• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is this for real? Woman arrested for staying silent during traffic stop in New Jersey

Svnla

Svnla

Lifer
Do we still live in the US of A? Do we still have the Constitution? Keep in mind it was the State Police, the cream of the crops, not Billy Bob sheriff deputy of a small town/BFE.

A trooper pulled Musarra over for suspected speeding, requested her license, registration and insurance, and asked if she knew why she was being pulled over, according to dash camera footage obtained by NJ.com through an open records request. Musarra said she provided the documents but didn't respond to the troopers.

"You're going to be placed under arrest if you don't answer my questions," one of the troopers told her before she was handcuffed and taken to a police station. Musarra asked the troopers if she was being detained, and one of the troopers said, "Yeah, obstruction."
Click to expand...



https://www.yahoo.com/news/woman-arrested-staying-silent-during-traffic-stop-sues-143925452.html
 
The police have apparently already said that a rookie officer made a mistake. She was released when a supervisor reviewed the video at the station.

Not sure what she expects to get from the lawsuit.
 
Why are people continually surprised that bears, when poked, respond?

What are we doing as a society that is leading to less poking and less fear of being poked?

And why are we surprised that people who are in these positions are prone to escalation. I mean, seriously, what does someone who is sufficiently inflexible as to believe in absolute right/wrong/order/compliance views of the world seek in their every day lives? Generally speaking, opportunities to be the authority or to challenge the authority.
 
LTC8K6 said:
The police have apparently already said that a rookie officer made a mistake. She was released when a supervisor reviewed the video at the station.

Not sure what she expects to get from the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Sounds from the story like there were multiple troopers involved

Rebecca Musarra, an attorney, filed the federal civil rights lawsuit after the Oct. 16 stop on Route 519 near the border with Pennsylvania in Warren County, NJ.com reported (http://*******/21zKGbV ). At least three troopers insisted after she was pulled over that refusing to answer questions was a criminal act, according to the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see a small punitive award here. Won't have so many "mistakes".
 
interchange said:
Why are people continually surprised that bears, when poked, respond?

What are we doing as a society that is leading to less poking and less fear of being poked?

And why are we surprised that people who are in these positions are prone to escalation. I mean, seriously, what does someone who is sufficiently inflexible as to believe in absolute right/wrong/order/compliance views of the world seek in their every day lives? Generally speaking, opportunities to be the authority or to challenge the authority.
Click to expand...

Is this a plea for common sense? The last time I was stopped for an officer I was talking to somebody in the car and driving by trusted auto pilot who was successfully maneuvering me up the congested freeway in the freeway entrance lane. I passed his patrol car then saw the lights and realized that it would have been more normal to have merged sometime farther back, but Mr Auto was taking the way of least resistance. The officer didn't tag me for anything but seemed quite persistent in challenging the fact that I agreed with him on all of his accusations. What could I say. I had been away while all of this happened and the guilty one, my dear autonomic driver, had jumped in the back seat, hands folded and calm with feigned innocence. He was, I am sure he believed, just doing his job.

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Auto because years ago he drove me across a whole city while on a trip not one single detail of which, when I woke at my destination, I could remember a thing about.
 
Moonbeam said:
Is this a plea for common sense? The last time I was stopped for an officer I was talking to somebody in the car and driving by trusted auto pilot who was successfully maneuvering me up the congested freeway in the freeway entrance lane. I passed his patrol car then saw the lights and realized that it would have been more normal to have merged sometime farther back, but Mr Auto was taking the way of least resistance. The officer didn't tag me for anything but seemed quite persistent in challenging the fact that I agreed with him on all of his accusations. What could I say. I had been away while all of this happened and the guilty one, my dear autonomic driver, had jumped in the back seat, hands folded and calm with feigned innocence. He was, I am sure he believed, just doing his job.

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Auto because years ago he drove me across a whole city while on a trip not one single detail of which, when I woke at my destination, I could remember a thing about.
Click to expand...
Sounds like that cop didn't know that the zipper merge at the end of the entrance is the most efficient system.
 
interchange said:
Why are people continually surprised that bears, when poked, respond?

What are we doing as a society that is leading to less poking and less fear of being poked?

And why are we surprised that people who are in these positions are prone to escalation. I mean, seriously, what does someone who is sufficiently inflexible as to believe in absolute right/wrong/order/compliance views of the world seek in their every day lives? Generally speaking, opportunities to be the authority or to challenge the authority.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree.

If she did NOT want to provide license, proof of insurance, registration then the troopers would have cause to arrest her but she did not want to talk to them. IIRC, that is protected under the Constitution.

