# Kissing your husband while black? Not if the LAPD can help it. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 14, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492 "2014-09-14T19:21:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 27
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/521 "2014-09-15T19:15:42Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And what of any felony that may have happened? There is no evidence that a felony occurred. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/522 "2014-09-15T19:16:58Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > If you were talking about just questioning people at random I would agree with you, but again, this cop was called to the scene and met with a couple who fit with a description. But because only a misdemeanor-level crime with no risk to public safety was reported, and it was not occurring when the officers arrived, they did not have the legal right to detain Watts. They acted unlawfully by detaining Watts. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/523 "2014-09-15T19:17:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You see, it does fall to the officers to distinguish between a felony, a misdemeanor involving public safety, and one that does not involve public safety. A Terry stop is not reasonable to investigate a completed misdemeanor, unless the misdemeanor is one that involves public safety. Which they could not possibly have done in this scenario until they spoke to the suspects involved. Is it your assertion that the police should refuse to investigate _any_ reports of public sex because “it’s probably only a misdemeanor”? And if it has been reported that two people are currently engaged in sexual conduct, and upon arrival a few minutes later police find those people _still_ engaged in fondling and making out, then it is not reasonable to conclude that any potential crime is still underway. And when one person refuses to provide any means of determining whether they’re of the age of consent or not involved in other criminal acts, then it becomes a potential matter of public safety. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/524 "2014-09-15T19:17:57Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > If you were talking about just questioning people at random I would agree with you, but again, this cop was called to the scene and met with a couple who fit with a description. Fucking ug. Aren’t you reading what other people are typing here? Anyone home in there? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/525 "2014-09-15T19:18:58Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > It applies to the whole country in which stop-and-identify laws exist. CA does not have one, therefore the ruling is irrelevant to CA law. Er, no. The correct conclusion to this sentence, assuming that the assertion “CA does not have [stop-and-identify laws]” is correct (which I am inclined to doubt until I see it stated by a credible source), is “…therefore the cops had no possible legal justification to detain Watts”. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/526 "2014-09-15T19:19:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So far as I know, the police were called with a report of a couple having sex in a car. That’s the crime of lewd conduct. > > When they arrived, they did not see the crime being committed. It’s also potentially the crime of rape, statuatory rape, sexual assault, or pandering. Do the police have enough evidence to determine _specifically_ that none of those events are occurring and that it’s only a misdemeanor? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/527 "2014-09-15T19:19:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Even if California had such a law, it would likely not pass muster under _ **Hibbel v. Sixth Judicial District** _, which permitted a state law that required a detained person to supply a name but did not go as far as requiring specific written identification. (bolding mine) [nitpick] It’s Hiibel. The double “i” gets a lot of people. [/nitpick] ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/528 "2014-09-15T19:20:18Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But because only a misdemeanor-level crime with no risk to public safety was reported, and it was not occurring when the officers arrived, they did not have the legal right to detain Watts. They acted unlawfully by detaining Watts. She wasn’t detained for a misdemeanor-level crime with no risk to public safety. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/529 "2014-09-15T19:20:31Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Which they could not possibly have done in this scenario until they spoke to the suspects involved. Is it your assertion that the police should refuse to investigate _any_ reports of public sex because “it’s probably only a misdemeanor”? Investigating is fine, in this case. Asking questions is fine. Detaining someone is not fine, and was unlawful, in this situation. > [@](#): > > And if it has been reported that two people are currently engaged in sexual conduct, and upon arrival a few minutes later police find those people _still_ engaged in fondling and making out, then it is not reasonable to conclude that any potential crime is still underway. There’s no evidence they were “fondling”, and making out is not lewd behavior, so no, it was not reasonable to conclude that a crime was underway. > [@](#): > > And when one person refuses to provide any means of determining whether they’re of the age of consent or not involved in other criminal acts, then it becomes a potential matter of public safety. No it doesn’t. You are factually incorrect about the law. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/530 "2014-09-15T19:21:03Z")
> [@JesterX](#): > > Not every single case is gonna fall in line with this one. This actress lucked her way onto legal ground. She didn’t luck into anything; the cops are the one who gambled and lost. It’s a gamble they probably take every day, too. Gambling with people’s rights. The more you post, the more I’m glad she was bold enough to do what she did. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/531 "2014-09-15T19:21:29Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Do the police have enough evidence to determine _specifically_ that none of those events are occurring and that it’s only a misdemeanor? “Can you prove that it _didn’t_ happen?” –Criswell, frame narration to _Plan Nine From Outer Space_ ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/532 "2014-09-15T19:21:33Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > It’s also potentially the crime of rape, statuatory rape, sexual assault, or pandering. Do the police have enough evidence to determine _specifically_ that none of those events are occurring and that it’s only a misdemeanor? They have zero evidence that any of these events are occurring. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/533 "2014-09-15T19:21:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Investigating is fine, in this case. Asking questions is fine. Detaining someone is not fine, and was unlawful, in this situation. She wasn’t detained because of the lewdness. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/534 "2014-09-15T19:22:34Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > They have zero evidence that any of these events are occurring. Which is why they needed to investigate and determine the facts of the matter, which Watts obstructed them from doing. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/535 "2014-09-15T19:22:39Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > She wasn’t detained for a misdemeanor-level crime with no risk to public safety. > [@Smapti](#): > > She wasn’t detained because of the lewdness. The officers had no lawfully valid reason to detain her. They acted unlawfully by detaining her. Again, **Bricker** laid out under what circumstances cops can detain someone. Which category does this apply to? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/536 "2014-09-15T19:23:40Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Which is why they needed to investigate and determine the facts of the matter, which Watts obstructed them from doing. No she didn’t. They had the right to ask, and she had the legal right to not answer and walk away. They did not have the lawful right to detain her because she wouldn’t answer. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/537 "2014-09-15T19:24:54Z")
**Smapti** , I’ll ask again because you haven’t answered: Cops can lawfully detain someone only under the circumstances laid out by **Bricker** in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17733260&postcount=418). The detainment of Watts does not fall into any of these categories. If you disagree, which of the categories described by **Bricker** does this detainment fall under? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/538 "2014-09-15T19:24:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No she didn’t. They had the right to ask, and she had the legal right to not answer and walk away. They did not have the lawful right to detain her because she wouldn’t answer. Then she should sue. Why hasn’t she sued, I wonder? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/539 "2014-09-15T19:25:31Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > And what of any felony that _may have happened_? (emphasis added) > [@Smapti](#): > > When there is _absolutely zero evidence_ of a racial motive (emphasis added) Smapti, Smapti, Smapti; what _have_ I told you about including [United Way updates](http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-10-02/) in these situations? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2014, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492/540 "2014-09-15T19:26:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > **Smapti** , I’ll ask again because you haven’t answered: Cops can lawfully detain someone only under the circumstances laid out by **Bricker** in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17733260&postcount=418). > > The detainment of Watts does not fall into any of these categories. If you disagree, which of the categories described by **Bricker** does this detainment fall under? All three. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kissing-your-husband-while-black-not-if-the-lapd-can-help-it/698492.md?page=28)