BlueLine

The Sandra Bland Incident-A total breakdown of law and order”

Posted on Updated on

SB!
GOWBanner

The arrest of Sandra Bland may leave many questions and has left the masses confused once again. During the past two years many folks have marched in various cities, following grand jury decisions in Ferguson, Missouri and New York City that failed to indict police officers who killed citizens, a frequent sign that can be seen, carried by protesters, is: “Black lives matter. “Yes, in truth the case of Sandra Bland defiantly in spirit -highlights the true nature of the problem on the public streets of urban America. It is very likely that, as often alleged, while laws need to change for everyone-but blacks in urban cities are disproportionately stopped and harassed by police more often than whites or others. This, however, is not the full picture of the harassment and threats that occur on urban sidewalks-it goes much deeper.

But, singular as it may seem, there is no turning back from the fact that laws of our country are on a collision course with change. Our government has to determine all of the problems and flaws within the race oriented system and the criminal justice system problem they are confronted. To put it  more directly, no doubt-the criminal justice system issue is a serious problem in the United States!

Bland
          Bland Police Video

Video: I decided to add a laundry list of possible violations of Bland rights.

After my review of the video I decided to add a laundry list of possible violations of Bland’s  constitutional rights. Ms. Bland was an African-American from the Chicago area who had come to Texas for a job at her alma mater, Prairie View A&M University, was arrested after she was stopped July 10, 2015 for failure to signal a lane change. This list doesn’t necessarily mean that the courts will find the officer coerced, forced or lied in the statement or anything else with his report about the incident. But if the courts rule that he did act out of policy, not only is the statement inadmissible, but so too is any evidence that the police obtain as the result of it. I’m hard pressed to find in most of the video, where the officer had the level of control that his training should have dictated.

MaximInLaw3

When the officer demanded loudly that Sandra Bland step out of her vehicle, Bland knew her rights and asked “Why am I being apprehended?” to which the officer simply replied, “I am giving you a lawful order” without articulating any reasonable suspicion of a crime. (Neither the stun gun nor the confrontation over the cigarette was mentioned in Trooper Encinia’s incident report according to police statement.) Why!!

 It doesn’t matter whether an interrogation occurs in a jail, at the scene of a crime, on a busy downtown street, or the middle of an open field: If a person is in custody (deprived of his or her freedom of action in any significant way), the police must read the Miranda rights if they want to ask questions and use the answers as evidence at trial.

If someone is not in police custody, however, no Miranda warning is required and anything the person says can be used at trial. Police officers often avoid arresting people—and make it clear to them that they’re free to go—precisely so they don’t have to give the Miranda warning. Then they can arrest the suspect after getting the incriminating statement they wanted all along.

For more detail on these issues, see Miranda: The Meaning of ‘Custodial Interrogation.

Pre-Arrest Questioning

Do you have to respond to police questions if you haven’t been arrested? Generally, no. (You typically don’t have to answer even if you’re under arrest.) A police officer generally cannot arrest a person simply for failure to respond to questions. (There are, however, situations where you might have to provide information like identification.

 Video: I also decided to add a laundry list of possible violations on the video.

The video showed the officer pulling Ms. Bland over and their encounter escalating into a physical altercation in which he threatened her with a stun gun.

  • “I will light you up,” the trooper said, pointing the stun gun at her.

  • The video also confirmed an account from the family’s lawyer that the confrontation between Ms. Bland and the trooper, Brian T. Encinia, escalated after she refused his order to put out a cigarette.

 But this conflicts with Officer Encinia’s seeming  lies of omission in both his report and in his verbal recap to the Texas DPS dispatch.

  •  In fact, in frame 23:24 Officer Encinia claimed that he tried to de-escalate the situation when he encountered an unarmed woman with half of his body mass with a taser in hand.

Video: Minutes 23 through 24 the Officer produces a serious of incorrect statements that I subjectively one could conclude as lies.

Video: 25 though 34.05 video shows credible evidence of technical difficulties suggesting the possibility of editing or some undisclosed technical error combination

 The audio sounds like a continuous stream of discussion between dispatch or phone and Officer Encinia, the video below shows the tow truck driver leaving his car multiple times without going back to the cab of his wrecker. The same vehicles can clearly be seen to pass multiple times. It is unknown at this time if the irregularities signal intentional editing, technical difficulties or a combination of both.  A lot can happen in 2 minutes.

 

 Other Problematic areas with this story.

 Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, speaks with Texas Standard about the footage of the arrest, point-by-point. Here’s a transcript of the conversation, edited for brevity and clarity:

 The trooper asks, “You mind putting out your cigarette please?” And Ms. Bland says, “Well, I’m in my car – why do I have to put out my cigarette?” Does she have to put out her cigarette?

  • No, she doesn’t have to put out her cigarette. And you wonder why the officer is even bothering with that. This is part of his escalation of the whole event that unfolded, unfortunately.

SC

The next part: “Step out of the car.” Ms. Bland says, “You do not have the right.” He interrupts – “I do have the right, step out of the car or I will remove you.” Does he have the right, first, to order her to step out of the car? And second, to actually physically remove her from the car?

  • He does not have the right to say, get out of the car. He has to express some reason. ‘I need to search your car,’ or, whatever; he needs to give a reason. He can’t just say ‘get out of the car’ for a traffic offense.

 

Ms. Bland says, “I refuse to talk to you other than to identify myself.” Is she right or wrong.

  • She’s right. Unfortunately, officers don’t like it when you know the law. In this case, even if you are right, you are still in danger. And that’s what we see unfolding here.

The trooper says, “I am giving you a lawful order.” Now, is the lawful order to extinguish the cigarette, or to get out of the car, or neither.

  • Certainly, telling her to put out the cigarette was not a lawful order.

  • Just saying ‘Get out of the car,’ in and of itself, without an explanation, is not lawful. And you see him say that throughout the video without ever saying why [or] what’s .

  • It’s clear to me that he’s trying to assert authority that he probably does not have under the law, and he’s escalating the situation because he is upset. [He] doesn’t exercise the training that he needs to be exercising to de-escalate this situation.

“I’m gonna yank you out of here,” is what the trooper says. Can he physically “yank” her out of her vehicle?

  •  He can’t do that either, unless she’s posing a threat to his welfare and safety. What he should have done was just wait for backup, if he couldn’t de-escalate it himself. But you don’t just pull somebody out of the car, and point that taser in her face. What if it had gone off? She’d have permanent brain damage.

She says, “Dont touch me, I’m not under arrest.” Trooper says, “You are under arrest. She says, “Under arrest for what?” He then turns to his shoulder-mounted radio, and asks for another unit. Does he have an obligation as a law enforcement officer to tell her why she is under arrest?

  • Yes. He needs to – it’s not clear to her what’s going on. He needs to tell her, ‘You’re under arrest because …,’ but you can’t really tell her that.

  •  Because you can’t tell from the video that there’s any reason to have her under arrest.

She asserts her right to record this with her cell phone. That’s a right that has been clearly established. Is that true? 

  •   She has a right to do that. But that’s another example where the officer perceives this as a challenge to his authority – and it further escalates the whole scenario.

When he says “get out of the car, or I will light you up,” he is apparently referring to the use of a taser. Is that a legitimate threat? Is that something that’s okay for officers to do in that situation?

No – here’s the situation where he is clearly violating her constitutional rights.

  • This is excessive force on the part of the officer – to take that taser and point it in her face and say, “I’m going to harm you.”

  • Taser is the last recourse to a gun. And if he can’t get her out, he can’t de-escalate it, he’s got to wait for another officer to come and talk through this.

Right now, the trooper has been placed on administrative duty. He’s not on leave, he’s still working for DPS. It’s our understanding that there is a violation of policy here – he should not have allowed it to escalate.

We are talking about a certain level of discretion that the state apparently entrusts with its troopers. Should officers have that much discretion.

He clearly exceeded that….

