# 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:** 39
**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 24, 2015, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/761 "2015-07-24T18:50:49Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > As has been noted Rodriguez says when the traffic stop should reasonably have been over. All he needed was a signature. When she refuses to put out her cigarette he does not hand her the clipboard to sign. He puts the clipboard on the hood and orders her out of the car. > > As also noted in Rodiguez and I cited upthread he actually had no right to order her out of the car. Mimms does not work here. While asking her to put out her cigarette is fine her refusal is lawful and also fine. She later asks to sign the warning but the officer was having none of it at that point. Ok, but is this your own interpretation of the relevant case law and how this will play out or is this the current prevalent theory from lawyer types talking about this? Because this is the first I’ve heard about using Rodiguez in this particular case and you are making these claims in a definitive way asserting that this is pretty solid, while most of what I am still reading is saying that he could indeed require her to leave the car in this situation. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/762 "2015-07-24T18:53:04Z")
> [@iamthewalrus\_3](#): > > I’m saying it might be illegal, and it _absolutely_ should be. > > No, he just can’t change his mind based on protected speech. If you say “Whew, so glad you didn’t give me a ticket. I was driving so fast because I’m late to deliver a bunch of narcotics and handguns in the trunk”, then that’s evidence of a crime, and he would be justified in arresting you. > > But, if an officer can’t legally arrest me for insulting him, then he also shouldn’t be legally able to arrest me for something he was clearly not going to arrest me for _because_ I insulted him. The existence of an arrestable offense should not be used as a pretext for an arrest, when the _actual_ offense is failure to kowtow. So in a traffic stop, as soon as the officer says the magic words “I’m going to give you a warning” I can say anything I possibly want, including a 5 verse song extolling his mother’s value as a whore, as long as it doesn’t involve me and criminal activity and if he tries to actually give me a ticket instead, I can just say “No you can’t! You already said you were just going to give me a warning. No take backs!” Not saying he can or cannot do this, but I would never think of doing anything untoward once I heard the words “I’m going to give you a warning” for fear that I would get a ticket instead, and I wouldn’t want to ruin it. I thought that was common knowledge. Anyone know any REAL legal status on this? ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/763 "2015-07-24T18:53:35Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > In other words he had even less reason to continue the stop. In other words, the stop wasn’t over. * * * Skipping, just for a moment, the particulars of this case, what is the alternative (in Texas) to signing the warning during the traffic stop? Isn’t it being arrested, and going to jail, until you go before the court and enter a plea? ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/764 "2015-07-24T18:53:51Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > ok fine. If he decided to give her a warning, but wouldn’t put out her cigarette, your view is he cannot ever change his mind and decide to arrest her instead, since he was legally entitled to do that at the very beginning of the stop? Once he ‘decides on a warning’ he can’t change his mind ever? Ha, people change their minds all the time, but Smoking is not a legal reason for him to change his mind about the warning since he did not feel threatened or his safety compromised. He left her waiting in her own car for 6 minutes while he meandered to his cruiser to write her up. Calling someone a cocksucker is more than just disrespectful, it invites retaliation. If he did feel he was threatened, he should have told her that safety was the reason for her to get out of the car. Instead he refused to give her a reason for putting her under arrest, apprehending her or drawing the taser on her. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/765 "2015-07-24T18:58:48Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, then, why didn’t he ask her to step out of the car when he first approached? Why didn’t he ask her to step out of the car when he returned with the clipboard _after_ checking her record out? Why was it necessary at the point when she was refusing to put out her ciggy? Did she need to get out of the car to sign the warning ticket? Can anyone give me a reason other than the cop just pushing her buttons because he could? Maybe the cop didn’t want to get burned by a lit cigarette when passing a clipboard and a pen back and forth through the window. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/766 "2015-07-24T18:59:42Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Ok, but is this your own interpretation of the relevant case law and how this will play out or is this the current prevalent theory from lawyer types talking about this? Because this is the first I’ve heard about using Rodiguez in this particular case and you are making these claims in a definitive way asserting that this is pretty solid, while most of what I am still reading is saying that he could indeed require her to leave the car in this situation. My interpretation but I am not the only one. Not sure which of these (if any) were written by actual lawyers but some interview lawyers who agree with this interpretation. You are of course free to provide your own interpretation or find some differing opinions. - [Texas DPS Officer Mishandled Sandra Bland’s Traffic Stop in Violation of Recent SCOTUS Ruling](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grant-stern/texas-dps-officer-mishand_b_7852894.html) - [What The Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/07/22/3683281/supreme-court-say-sandra-blands-arrest/) - [Texas State Trooper Fought Over Cigarette When Recent SCOTUS Ruling Said Sandra Bland Arrest Should Have Ended (UPDATED)](http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/texas-state-trooper-fought-over-cigarette-when-recent-scotus-ruling-said-sandra-bland-arrest-should-have-ended/) - [Texas Trooper Had No Right To Ask Sandra Bland To Put Out Her Cigarette](http://www.alternet.org/texas-trooper-had-no-right-ask-sandra-bland-put-out-her-cigarette) - [Sandra Bland Could Have Been Me](http://www.dallasweekly.com/opinion/article_e105779c-3151-11e5-8c7f-7b43e758cfe4.html) - [New Angle: What the Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://www.citywatchla.com/8box-left/9361-new-angle-what-the-supreme-court-has-to-say-about-sandra-bland-s-arrest) ---
**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:** [July 24, 2015, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/767 "2015-07-24T19:00:03Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > ok fine. If he decided to give her a warning, but wouldn’t put out her cigarette, your view is he cannot ever change his mind and decide to arrest her instead, since he was legally entitled to do that at the very beginning of the stop? Once he ‘decides on a warning’ he can’t change his mind ever? He has to have probable cause to detain her. At the point that he asked her to stop smoking, he had already checked her plates and license number and determined her violation only merited a warning. She had no other offenses he could nail her on, so he had no reason to continue detaining her. By the logic your espousing, he could’ve held her another two or three hours, finding new and unusual things to grill her about until he grew bored and finally handed her the warning to sign. But of course that is wrong. Once he finished his investigation, he was required to release her without delay. The video shows he had no valid reason to order her out of the car. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/768 "2015-07-24T19:01:02Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > In other words, the stop wasn’t over. Not sure why you don’t get this. The officer _can not_ extend the stop without good reason. He had no good reason here to extend the stop. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/769 "2015-07-24T19:01:40Z")
> [@Andiethewestie](#): > > Ha, people change their minds all the time, but Smoking is not a legal reason for him to change his mind about the warning since he did not feel threatened or his safety compromised. He left her waiting in her own car for 6 minutes while he meandered to his cruiser to write her up. Calling someone a cocksucker is more than just disrespectful, it invites retaliation. > > If he did feel he was threatened, he should have told her that safety was the reason for her to get out of the car. Instead he refused to give her a reason for putting her under arrest, apprehending her or drawing the taser on her. I think it’s helpful to draw a distinction between the observation that the trooper SHOULD have done something differently, and the conclusion that the trooper acted illegally. So if he felt threatened, he should indeed have told her why he was getting her out of the car. But he isn’t legally obligated to do so and his failure to do so doesn’t transform the arrest into an illegal one. I persist in making this distinction because it’s clear to me that some participants don’t yet understand that. The trooper’s conduct was horrible, and a violation of his department policy. It wasn’t unconstitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/770 "2015-07-24T19:01:55Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > My interpretation but I am not the only one. Not sure which of these (if any) were written by actual lawyers but some interview lawyers who agree with this interpretation. You are of course free to provide your own interpretation or find some differing opinions. > > - [Texas DPS Officer Mishandled Sandra Bland’s Traffic Stop in Violation of Recent SCOTUS Ruling](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grant-stern/texas-dps-officer-mishand_b_7852894.html) > > - [What The Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/07/22/3683281/supreme-court-say-sandra-blands-arrest/) > > - [Texas State Trooper Fought Over Cigarette When Recent SCOTUS Ruling Said Sandra Bland Arrest Should Have Ended (UPDATED)](http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/texas-state-trooper-fought-over-cigarette-when-recent-scotus-ruling-said-sandra-bland-arrest-should-have-ended/) > > - [Texas Trooper Had No Right To Ask Sandra Bland To Put Out Her Cigarette](http://www.alternet.org/texas-trooper-had-no-right-ask-sandra-bland-put-out-her-cigarette) > > - [Sandra Bland Could Have Been Me](http://www.dallasweekly.com/opinion/article_e105779c-3151-11e5-8c7f-7b43e758cfe4.html) > > - [New Angle: What the Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://www.citywatchla.com/8box-left/9361-new-angle-what-the-supreme-court-has-to-say-about-sandra-bland-s-arrest) I could get behind the idea that the vehicle stop was extended in violation of Rodriguez. I think a finder of fact would have to make that determination. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/771 "2015-07-24T19:02:15Z")
> [@Andiethewestie](#): > > Ha, people change their minds all the time, but Smoking is not a legal reason for him to change his mind about the warning since he did not feel threatened or his safety compromised. He left her waiting in her own car for 6 minutes while he meandered to his cruiser to write her up. Calling someone a cocksucker is more than just disrespectful, it invites retaliation. > > If he did feel he was threatened, he should have told her that safety was the reason for her to get out of the car. Instead he refused to give her a reason for putting her under arrest, apprehending her or drawing the taser on her. It just seems to me that a cop has up to the moment he hands over the warning to change his mind and give the maximum penalty for whatever the stop was for. I don’t think he really needs a reason to do something he could have done from the very beginning. Again, I’m not a lawyer and don’t claim to know much about fine intricacies of traffic laws. I just can’t believe a cops legal actions can be curtailed by some magic words. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/772 "2015-07-24T19:06:23Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > He has to have probable cause to detain her. > > At the point that he asked her to stop smoking, he had already checked her plates and license number and determined her violation only merited a warning. She had no other offenses he could nail her on, so he had no reason to continue detaining her. > > By the logic your espousing, he could’ve held her another two or three hours, finding new and unusual things to grill her about until he grew bored and finally handed her the warning to sign. But of course that is wrong. Once he finished his investigation, he was required to release her without delay. > > The video shows he had no valid reason to order her out of the car. sorry but that is NOT my logic. My logic is: He could have arrested her immediately IAW what I’ve read in this thread about Texas law. He didn’t, and decided to give her a warning, until he decided to NOT just give a warning and arrest her instead. You make it seem like once he makes a mental decision to give a warning there are “No take backs!” And again, as has been pointed out in this thread at least 8 times, and something I learned, he doesn’t need to say a reason or have a reason to order the driver out of the car during a traffic stop. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/773 "2015-07-24T19:07:07Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > It just seems to me that a cop has up to the moment he hands over the warning to change his mind and give the maximum penalty for whatever the stop was for. I don’t think he really needs a reason to do something he could have done from the very beginning. Again, I’m not a lawyer and don’t claim to know much about fine intricacies of traffic laws. I just can’t believe a cops legal actions can be curtailed by some magic words. The officer cannot extend the stop to an unreasonable amount of time. If the officer has written out the warning then at the last second pulls it back and says, “No, I think I will write a ticket” I think you have a case for being detained too long. Otherwise, as you have it, the officer could spend hours changing his mind just to mess with you and there’d be nothing to stop it. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/774 "2015-07-24T19:08:56Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > My logic is: He could have arrested her immediately IAW what I’ve read in this thread about Texas law. You can be arrested in Texas for failure to signal a lane change? Really?? Wow. A ticket sure but arrested and thrown in jail? Seems a little excessive. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/775 "2015-07-24T19:10:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I think it’s helpful to draw a distinction between the observation that the trooper SHOULD have done something differently, and the conclusion that the trooper acted illegally. > > So if he felt threatened, he should indeed have told her why he was getting her out of the car. > > But he isn’t legally obligated to do so and his failure to do so doesn’t transform the arrest into an illegal one. > > I persist in making this distinction because it’s clear to me that some participants don’t yet understand that. The trooper’s conduct was horrible, and a violation of his department policy. It wasn’t unconstitutional. And your persistence is noteworthy, except the question was why can’t an officer change their mind and arrest someone after the warning was completed. No doubt they can, but he’s was stretching to find probable cause until he invented a reason. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/776 "2015-07-24T19:11:09Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > The officer cannot extend the stop to an unreasonable amount of time. > > If the officer has written out the warning then at the last second pulls it back and says, “No, I think I will write a ticket” I think you have a case for being detained too long. Otherwise, as you have it, the officer could spend hours changing his mind just to mess with you and there’d be nothing to stop it. Sure an officer COULD do that. He could also sit in his cruiser watching movies on his IPhone for 4 hours and then claim his computer was slow in looking up the license plate information. so what? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/777 "2015-07-24T19:11:25Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I could get behind the idea that the vehicle stop was extended in violation of Rodriguez. I think a finder of fact would have to make that determination. Of course. Nothing said here means bupkis regardless of which side you are arguing. The only one that will matter will be a court (if it ever gets there). ---
