# Sandra Bland video **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 22, 2015, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859 "2015-07-22T05:50:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/181 "2015-07-22T22:52:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > At the point at which the trooper says, “Well, you can step on out now,” she replies, “I don’t have to step out of the car,” and he responds in a harder tone, “Step out of the car,” she’s clearly and unambiguously being given an order. Moments later, after he’s opened the car door, he says, “Step out or I will remove you. I’m giving you a lawful order.” > > Do you contend that order is lawful? Or not? > [@watchwolf49](#): > > 3} “Get out of the car” … yeah, from this point on, she didn’t act like a good darkie, I have no excuses for her at all from there on out. My position is that this was an unlawful order. The traffic violation at this point was settled, the officer using his professional judgement had already decided the written warning was enough to ensure the girl would start using her blinkers. It’s clear from the video she got lippy with the officer, which she is _entitled_ to do under the 1[sup]st[/sup] Amendment. If her words had _anything_ to do with the order to step out of the car … … then the officer violated the most sacred of all our liberties … the very foundation of what it means to be an American … to use his power to repress what is _completely_ lawful in the United States (except in the very restrictive case of eminence). The US Constitution trumps Texas Law in all cases and at all times in matters explicitly stated … like Free Speech. * * * I wonder … if this was a pick-up truck with an (empty) gun rack and a couple confederate flags … and the driver played nose guard for the high school football team until all the centers in the league were hospitalized … would the officer done _anything_ different? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/182 "2015-07-22T22:57:28Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > She called her friend once to tell her she was in jail and that “she was going to pursue that officer who abused her,” and she needed help finding a witness. This would seem to be an item against the suicide theory, wouldn’t it ? She’d said as much on the arrest video too, “I can’t WAIT until we go to court” or something along those lines. Somebody who’s planning on killing themselves doesn’t really make plans for the future. I also have a hard time squaring depression with virulent anger - when I’m in a depressive phase, I can’t be brought to feel anything. I just don’t give a shit, about anything. It all dissolves into a shitty grey blur of sure, fine, whatever, what does it matter anyway, what’s even the point ? etc… And, I mean, it’s not like she had just been railroaded into 20 to life in San Quentin here. Quite the opposite : in her misfortune, she’d “lucked” into the new and improved American dream : a slam dunk lawsuit. She really had no particular reason to kill herself at that time, in that place ; other than the notion that because six months ago she made one post on Facebook where she used the word depressed, that settles it, she musta had a death wish that coulda blown off at any time for no reason whatsoever. Which is pretty weaksauce. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/183 "2015-07-22T23:13:22Z")
Why did the officer make a U-turn to follow Ms Bland? Has any reason been offered? ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/184 "2015-07-22T23:38:30Z")
Certainly not a crim law expert, but my seat of the pants impression is the cop’s orders were lawful. As someone upthread said, say nothing, and do what the cop says. But I sure hope there is some way to hold the cop responsible for his unprofessional conduct. A lot of folk say he escalated when he asked her to put out the smoke. Or when he said “Are you finished.” Bullshit. He was trying to start something when he asked her if she was irritated. “Naw, massa, I’m THRILLED to be hassled for just driving down the street. Let me out of the car so I can do some cartwheels!” And it wouldn’t be at all possible for him to preface his lawful orders: “Put out that cigarette” “Get out of the car” with words that might actually make sense to a human being. Maybe, “I need to discuss why I’m giving you a warning. … Department policy requires that cigarettes be extinguished. … Step out of the car and over to the curb so we can discuss this without me standing in the street.” Afterwards, he said he wanted her to exit the car so he didn’t have to stand in the street (which sounded like BS. His cruiser was blocking the lane, and traffic was giving a wide berth.) But what do you think? If she had put out her smoke, would he have ordered her out of the car? Hell, if she tossed it in the street, he would have written her up for littering! Asshole cop. Sort of thing that gives all cops a bad name, and makes lawful citizens fear any innocent interaction with them. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/185 "2015-07-22T23:40:59Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > This would seem to be an item against the suicide theory, wouldn’t it ? She’d said as much on the arrest video too, “I can’t WAIT until we go to court” or something along those lines. Somebody who’s planning on killing themselves doesn’t really make plans for the future. I also have a hard time squaring depression with virulent anger - when I’m in a depressive phase, I can’t be brought to feel anything. I just don’t give a shit, about anything. It all dissolves into a shitty grey blur of sure, fine, whatever, what does it matter anyway, what’s even the point ? etc… > > And, I mean, it’s not like she had just been railroaded into 20 to life in San Quentin here. Quite the opposite : in her misfortune, she’d “lucked” into the new and improved American dream : a slam dunk lawsuit. > She really had no particular reason to kill herself at that time, in that place ; other than the notion that because six months ago she made one post on Facebook where she used the word depressed, that settles it, she musta had a death wish that coulda blown off at any time for no reason whatsoever. Which is pretty weaksauce. I understand that there is a video of the corridor outside her call, with no one shown on the video entering the cell from the last check during which she was alive to the time that she was discovered dead. That would seem to be an item against the non-suicide theory, wouldn’t you say? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/186 "2015-07-22T23:47:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > …Do you agree at that point, she was unambiguously under arrest? For what? She was booked for assaulting a peace officer, yes? Which crime had not yet been committed. Isn’t he supposed to say something to advise the client of the reason her account is being serviced? He _did_ advise her of his intent to take direct physical action… TROOPER: “Step out or I’ll remove you. I’m giving you a lawful order. Get out of the car now or I’m going to remove you.” BLAND: “I’m calling my lawyer.” TROOPER: “I’m going to yank you out of here.”… (You left this part out, no doubt for purposes of brevity and clarity…) So, when he walked back to her car, he had filled out the paperwork for a warning ticket, so may we assume that he clearly did not intend to arrest her at that point? Yes? Is it because as a reasonable person she must assume she is under arrest, even if she is not? Even if the officer has yet to decide to do so? So, if the law conflicts with temporal causality, causality must concede? Far out. PS: transcript cited from here [http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/transcript-traffic-stop-sandra-bland-arrested-32617883](http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/transcript-traffic-stop-sandra-bland-arrested-32617883) ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/187 "2015-07-22T23:47:15Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Certainly not a crim law expert, but my seat of the pants impression is the cop’s orders were lawful. As someone upthread said, say nothing, and do what the cop says. > > But I sure hope there is some way to hold the cop responsible for his unprofessional conduct. A lot of folk say he escalated when he asked her to put out the smoke. Or when he said “Are you finished.” Bullshit. He was trying to start something when he asked her if she was irritated. “Naw, massa, I’m THRILLED to be hassled for just driving down the street. Let me out of the car so I can do some cartwheels!” > > And it wouldn’t be at all possible for him to preface his lawful orders: “Put out that cigarette” “Get out of the car” with words that might actually make sense to a human being. Maybe, “I need to discuss why I’m giving you a warning. … Department policy requires that cigarettes be extinguished. … Step out of the car and over to the curb so we can discuss this without me standing in the street.” > > Afterwards, he said he wanted her to exit the car so he didn’t have to stand in the street (which sounded like BS. His cruiser was blocking the lane, and traffic was giving a wide berth.) But what do you think? If she had put out her smoke, would he have ordered her out of the car? Hell, if she tossed it in the street, he would have written her up for littering! > > Asshole cop. Sort of thing that gives all cops a bad name, and makes lawful citizens fear any innocent interaction with them. All of his business should be done in front of the camera, or else why isn’t there a side camera? “I wanted to get out of the camera range so I asked her to exit her car”? I wish she had told him it was her last one and could she save it. And then got out of the car and said nothing and sued. You heard of “Miranda”? i think you’re going to hear about "Bland’ too someday. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/188 "2015-07-22T23:51:00Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Afterwards, he said he wanted her to exit the car so he didn’t have to stand in the street (which sounded like BS. His cruiser was blocking the lane, and traffic was giving a wide berth.) This kind of stuff [never](http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/grand-prairie-officer-escapes-crash-during-traffic-stop-with-minor-injuries.html/) [happens](http://6abc.com/news/suspected-drunk-driver-hits-officer-4-others-during-traffic-stop/586114/). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/189 "2015-07-22T23:58:47Z")
Yeah, with all that traffic whizzing by at speeds approaching 20 mph! Your cited incidents took place on highways. But hey, maybe _you_ can tell me why he u-turned his squad car to follow her. You’re good at this stuff, why? Did he suspect she was just about to change lanes without signaling? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/190 "2015-07-23T00:00:41Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I understand that there is a video of the corridor outside her call, with no one shown on the video entering the cell from the last check during which she was alive to the time that she was discovered dead. > > That would seem to be an item against the non-suicide theory, wouldn’t you say? We’ve already gone over this. It’s not probative in and of itself. There is a very long period with zero footage in between those times ; which is not in itself evidence of nothing happening. ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/191 "2015-07-23T00:02:38Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > You heard of “Miranda”? i think you’re going to hear about "Bland’ too someday. I doubt it. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/192 "2015-07-23T00:05:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > For what? She was booked for assaulting a peace officer, yes? Which crime had not yet been committed. Isn’t he supposed to say something to advise the client of the reason her account is being serviced? He _did_ advise her of his intent to take direct physical action… > > TROOPER: “Step out or I’ll remove you. I’m giving you a lawful order. Get out of the car now or I’m going to remove you.” > > BLAND: “I’m calling my lawyer.” > > TROOPER: “I’m going to yank you out of here.”… > > (You left this part out, no doubt for purposes of brevity and clarity…) > > So, when he walked back to her car, he had filled out the paperwork for a warning ticket, so may we assume that he clearly did not intend to arrest her at that point? Yes? Is it because as a reasonable person she must assume she is under arrest, even if she is not? Even if the officer has yet to decide to do so? > > So, if the law conflicts with temporal causality, causality must concede? Far out. > > PS: transcript cited from here > [http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/transcript-traffic-stop-sandra-bland-arrested-32617883](http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/transcript-traffic-stop-sandra-bland-arrested-32617883) Actually, that’s not exactly accurate either…I’m sure it’s just because you also were striving for brevity, not because you were trying to mis-characterize anything… > [@](#): > > TROOPER: “Well, you can step out now.” > > BLAND: “I don’t have to step on out.” > > TROOPER: “Step out of the car.” > > (He opens the driver’s side door.) > > BLAND: “No, you don’t have the right.” > > TROOPER: “Step out of the car!” > > BLAND: “You don’t have the right to do that.” > > TROOPER: “I do have the right. Now step out or I’ll remove you.” > > BLAND: “I am getting removed for failure to signal?” > > TROOPER: “Step out or I’ll remove you. I’m giving you a lawful order. Get out of the car now or I’m going to remove you.” > > BLAND: “I’m calling my lawyer.” > > TROOPER: “I’m going to yank you out of here.” > > BLAND: “OK, you’re going to yank me out of the car?” > > TROOPER: “Get out!” (reaching into the car) > > BLAND: “Don’t touch me!” > > TROOPER: “Get out of the car!” Now, while I know very little of whatever transpired or the right or wrong of things, this is clearly yet another case of cops being dicks and people thinking they know the law and deciding to flaunt it, thus escalating an already tense situation to the boiling point. A quick Google search seems to indicate that an officer DOES have the right to ask you to leave your car and an expectation that you will do so. The legal types on the board, of course, can confirm or deny this, but to me [this](http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/police-stops-when-pulled-over-30186.html) page seems to offer good advice to avoid this sort of thing happening in the first place. > [@](#): > > Right After You Stop > > After you’ve pulled over to a safe spot, you might want to show the officer a few other token courtesies. At this point, you have little to lose and perhaps something to gain. > > First off, roll down your window all the way. You may also want to turn off the engine, place your hands on the steering wheel, and, if it’s dark, turn on your interior light. This will tend to allay any fears the officer may have. (After all, police officers are killed every day in such “ordinary” traffic-stop situations, and the officer’s approach to the vehicle is the potentially most dangerous.) > > Don’t start rummaging through your back pocket for your wallet and license, or in your glove compartment for your registration, until the officer asks you for them. For all the officer knows, you could be reaching for a gun. > > If you are at all concerned that the person who stopped you is not actually a police officer (for example, if the car that pulled you over is unmarked), you should ask to see the officer’s photo identification along with his badge. If you still have doubts, you can ask that the officer to call a supervisor to the scene or you can request that you be allowed to follow the officer to a police station. > [@](#): > > Should You Get Out of Your Car? > > An officer who stops you for an alleged traffic violation has the right to insist that you and your passengers get out of your car. You should do so if asked. Also, getting