  • The discretion here is, how do you de-escalate the situation? He could have just given her the ticket and walked away.

  •  Just like that. But he had to go through this confrontation. Of course, there are questions of race that come up here. And the fact that this is an out-of-state car moving through the town – and we know in Texas that’s a pretty typical profiling event.

  • What bothers me a lot is that troopers are supposed to be the best-trained police officers we have in the state. This guy is clearly out of control – clearly shouldn’t be out on the streets dealing with people – [given] this level of escalation that he provokes.

 I noted the time frames with digital Breaks (2 second drift)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBh3wzXd3vg

 8:45 – The altercation starts.

9:15 – Officer asks her to put out the cigarette, she refuses.

9:30 – Officer opens her car doors.

10:05 – Officer tells her she’s under arrest.

10:30 – Officer: “I will light you up.”

10:35 – Sandy gets out of the car.

10:44 – They leave the view of the dashcam.

12:20 – They briefly re-enter the frame.

13:20 – Struggle offscreen.

12:40 – Sandy: “You’re about to break my fucking wrist.”

13:15 – Sandy: “You’re about to break my wrist. Stop!”

14:15 – Officer tells bystander to stop filming

15:00 – Sandy claims her head was knocked into the ground.

15:50 – Sandy not heard after this point.

16:00 – Police officer claims he was kicked.

16:10 – Car is searched

22:15 – Tow truck arrives

31:05 – Officer starts talking about arrest.

32:38 – CAR DISAPPEARS

49:35 – Car is towed

END

OW2 Promo
OW01 Logo

Police are Killing Citizens!-What’s the Truth behind the Sudden outbreak! (Privilege and Control Theory)

Posted on Updated on

By Gregg L.Greer, Editor One World (Journal)

This past month, It was a privilege for me (Gregg L. Greer) to write about Denika Chatman, someone whom I see as a, “hero,”  and currently, she is preparing to take the national stage in a “Historical Run for State Senator District 3 California. I was introduced to Ms. Chatman two years ago due to the tragic circumstance of the death of her son, “Kenneth Harding Jr.” who was killed in July of 2011 by San Francisco Police in a progression of very unfortunate events.
Bobby Henning-shot and killed by a LA sheriff's deputy Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2012
Bobby Henning-shot and killed by a LA sheriff’s Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2012
Denika Chatman
Denika Chatman
Also, this week I began conversations with the family of Robert “Bobby” Henning,  another California young man who was shot and killed by a Los Angeles County Sheriff‘s Deputy Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2012 also a California Mother La Mesha Irizarry her son Idriss Stelley was shot dead with 48 bullets from 9 San Francisco policemen. While, most people in communities think that overall there are many “good,” Police Officers, and feel very safe in communities around the country, also people believe Police overall do a great job in protection of the community, lately, many communities are also expressing some anger and disappointment when hearing of the growing amount of “Police Kill, excessive force incidents across the county. “Standout,” communities with a high incident rate of “Police Kill,” incidents are Florida, and most of the State of California, especially the San Fransisco Bay Area.
Guilty in Innocence Project (Final)
Gregg Greer, chair of the Guilty in Innocent Project, states, “ I Strongly urge and understand that most of the incidents are due to an invisible code of ethics called “The Thin Blue Line.” Proponents of the symbol (code) assert that the Blue Line is meant to show support for police like the-Fraternal Order of Police Bumper Stickers. Greer also states “In opposition-those who know of the “Thin Blue Line,” feel that this standard is “extremely,” questionable and is a code that compels a bad police or bad group of police to obey their own makeshift set of laws binding only to themselves.”  “They are becoming like a “Gang,” states, Greer
Well Known Police Blue Line Slogan Sticker
Well Known Police Blue Line Slogan Sticker
Many people in communities strongly feel that, Police make the difference legal at their own discretion.
Here are the basics;
  • 1. The thin blue line represents the thin line Police Officers walk daily between life and death.
  • 2. The thin blue line represents the police officer role of separating the good from the bad while creating order from chaos.
  • 3.The thin blue line on black is a memorial or a connection or memory between Officers killed in the line of Duty and those who continue with their duties in the present.
Pretty similar to the “Thin Blue Line,” is that states including,  Florida, California, and Virginia have The Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights (LEOBR or LEOBoR) which is meant to protect American law enforcement personnel from unreasonable investigation and persecution caused by extraordinary circumstances in the official performance of their duties, and provides them with special privileges not enjoyed by other Americans accused of crimes. It was first set forth in 1974, following Supreme Court rulings in the cases of Garrity v. New Jersey (1967).
Police Sprays witnesses during demonstration
Police Sprays witnesses during demonstration

