Yeah, I’ve been hearing that too.
It’s fun the way they instantly assume everyone is racist until the facts come out. But at least this time they’re doing the right thing by telling her that crying wolf is a bad thing.
Be interesting to see how it goes from here. But as I recall those who were most vociferous in the Lying Whore thread way back when didn’t exactly bust a gut admitting their error as it became clearer that the mendacious sex worker was not, after all, a fine upstanding citizeness, and I’d bet dollars to donuts they won’t be busting a gut on this one, either.
This in response to:
“… but you can’t detain someone, even temproarily, for a completed misdemeanor that does not threaten public safety.”
To be clear … and I hate to be a pedant … but the law may indicate you may not or even should not detain someone in such a situation, yes. As for “can”, that’s only about what is possible, not about which is different from allowable or lawful or unlawful.
“The cops had no right to detain her …”
I dunno. They’re still batting around the topic of investigating a reported crime, in which case one may be detained, no? And in investigating a reported crime when you’re identified as the suspects (with particularity, evidently), and said suspect refuses to **identify herself **(not just cough up ID, if I recall) … that only serves to makes cops suspicious (let alone the rest of her strategy). All this pending finer points of CA case law aside, I mean.
“When they arrested her for not providing ID that she was not legally obligated to produce, they violated her rights.”
But she was NOT arrested or even cited, unless something’s changed since the incident (noting that of course an officer isn’t obligated to arrest you at the time of a given incident, but may choose to do so later).
Sorry I’m so late in circling back around, btw.
No.
Grigg pretty clearly says: no detention on a completed misdemeanor, unless the misdemeanor is one that implicates public safety.
The crime they were investigating was public lewdness, a misdemeanor. They can investigate that but not detain anyone. They detained her. A detention happens when one is seized for Fourth Amendment purposes. It’s when you are not free to disregard the police and go about your business. Handcuffs always mean detention.
(post shortened)
I’m just thinking out loud but this ID thing still puzzles me. It’s been 7 years since Grigg and the LAPD still seems pretty adamant about asking for, and receiving, at least a verbal identification from suspects. Is it possible that some Homeland Security legislation has overwritten Grigg? 
I don’t know of any such legislation. And since Grigg is constitutionally grounded, I’d be skeptical that it would be possible to “overwrite” the decision that way.
In any event, the burden to justify a warrantless detention rests on the police. In other words, they cannot simply say, “Our policy is to ask for ID.” They have to explain what rationale supports the warrantless detention.
No facts have come out that absolve the police for misbehavior. The police illegally detained her and it’s likely they wouldn’t have done so to a white woman. What leads you to conclude “crying wolf”?
Okay, then let’s see a cite comparing the number of black women detained for humping in public vs. the number of white women detained for humping in public.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t agree. Police tend to be very adamant about the “give me your ID,” business. YouTube is full of examples of white people who are detained for open carry of a handgun, despite the fact that such detention is completely illegal (since these examples arise in jurisdictions where open carry is legal).
I completely disagree. From the sound of his voice to the comments themselves, to his followup interview, I think the cop was more interested in just clearing his mental checklist before closing the call than anything having to do with race.
His mental checklist was likely wrong in terms of needing to have ID, but that’s all it was.
- Identify the people involved in the complaint
- Observe any violations in progress
2a) If there are any, tell them to knock it off - Check their IDs for open warrants
- Say “Have a nice day.” and get coffee.
Forget it, guys. It’s about a half hour drive from Chinatown.
An office full of people saw the car rocking, her on top of him thrusting and grinding and they also saw them wiping their private parts off with kleenex afterwards.
You don’t need a penis in vagina photo when you have so many adults who presumably have had enough sex to know it when they see it.
Perhaps, but it is naive and foolish to pretend that disproportionate minority contact and disproportionate minority arrest are not real, demonstrable and documented phenomena. Given that, the argument that in the course of all this disproportionate contact and arrest, requests for ID occur proportionately just doesn’t hold water.
Statistics and anecdotal reports indicate that black people are more likely to be victims of cop “misbehavior” – the proverbial driving while black, excessive force, extra attention, etc. It’s impossible to tell whether each individual instance of such misbehavior is at least partially due to the race of the victim, and in most cases it’s not possible to know whether any particular instance is due to the race of the victim. Nonetheless, it’s reasonable to discuss instances of cop misbehavior like this one in the context of greater attention and greater amounts of “misbehavior” – even though this particular one may not be due to race.
How,from that distance, could they ID the brand of tissues being used?
Maybe they were accurate and maybe they were not. Maybe they were racially biased and maybe they weren’t.
What I like about the US v Grigg decision and all the other case law that established the point, is that it says when the stakes are low, the cops shouldn’t hassle you just on the say so of someone else.
Maybe it’s because of the crazy woman who lived next door when I was a kid who would make up shit and call the police regularly to have them hassle us. Different than a terry stop, I know. Hopefully I would still support the principle involved without that.
You had one of them too?
[hijack] Ours used to call and tell the cops we rearranged the furniture in her living room while she was in the bedroom, and stuff like that. Tell the truth, we’da done it if we’da thunk of it, but we didn’t. Then one day she screwed a big hasp to the outside of her door, locked a big lock in it, then crawled through a window to get in the house. Then called the cops. They came, talked to her through the door. They thought she was complaining that we had put the lock on to trap her inside, and they were ready to arrest us (or something). But no, she really just wanted to tell them we were so bad she had to put it on, for protection, don’t you see? When she crawled out the window and unlocked it with her key, the cops were convinced and actually came over to us and said they would never hassle us again at her instigation. So something good came of it. One day during a thunderstorm, she came outside wearing a big pot (the cooking kind) on her head, and banging on the lid with a wooden spoon while screaming at the top of her voice in some incoherent sing-song. I think she was committed soon after.[/hijack]
But other than that, and several instances during my hippie days, I’ve avoided most cop hassles. I’ve always credited my sterling character (and my deficiency in melanin).
I did, although mine wasn’t psychotic. Most of the cop-involved stuff was really stupid, like “he made faces at me” or “he was peeking in the back window” or “he threw sticks in my back yard” - none of which was true, just to be clear. The incident that was most revealing of the pathology involved though went like this.
One Saturday morning, I wake up, and eventually open the front door to find a statue laying on its side on my front porch. “Hmmm. That’s odd,” I say to myself. Not very long thereafter, before having a chance to really get around to doing anything about it, there’s a knock at the door. It’s the next door neighbor, and her husband standing there (and to get a sense of the husband, imagine the little old sidekick guy from Benny Hill).
Perplexed, I stand there as she points to the statue, and the guy starts in on me about having taken their statue. It dawns on me that she has set all this up in order to convince her husband how devious I am. I listen for a moment, and then I ask him, “If I had taken your statue, why would I have just left it lying right on my front porch.” He stammers and is a bit stymied, finally concluding with something about who knows why someone like me would do anything.
So, no cops involved in that one, but part of a whole string of weird accusations.
The danger there is that if you’re trying to use that anecdote as evidence to convince someone who is skeptical that the overall societal problem is a real one, and the example you’ve chosen falls apart, it might actually be counterproductive. “Wait, so you think that cops are biased against black people, and all you got is THIS??!?!?!”.
So discussion every situation has to be encased in a complete airtight history of race in America?
Anyone whose reaction is “is this all you’ve got?” Is either unspeakably ignorant or affirmatively dishonest.