This is why I have a small sheet of paper in my wallet (behind the driver license) and it says "With all due respect officer, I wish to invoke my 4th and 5th Amendment rights. I do not answer questions from law enforcement without my attorney present nor do I agree to a search of my person or property. I would like to leave now, am I free to go?".

Blackjack200 said:
New Jersey State Troopers. Closest thing you'll find to Stasi in the states.
Click to expand...

I did have good experience with State Troopers from Texas and Louisiana. They were all professional and courtesy.

Small towns cops? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Asset_forfeiture_controversy
 
Last edited:
Svnla said:
I have to disagree.

If she did NOT want to provide license, proof of insurance, registration then the troopers would have cause to arrest her but she did not want to talk to them. IIRC, that is protected under the Constitution.

This is why I have a small sheet of paper in my wallet (behind the driver license) and it says "With all due respect officer, I wish to invoke my 4th and 5th Amendment rights. I do not answer questions from law enforcement without my attorney present nor do I agree to a search of my person or property. I would like to leave now, am I free to go?".



I did have good experience with State Troopers from Texas and Louisiana. They were all professional and courtesy.

Small towns cops? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Asset_forfeiture_controversy
Click to expand...

So true. It just makes the ultimate sense to me to die protecting my rights to remain silent at a traffic stop. They can pry my rights out of my cold dead fingers. I also enjoy getting into fights with the punch drunk.
 
Svnla said:
I have to disagree.

If she did NOT want to provide license, proof of insurance, registration then the troopers would have cause to arrest her but she did not want to talk to them. IIRC, that is protected under the Constitution.

This is why I have a small sheet of paper in my wallet (behind the driver license) and it says "With all due respect officer, I wish to invoke my 4th and 5th Amendment rights. I do not answer questions from law enforcement without my attorney present nor do I agree to a search of my person or property. I would like to leave now, am I free to go?".



I did have good experience with State Troopers from Texas and Louisiana. They were all professional and courtesy.

Small towns cops? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Asset_forfeiture_controversy
Click to expand...


I tend to agree here, and applaud your preparation for any future encounter. Everyone who drives, IMO, should have a similar strategy. I've been in the car when people try to "wing it," and end up feeding the officers with excuses and validation. Good times were not had by all.

Anyway, in this case, there was no actual poking. She complied and gave him the required information. If there was no cause to detain her, she should have been free to go regardless of her choice to remain silent. Sounds like a rookie mistake, but then I've heard of seasoned officers losing their cool when they felt they deserved answers, or else. I'd like to see a more personalized punitive reaction to shit like this, no more of this distributed pain of the whole depart getting screwed out of six figures (or more). Have the officers themselves answer for it more, get creative judge! Watch attention to job regulations soar, even the cowboys will take note. Ideally, the abilities and resources of the department should not suffer beyond them having to deal with an officer being gone from learning how not to be an asshole, or at least an idiot.
 
Svnla said:
I have to disagree.

If she did NOT want to provide license, proof of insurance, registration then the troopers would have cause to arrest her but she did not want to talk to them. IIRC, that is protected under the Constitution.

This is why I have a small sheet of paper in my wallet (behind the driver license) and it says "With all due respect officer, I wish to invoke my 4th and 5th Amendment rights. I do not answer questions from law enforcement without my attorney present nor do I agree to a search of my person or property. I would like to leave now, am I free to go?".
Click to expand...

I am not sure where this conflicts with what I said.

And I did not specify who in that scenario was the bear. I think it is both.
 
Poorly trained cops. "Do you know why I pulled you over?" is part of the drill, one of several ways they're trained to judge a driver's sobriety. If the driver doesn't answer the question, the correct response is to answer it for them & proceed with business. It's what the cop was going to do anyway.

OTOH, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to say "No, I don't know, officer." After they explain, the next thing to say is "My mistake. Am I getting a ticket?" at which point they'll write one or let you go if it's just about your driving.

Objections? Save it for the judge in a venue where you might win.
 
Blackjack200 said:
Sounds from the story like there were multiple troopers involved



I'd like to see a small punitive award here. Won't have so many "mistakes".
Click to expand...

The problem is that such settlements hit the taxpayer in the pocketbook, but it doesn't hit home to where it needs to in order to send the appropriate message. Those responsible for the "mistakes" that lead to such settlements need to personally feel the impact if there is to be change.

To be fair, I think officers need a lot of leeway to do their job, and I'm not in favor of armchair monday morning quarterbacking analysis of every little thing they did. However, when they cross the line, they need to personally feel the impact. That's the only way to make the system work.
 