**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 24, 2015, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/778 "2015-07-24T19:11:36Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > My interpretation but I am not the only one. Not sure which of these (if any) were written by actual lawyers but some interview lawyers who agree with this interpretation. You are of course free to provide your own interpretation or find some differing opinions. > > - [Texas DPS Officer Mishandled Sandra Bland’s Traffic Stop in Violation of Recent SCOTUS Ruling](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grant-stern/texas-dps-officer-mishand_b_7852894.html) > > - [What The Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/07/22/3683281/supreme-court-say-sandra-blands-arrest/) > > - [Texas State Trooper Fought Over Cigarette When Recent SCOTUS Ruling Said Sandra Bland Arrest Should Have Ended (UPDATED)](http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/texas-state-trooper-fought-over-cigarette-when-recent-scotus-ruling-said-sandra-bland-arrest-should-have-ended/) > > - [Texas Trooper Had No Right To Ask Sandra Bland To Put Out Her Cigarette](http://www.alternet.org/texas-trooper-had-no-right-ask-sandra-bland-put-out-her-cigarette) > > - [Sandra Bland Could Have Been Me](http://www.dallasweekly.com/opinion/article_e105779c-3151-11e5-8c7f-7b43e758cfe4.html) > > - [New Angle: What the Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://www.citywatchla.com/8box-left/9361-new-angle-what-the-supreme-court-has-to-say-about-sandra-bland-s-arrest) I was asking you. But you are making assertions of this as if it’s resolved fact in this thread (such as your next post “The officer cannot extend the stop to an unreasonable amount of time”), while glancing at your links it’s speculation at this point. Like I said, this is the first I’ve seen this argument made, and I’m no lawyer nor do I pretend to be one. I suppose it will be interesting to see how it plays out with the REAL lawyers. Would be interesting to see what Bricker thinks of this, or some of the other board lawyers. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/779 "2015-07-24T19:12:11Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > You can be arrested in Texas for failure to signal a lane change? Really?? > > Wow. > > A ticket sure but arrested and thrown in jail? Seems a little excessive. Jesus, did you read this thread? I was surprised too, but it has been mentioned at least once or 50 times. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/780 "2015-07-24T19:12:40Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > My interpretation but I am not the only one. Not sure which of these (if any) were written by actual lawyers but some interview lawyers who agree with this interpretation. You are of course free to provide your own interpretation or find some differing opinions. > > - [Texas DPS Officer Mishandled Sandra Bland’s Traffic Stop in Violation of Recent SCOTUS Ruling](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grant-stern/texas-dps-officer-mishand_b_7852894.html) AGAIN. That claim doesn’t apply here for several reasons, and has been discussed earlier in the thread. Whoever wrote that article did not appear to understand that Texas law requires the signing of the citation in order for the traffic stop to end. > [@](#): > > - [What The Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/07/22/3683281/supreme-court-say-sandra-blands-arrest/) This is a better article. And in it, the author concedes that the stop was not over – it was “almost over.” And the author even speculates, although urging skepticism, that the trooper’s safety concerns may have been an issue. But that’s a determination of fact to be made by a court – the stopped motorist is not entitled to independently evaluate the officer’s reasoning. And once the trooper informs her she’s under arrest, and she refuses to exit the car, she’s violated Texas’ resisting arrest statute. And of course, in the course of resisting arrest, she injures the officer and violates another Texas law. > [@](#): > > - [Texas State Trooper Fought Over Cigarette When Recent SCOTUS Ruling Said Sandra Bland Arrest Should Have Ended (UPDATED)](http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/07/texas-state-trooper-fought-over-cigarette-when-recent-scotus-ruling-said-sandra-bland-arrest-should-have-ended/) > > - [Texas Trooper Had No Right To Ask Sandra Bland To Put Out Her Cigarette](http://www.alternet.org/texas-trooper-had-no-right-ask-sandra-bland-put-out-her-cigarette) > > - [Sandra Bland Could Have Been Me](http://www.dallasweekly.com/opinion/article_e105779c-3151-11e5-8c7f-7b43e758cfe4.html) > > - [New Angle: What the Supreme Court Has To Say About Sandra Bland’s Arrest](http://www.citywatchla.com/8box-left/9361-new-angle-what-the-supreme-court-has-to-say-about-sandra-bland-s-arrest) Same problems. Do you have any cites which address those points? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=38) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=40)