch, and bite when hitting on something. They don't want people around so that there is not an accidental bite. If the K9 indicates on the vehicle, that is probable cause to search the vehicle. That doesn't mean that there is something definitely in the vehicle. The K9 hits on the odor of the narcotics, so it's possible that the drugs were there previously and are now gone.
That being said, even after the officer determined that the driver was still licensed, he can still detain the people there as he believed that the passenger was a wanted felon. Once the passenger was found to not be the wanted subject, he would have been let go. However, by refusing to comply by getting out of the vehicle or showing ID, he is committing obstruction.
- Merg
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
actually he was in his rights not to produce ID....should have..could have...sad...
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
The Merg
Golden Member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 1,210
- 34
- 91
He was being detained as being a possible wanted subject. He was told to get out the vehicle, which he is legally required to do so, and refused. That's obstruction.
- Merg
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,735
- 17,383
- 136
The Merg
Golden Member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 1,210
- 34
- 91
Good reference. This case though just asserted that the passenger can challenge the reason for a stop. It did not say that the stop was not valid.
- Merg
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
Why not? The Supreme court has ruled that passengers do not have to provide ID even when asked....... How did this guy know the cop was telling the truth.....just because you look like somebody...that's a poor excuse.....especially when you are not that person...
Your tax dollars hard at work....
Plus Cops are legally allowed to lie to you........yet you cannot lie to cops..interesting...huh..
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
What are you talking about? That was the whole basis for the Brendlin getting the evidence discovered during his arrest thrown out - that the traffic stop was not valid since it was determined that the car registration was not expired.
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/...n=display_arch&article_id=1259&issue_id=92007
Humpy
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2011
- 4,464
- 596
- 126
I believe it depends on what it means to "produce ID". He is not required to carry a physical ID card as a passenger thus not required to hand it over. He is also within his rights to not give his name (it is illegal to give a false name). If the police suspect he was someone they were looking for they can detain him until they ascertain who he is. He could have identified himself verbally and then it would have been on the police to demonstrate that they believed he was/wasn't telling the truth.
If the guy resembled a wanted felon he is pretty much out of luck.
The Merg
Golden Member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 1,210
- 34
- 91
Yes, as a passenger he does not have to provide ID. However, he was being detained at that point. Plus, even if you don't think he had to provide his ID, he was still ordered out of the vehicle and refused to do so.
With regard to lying, yes, cops can lie to you. If it's a consensual stop, you can lie to your heart's content. However, if you are being detained and lie about who you are you have just escalated it to a criminal offense. Even in a detention situation, you are allowed to lie to the police. You cannot be charged with obstruction for lying to the police. The one exception is lying about your identity. However, you cannot perform actions that prevent an officer from doing their job. So, if you are being detained and are requested to furnish ID, you need to do so. If it is a consensual stop and the officer requests ID, you don't need to do so.
- Merg
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Producing ID is not required by Ohio, only stating your name, address, or birth date, .
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2921.29
her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
The Merg
Golden Member
- Feb 25, 2009
- 1,210
- 34
- 91
Yes, the Supreme Court's decision might have caused the original case to be overturned. However, the Supreme Court was not deciding on the validity of the stop itself. They were only deciding on whether the passenger can argue that they have standing in arguing the validity of the stop. In that case, they did rule that the passenger can argue the validity of the stop and when viewed in that light, the evidence against him would be thrown out.
So, with respect to this case, while the passenger can argue that he was detained without just cause by saying the stop was illegal, he would still need to prove that the stop was illegal.
In this case, the officer did find out that the driver was licensed after stopping her and checking her license status. However, the officer at that same time also confirmed that the subject the passenger looks like was still wanted. At that time, he can continue to hold the passenger there on a detention while he continues his investigation.
- Merg
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter