I really hope everything works out for him. Given what’s been happening to black motorists at the hands of scared-shitless police officers, I would have also sought out a public parking lot with good lighting, if I had been in this guy’s shoes. But I guess only police officers are entitled to be wary.
Not pulling over is a crime.
Correct. It doesn’t.
He was offered a chance to plead to a misdemeanor. He chose to face felony charges. If his life is ruined, it’s his own fault.
That’s completely ass-backwards. You’re arguing that if you follow the cops’ orders they might shoot you, so you should resist arrest instead and everything will work out. That didn’t work in this case, and it hasn’t worked for anyone else who’s tried it. That kind of advice is only going to get more people in trouble they don’t have to be in. If this man had just pulled over, the officer would have determined he wasn’t the man he was looking for and sent him on his way.
It would ruin that young mans life to take that deal, so I don’t blame him for not doing so.
I’m an old white woman and I don’t travel much at night, but when I do, it is in a very rural area. I too would look for a well lit populated area before pulling over. How should I communicate that to the officer and why should he or she have a problem with my concern for safety?
I question this cops pulling the kid over in the first place anyway. The car looked like one that had driven on a sidewalk? How was pulling him over going to determine that?
No, it wasn’t the same. Not according to the media reports. The pair alledgedly loaded a shotgun in the Walmart. No one has suggested that they loaded a shotgun in the Winn-Dixie or Krispy Kreme. Since open-carry is legal, or not unlawful, in Mississippi, neither shotgun toter was charged with violating open-carry laws. They were eventually charged with “disturbance in a public place” for their action in the Walmart.
That presents a new legal question/challenge, since open-carry is not unlawful in Mississippi, does Mississippi law differentiate between open-carry of an unloaded firearm and open-carry of a loaded firearm?
*GULFPORT, MS (WLOX) -
Because 19-year-old Holton Wade Saucier reportedly took steps to make his rifle ready to fire in the presence of witnesses, he’s now charged with a crime. And so is 18-year-old William Cordell Kennon.
…At the time, neither teen was charged with a crime.
Now, five days later, police say Saucier is accused of disturbance in a public place and disturbance of the public peace or the peace of others. Kennon is accused of disturbance in a public place.*
*Mississippi Supreme Court unanimously upholds state’s open carry law
8/31/13| by S.H. Blannelberry
On Thursday, the Mississippi Supreme court unanimously upheld House Bill 2, the state’s recently passed open carry law after a lower-court judge blocked it from taking effect on July 1.
…“No change to the constitution here; just defining concealed for the first time,” he continued. “Until now, individual law enforcement or courts could fabricate a definition which resulted in an illogical infringement on constitutional rights.”
To reiterate, House Bill 2 simply states that a pistol carried in a holster that is either wholly or partially visible is not concealed carry. Thus, it’s considered open carry. If one is a law-abiding citizen, he/she can openly carry a firearm without a permit. If he/she wants to fully conceal a firearm, he/she needs a concealed carry license.
House Bill 2 cleared the state Legislature with overwhelming bipartisan support, e.g., the House passed it by a vote of 111-8 and the Senate 51-0.*
Wrong, if by “not pulling over” you mean “politiely driving to a safe place and then pulling over.”
Wow. I mean, really wow! Double Wow. I think you’ve broken the record (previously held by yourself?) for stupidest thing ever posted at SDMB.
The innocent man was offered a chance to plead a misdemeanor and any result is now his own fault. And the argument for this, if any, appears to be that by driving politely and legally to the safe point he risked being shot. Since it wasn’t illegal for him to do what he did, the key reason not to “disobey” cop was to avoid getting shot. Flabbergastingly wow.
I think I’ll bookmark your post for future use as a stupidity cite.
Exactly what was unsafe about the place the officer signaled for him to pull over at?
He’s not innocent. He failed to pull over. He was given a chance to plead guilty to the misdemeanor of which he is guilty and of which his guilt is not in question, and he refused. That’s his choice and the consequences of that are his fault.
Cite?
Is it a felony crime ?
Yes, it is;
[Quote=MI penal code, Section 750.479a]
(1)An operator of a motor vehicle or vessel who is given by hand, voice, emergency light, or siren a visual or audible signal by a police or conservation officer, acting in the lawful performance of his or her duty, directing the operator to bring his or her motor vehicle or vessel to a stop shall not willfully fail to obey that direction by increasing the speed of the vehicle or vessel, extinguishing the lights of the vehicle or vessel, or otherwise attempting to flee or elude the police or conservation officer. This subsection does not apply unless the police or conservation officer giving the signal is in uniform and the officer’s vehicle or vessel is identified as an official police or department of natural resources vehicle or vessel.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (3), (4), or (5), an individual who violates subsection (1) is guilty of fourth-degree fleeing and eluding, a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.
[/quote]
Driving slowly to a safe spot with your four-ways going is not an attempt to flee.
So since the police cruiser dash cam video shows that Wallace did not “[increase] the speed of the vehicle” nor did he “[extinguish] the lights of the vehicle” and nor did he “otherwise [attempt] to flee or elude the police”, you’ll agree that no felony crime was committed?
If Mr. Boyd the dickhead Chief Prosecutor of Saginaw County wants to charge the young man with the misdemeanor instead, I’ll wager he’ll have an equally hard time proving an attempt to flee actually occurred. But Chief Prosecutor Dickhead doesn’t actually have cause to charge Wallace (again, because Wallace didn’t commit any crime); he just wanted to coerce a plea bargain. I’m betting he quietly decides there’s “not enough evidence” to charge Wallace after all. But he might surprise me. If so, I hope the local media shines a good spotlight on the case, since it’s caught their attention.
Reaching blinkered idiot is reaching.
He continued to drive for a mile and a half without stopping and had no legitimate reason to do so. This is not in dispute. That meets the standard established by the law.
Which, since he was also guilty of the misdemeanor, he should have done.
Well, I don’t know if it’s poor reading comprehension on your part or just your usual bone stupid authoritarianism overriding the language centers in your brain, but-- no, that doesn’t meet the standards established by the law you cited.
This is the location where the officer signaled him to stop. Please indicate what exactly you consider “unsafe” about it.
Right, kayaker. Please indicate using this aerial/satellite photo of the location taken during spring or summer daylight some time in the past year to 5 years what exactly was unsafe about the location at 2:00am in February 2015?
Dumbassery on top of fucknuttery, Smapti.
So you can’t point to anything unsafe about that location, then?
Knight to d5 : If cops get to feel afraid for their lives when confronted by a black guy walking away with earphones on, a civilian gets to feel unsafe about this location.
Check.
A law-abiding civilian has absolutely no cause or justification to be afraid of the police in any location where they have a right to be.
Checkmate.
Demonstrably false on account of Tamir Rice. Illegal move. I accept your forfeit.