out of your car may make it easier for you to check road conditions, the weather, and the place the violation supposedly occurred. > > However, many police officers prefer that you stay in your car and will tell you to stay there if you start to get out. If this happens, obviously you should cooperate. If you get out of the car against the officer’s orders, don’t be surprised to see a gun pointing at you. Cops are trained to expect the worst. When you get out of your car, they may assume you’re about to pull a weapon or attempt to flee. > > If an officer has any reason to believe that you might be dangerous, he or she has a right to conduct a quick “pat-down” search of your outer clothing while standing next to you, to make sure you don’t have a concealed knife or gun. If the officer feels any weapon-sized object during the pat-down search, he or she can reach in and get it. Also, the officer’s good faith belief that you may be dangerous justifies a search of the passenger compartment of your car for weapons. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/193 "2015-07-23T00:08:10Z")
[According to the sheriff, Bland disclosed a previous suicide attempt (within the last year) while she was being booked](http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/22/us-usa-texas-death-video-idUSKCN0PW1UI20150722?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews). Assuming this is true (and I don’t know that we should assume it is, especially given his [sordid history](http://mic.com/articles/122418/r-glenn-smith-sandra-bland-death)), it sure seems to me that this all the more reason they should have had her under close watch, away from plastic bags. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/194 "2015-07-23T00:20:27Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Actually, that’s not exactly accurate either…I’m sure it’s just because you also were striving for brevity, not because you were trying to mis-characterize anything… I linked the source. So, damn right I wasn’t! ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/195 "2015-07-23T00:27:05Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > We’ve already gone over this. It’s not probative in and of itself. Neither are the phone calls you mentioned as seeming “to be an item against the suicide theory”, were they? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/196 "2015-07-23T00:27:12Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I linked the source. So, damn right I wasn’t! And you cleverly cut off your copy and paste to spin it, so yeah, I think you were. Unless I’m supposed to think you didn’t read the whole thing and didn’t realize that what you did cut and paste was spin without the whole sequence…and, while I might think a lot of things about you, 'luci, you being stupid and/or forgetful is definitely not one of them. Besides, I’m giving you the same benefit of the doubt you gave the other posters, right? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/197 "2015-07-23T00:31:23Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Neither are the phone calls you mentioned as seeming “to be an item against the suicide theory”, were they? Actually, they’re more of a proof I’d say - because they’re not the \*absence \*of something. She was actively telling people what she’d do when out of jail, which implicitly suggests that she believed there would be such a thing. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but evidence of evidence is, well, _evidence_. ETA : oh, and **I** didn’t mention the phonecalls. You did. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/198 "2015-07-23T00:31:35Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > . Why would he even request her to put out the cigarette in the first place? That’s all-out entrapment. No, it’s not. Entrapment happens when the conduct of the police coerces the subject into committing the crime. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/199 "2015-07-23T00:32:38Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > [According to the sheriff, Bland disclosed a previous suicide attempt (within the last year) while she was being booked](http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/22/us-usa-texas-death-video-idUSKCN0PW1UI20150722?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews). > > Assuming this is true (and I don’t know that we should assume it is, especially given his [sordid history](http://mic.com/articles/122418/r-glenn-smith-sandra-bland-death)), it sure seems to me that this all the more reason they should have had her under close watch, away from plastic bags. Yeah, it sounds more and more like whatever the circumstances of Bland’s death, the department holds at the least some blame for it. That said, it’s telling who absolutely believes it’s suicide and who does not, and why the former think so. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2015, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/200 "2015-07-23T00:33:08Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Actually, they’re more of a proof I’d say - because they’re not the \*absence \*of something. The absence of footage is due to absence of activity, since the cameras were motion-activated. But I guess someone wearing Potter’s invisibility cloak might have fooled the cameras and strangled Bland. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=11)