imagesCAH0URSD

 

Police Bill of Rights-Florida, California, West Virginia

The Bill of Rights while is a tough standard to break, as Community Coalitions like the California Champaign to stop Police Brutality, and other citizens rights groups start to advocate with public awareness the more, officials are prone to act, within the interest of the public.

Police Bill of Rights (Funny)
California Police Bill of Rights

bill-lee

Example, when Sanford, Florida, Police Chief Bill Lee (above), who drew criticism for his department’s actions in the Trayvon Martin case, was fired for his failure to respond. June of 2012. “After much thoughtful discussion and deep consideration for the issues facing the city of Sanford, I have determined the police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community,” City Manager Norton Bonaparte said in a news release.
“We need to move forward with a police chief that all the citizens of Sanford can support. I have come to this decision in light of the escalating divisiveness that has taken hold of the city.”
Gregg Greer As, the current Chair of the Guilty in Innocence Project, which is a growing Human Rights Protection Organization-we believe strongly that when we raise awareness and concern about the failings of our criminal justice system, we can put in place “checks and balances that go far toward prevention of community misconduct especially from sworn officers.  Greer states, ”
__
“Privilege and Control Theory”

Today to prevent the growing concerns of Police Misconduct, The Guilty in Innocence Project (This Week) has initiated a research project concept, called, “Privilege and Control Theory” which is based on what we believe-that some Police  who have long-term exposure to small incidents of violence daily increase aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal and aggressive behaviors, and decreases helpful behaviors. The basics are;

  • 1. Police habituate or ‘get used to’ all the violence and eventually become physiologically numb to it.
  • 2. “Thin Blue Line,” misrepresents the police officer role of “Effective Community Policing,” and separating the good from the bad while creating order from chaos. Which long-term causes them to take on a Master-Slave like mentality, and once this idealism is permeated some officers are willing to go above the law to the extent of murder.”
  • 3. Officers need an effective systematic violence desensitization tool, “in addition to yearly mental health evelauations” 
  • 4. Also, the internal 800 Police misconduct Alert lines must be well-known thought out communities.
  • 5. When a fatality is involved from a police related “Killing,” The review board  (investigating) should be a Non Department, State or federally certified unit. (Not in most of California)
(Anyone who believes in the “Thin Blue Line or The Police Bill of Rights should read)
Dr. Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”
 "Letter from a Birmingham Jail  April  16,1963

“Letter from a Birmingham Jail
April 16,1963
___
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.” Dr. King Later in the letter stated, “law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.” 
Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.    
__
What you can you do?
You can find a community organization, like The Guilty in Innocence Project,  or the  California Champaign to stop Police Brutality (On FaceBook) and ask questions, and get training. You can reach the GuiltyinInnocenceProject@gmail.com or call 704 712-1972
In short, “Whether or not Policy makers would continue to protect The Police Bill of Rights, or the Thin Blue Line, is mainly a public policy question, not an exclusively legal one. Also, when citizens are reacting in mass numbers to policy with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the whole community, then-this type of injustice should be intolerable to every American, or human being. Lastly, if innocent people are imprisoned or, worse, being put to death for crimes that they did not commit, it is a facet of our society that eventually will inflame our society..”  Love, and Peace.  GLG
__
G.GreerGregg L. Greer a Public Speaker, Minister, and Social Activist Gregg Greer as the Editor of One World, and One World Today internet journals. you can reach him at one1worldtoday@gmail.com