HGmWieN.jpg
 
Never say anything to a cop. They will take it out of context one way or another and use it against you. You have the right not to self incriminate yourself. As soon as you answer them as to why you were pulled over, you are presumed to be guilty. Watch this video for more information on "why you should never talk to cops" ... this is about a 48 minute video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
 
Blackjack200 said:
Sounds from the story like there were multiple troopers involved



I'd like to see a small punitive award here. Won't have so many "mistakes".
Click to expand...

The arresting officer was a rookie, apparently.

I just don't see how she was harmed.

She did answer some questions, apparently. Is that a waiver of the right to remain silent? She was talking to the officers .

Are officers not allowed to make any mistakes at all?

Does the city have to pay out every time an officer makes any sort of mistake?

It's the citizens who will be paying any settlement, not the police.
 
bruceb said:
Never say anything to a cop. They will take it out of context one way or another and use it against you. You have the right not to self incriminate yourself. As soon as you answer them as to why you were pulled over, you are presumed to be guilty. Watch this video for more information on "why you should never talk to cops" ... this is about a 48 minute video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, the cop already presumed your guilt when he pulled you over in a traffic stop. Duh.

Don't be a dick or a dipshit- help the cop stay on task, which is writing you a traffic citation. Lead 'em nicely in that direction if you can.

Or play stupid games to see if you can win stupid prizes.
 
LTC8K6 said:
The arresting officer was a rookie, apparently.
Click to expand...

According to her account, three troopers told her that she was breaking the law by refusing to speak to them. There was a dashcam in the car and I didn't see this claim in dispute.

I just don't see how she was harmed.
Click to expand...

You don't think a false arrest is harm? You think your opinion would change if it happened to you? In any case, I'd agree that the harm was moderate. She was released when the supervisor reviewed the dashcam footage. A small punitive award protects our rights.

She did answer some questions, apparently. Is that a waiver of the right to remain silent? She was talking to the officers .
Click to expand...

I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but that's not how I understand protection under the 5th amendment.

Are officers not allowed to make any mistakes at all?
Click to expand...

What kind of question is this? Did I say the guy should be fired? I don't want officers falsely arresting people. What the fuck is so hard to understand about that? If you want to go to a place where officers can arrest whoever they want, there are plenty of them out there.

Does the city have to pay out every time an officer makes any sort of mistake?

It's the citizens who will be paying any settlement, not the police.
Click to expand...

The police are an agent of the public. If the citizens don't want to pay settlements, they should make their Governor aware so the governor can make any leadership changes that are needed in the police force.
 
Ideally there will be a balance between politeness and the exercise of one's rights under the law. Individuals who can't figure this out probably don't excel in other interpersonal arenas as well.
 
Moonbeam said:
Is this a plea for common sense? The last time I was stopped for an officer I was talking to somebody in the car and driving by trusted auto pilot who was successfully maneuvering me up the congested freeway in the freeway entrance lane. I passed his patrol car then saw the lights and realized that it would have been more normal to have merged sometime farther back, but Mr Auto was taking the way of least resistance. The officer didn't tag me for anything but seemed quite persistent in challenging the fact that I agreed with him on all of his accusations. What could I say. I had been away while all of this happened and the guilty one, my dear autonomic driver, had jumped in the back seat, hands folded and calm with feigned innocence. He was, I am sure he believed, just doing his job.

I have a lot of respect for Mr. Auto because years ago he drove me across a whole city while on a trip not one single detail of which, when I woke at my destination, I could remember a thing about.
Click to expand...

Moonie, all these days I thght you were a hippie from SF, now I know you are a tech hippie driving a tesla.Good going
 
Dude, you guys arguing...

I'm pretty sure this lady knew what she was doing and the cops did not, obviously. This is just another example of abuse of power, but it back fired on the cops.


Rebecca Musarra, an attorney, filed the federal civil rights lawsuit after the Oct. 16 stop on Route 519 near the border with Pennsylvania
Click to expand...
 
I read about this last night. I don't think the cops should be fired or suspended or anything like that. Maybe a small punitive lawsuit. But this is yet another example of why I think cops should have to carry individually funded liability/malpractice insurance. The most effective way to control behavior is through the pocketbook. You could also have premiums equalized across an entire department, so that fellow officers are monetarily incentivized to pressure their coworkers to conduct themselves professionally. Premiums would also be more accurately calculated, based on incident data and complaints (which should be public record).

And the best part is, if sued the taxpayer isn't ultimately on the hook for the payout, making all of us pay for the mistakes of an individual.

Now the other benefit of this approach: say it is instituted in a few districts, and we find that no insurance company in the country will back the police. Or premiums are so high as to make the whole system completely unaffordable. Wouldn't that be a very interesting data point? What would that tell us about citizen/police relationships?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top