# 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:** 58
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1141 "2015-07-27T05:35:30Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > …to be out of the range of the camera and not for another reason… And that other reason would be what? She was right in the camera, putting down her phone that she isn’t allowed. Not good enough, got to be over _there_, for a very good, very important reason. Which you cannot seem to put your finger on, but you’re real sure it must exist. Seems like the only thing you are sure of is what it isn’t, which is the very thing it most resembles. How long after she got out of camera range did the shit get physical? Boy, what a coincidence, huh? I know! She was waiting, she knew where the camera range ended, so she slipped over there, seized the cop in her iron grip, spun him around a few times, then flung herself to the ground, and dropping the cop on her back! Oh, wait, that doesn’t work, because of the witness there recording it with his phone. Which the officer apparently thought was another danger to public safety and the, ah, dignity of the State of Texas. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1142 "2015-07-27T05:36:35Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > Another thing that may have contributed is the fact it may not bode well to begin your new job (or interview or whatever it was) by saying you can’t make it in because you’re in jail. > > Could kinda fuck up your plans. Makes it a good idea to get out of the car when the police officer tells you to, doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1143 "2015-07-27T05:40:06Z")
Oooh. Snap. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1144 "2015-07-27T05:43:27Z")
And I’d just like to add: the discussion about the 500 bones isn’t going to go anywhere. It’s not a gigantic amount for most families that can keep a roof over their head, but any amount can be too much for some people. At any rate, they didn’t raise it for their own reasons. FTR, I wouldn’t bail my sister out for jaywalking (and I could probably bail her out for murder without calling anyone). That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t raise a stink if she died in police custody. ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1145 "2015-07-27T05:56:51Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Makes it a good idea to get out of the car when the police officer tells you to, doesn’t it? Thanks Captain Hindsight! ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1146 "2015-07-27T06:17:49Z")
I think now would be a good time to take a step back and really think about officer Encinia, maybe even a prayer, for his ouchy-boo-boos. Bow your heads with me… ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1147 "2015-07-27T06:19:22Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > Thanks Captain Hindsight! Really, the legal requirement to follow orders that an officer gives isn’t rare. I honestly don’t know of a state where it isn’t the law. If you have an example of one where it isn’t, I’d be educated if you would provide it. If you think the order isn’t lawful, the roadside is historically the absolute worst place in terms of results to attempt to adjudicate that. If we can take anything away from this almost universally idiotic stop (other than the officer needed to not escalate the situation at that moment) it’s that. Don’t try to argue your case with the officer. If you’re angry, you’re far from the first, and it will probably roll off their back. If you’re uncooperative with their orders, it’s possibly reason to take you in. If there is actually a legal merit to your problem, you can state it, but don’t pretend that stating it amounts for much on the roadside. In my experience, even the most hang 'em high judge is more reasonable than the jerk cop you happen to have been pulled over by. Wait until then. ETA: Your most recent comment seems to indicate that you’re not really willing to engage in this in a non-hysterical manner. I’d appreciate it if you’d refrain from replying to me. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1148 "2015-07-27T06:28:53Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > Really, the legal requirement to follow orders that an officer gives isn’t rare. I honestly don’t know of a state where it isn’t the law. If you have an example of one where it isn’t, I’d be educated if you would provide it. If you think the order isn’t lawful, the roadside is historically the absolute worst place in terms of results to attempt to adjudicate that. If we can take anything away from this almost universally idiotic stop (other than the officer needed to not escalate the situation at that moment) it’s that. Don’t try to argue your case with the officer. > > If you’re angry, you’re far from the first, and it will probably roll off their back. If you’re uncooperative with their orders, it’s possibly reason to take you in. If there is actually a legal merit to your problem, you can state it, but don’t pretend that stating it amounts for much on the roadside. In my experience, even the most hang 'em high judge is more reasonable than the jerk cop you happen to have been pulled over by. Wait until then. > > ETA: Your most recent comment seems to indicate that you’re not really willing to engage in this in a non-hysterical manner. I’d appreciate it if you’d refrain from replying to me. Except that we’re told repeatedly that we shouldn’t just do whatever the police say - that we should not talk to them, that we should not consent to a search. Granted - refusing to get out of the car is slightly different to declining a search - But is it really that far removed? Especially when it was, at first, basically a request? No reason given, nothing that would reasonably lead her to believe she was being arrested. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1149 "2015-07-27T06:43:38Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Except that we’re told repeatedly that we shouldn’t just do whatever the police say - that we should not talk to them, that we should not consent to a search. The people saying that you shouldn’t talk to police when you’re being questioned are fools. Not talking and providing boilerplate usually just raises suspicion unless you can keep the boilerplate going; few people can. To be honest, in far more than 50% of my more than 125 traffic stops, I’ve had a small amount of drugs in the car. I’ve been arrested for possession once, and paraphernalia once, and neither of those were due to me being adversarial during the stop. In one, I was going to be arrested for unpaid warrants already, and the cop found a seed under “locking up” my car, and called a dog as a result. In the other, the driver was already going down for drugs they found on him as part of a legal search. I say: Cooperate with the cops, but be very careful what you cooperate with them about. The second you feel the slightest bit threatened, tell them that you’re not really comfortable talking to them further without talking to a lawyer first. It doesn’t indicate any guilt, and by the time they’re questioning you, you’re legally entitled to it. > [@bengangmo](#): > > Granted - refusing to get out of the car is slightly different to declining a search - > > But is it really that far removed? Especially when it was, at first, basically a request? > No reason given, nothing that would reasonably lead her to believe she was being arrested. I’ve been told to get out of the car on many, many stops. Most of the time they were trying to fish for evidence of drugs (and my friends were usually wise enough to not give that up), but it’s normally within police powers as part of a stop. ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1150 "2015-07-27T06:52:03Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > Really, the legal requirement to follow orders that an officer gives isn’t rare. I honestly don’t know of a state where it isn’t the law. If you have an example of one where it isn’t, I’d be educated if you would provide it. If you think the order isn’t lawful, the roadside is historically the absolute worst place in terms of results to attempt to adjudicate that. If we can take anything away from this almost universally idiotic stop (other than the officer needed to not escalate the situation at that moment) it’s that. Don’t try to argue your case with the officer. > > If you’re angry, you’re far from the first, and it will probably roll off their back. If you’re uncooperative with their orders, it’s possibly reason to take you in. If there is actually a legal merit to your problem, you can state it, but don’t pretend that stating it amounts for much on the roadside. In my experience, even the most hang 'em high judge is more reasonable than the jerk cop you happen to have been pulled over by. Wait until then. > > ETA: Your most recent comment seems to indicate that you’re not really willing to engage in this in a non-hysterical manner. I’d appreciate it if you’d refrain from replying to me. Given that you can’t handle a few jokes thrown at Officer Friendly, I would appreciate you not replying to my replies about other replies. Oh wait, neither of us have that authority. And if I’ve lost your respect, it might be found wherever you’ve lost your sense of humor. I mean, really. Yes, she should have complied. I’m certainly not arguing that. But **Terr** always has to try and counter every sentiment with an “It’s all her fault” remark. It’s just tiring, It was both their faults, but he, as a professional peace officer failed miserably at doing what his department demands and what common human courtesy should be afforded during several moments during the whole, ugly, unessesary debacle. She was no criminal, until he found a way to make her one. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1151 "2015-07-27T07:07:42Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > Given that you can’t handle a few jokes thrown at Officer Friendly, I would appreciate you not replying to my replies about other replies. > > Oh wait, neither of us have that authority. And if I’ve lost your respect, it might be found wherever you’ve lost your sense of humor. > > I mean, really. Yes, she should have complied. I’m certainly not arguing that. But **Terr** always has to try and counter every sentiment with an “It’s all her fault” remark. It’s just tiring, It was both their faults, but he, as a professional peace officer failed miserably at doing what his department demands and what common human courtesy should be afforded during several moments during the whole, ugly, unessesary debacle. > > She was no criminal, until he found a way to make her one. Sorry, I do have a sense of humor, but it might not be as dark as yours. That’s awe, almost somewhere near high praise. I’d say that she wasn’t an arrest-able criminal until she made herself one. Even though the officer was a douchebag, he certainly knew he didn’t have a good case (even under Texas law) for arresting her until she decided to not exit the car. Understand that I say that as a relative of many persons who have been to actual prison (even the famouns San Quentin), and a person who has been to jail more than once myself. It’s a somewhat sad thing to say, but it’s easy to make yourself arrest-able in this world. It’s less than it was in the past, and I think the world would be a better place if we limited the offenses that were arrest-able. OTOH, there’s actually a small subset of offenses that are almost certain to get you charged with a felony. Acting the fool when you are getting cuffs put on, or after you have them on is one that is almost universal. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1152 "2015-07-27T11:02:36Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Terr, Smapti, Steophan, et al., let me ask you this. Do you think the officer in the Bland arrest acted admirably? No, I don’t think anyone thinks that. I think he acted _legally_, which as far as anyone apart from his bosses is concerned is all that matters. As for the idea of acting admirably, something ends up being admirable because it’s better than expected, because it goes beyond the call of duty. The idea that one’s actions should only be defended and supported if they are admirable is absurd, it’s along the lines of expecting everything to be above average… The cop acted contrary to his employer’s rules, and should be disciplined by them, probably sacked. But that’s where it ends, as he broke no laws and deserves no legal punishment or sanction. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1153 "2015-07-27T13:02:07Z")
Nonsense. Some are admirable for simply performing a difficult and demanding job adequately. Being a cop who takes the words “protect and serve” seriously and honors that commitment adequately is admirable. A puffed up little tin horn who’s main joy from police work is asserting his authority isn’t “admirable” regardless of how well he sustains his power trip. How would such a cop have handled the situation? By doing it right from the git-go, by acting immediately to reduce the level of anxiety and hostility. Why not just start with letting her know that this was no big hairy ass deal, that he was intending to issue a warning. By accepting her good intentions as equal to his own. Welcome to Prairie View Texas, m’am. Yes, indeed, the response to a police car coming up fast behind you is to pull out of the path, but, nonetheless, you need to signal that move. Indeed, signaling every move is a good habit to get into. Also, a stop sign is a “stop!” sign, not a slow down and check for traffic sign. Now, if you have any questions, I’ll be happy to answer them. If not, please sign at the bottom there, and we’ll both be on our way. Have a good day, and welcome to Texas. Why wouldn’t he do that? Unless, of course, he didn’t want to. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1154 "2015-07-27T13:33:45Z")
> [@Andiethewestie](#): > > No I don’t especially when The code gives the cop broad discretion If they use that broad discretion to not activate lights or siren, then 545.156 does not apply, since by its plain, unambiguous terms, it only applies when lights or siren are used. What specific principle or rule of analysis makes you believe that 545.156 can be applied to a situation that did not involve lights or siren, when by its specific, plain language it is limited to situations involving lights or siren? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1155 "2015-07-27T13:47:09Z")
Well, since you bring it up, why _weren’t_ his lights and/or siren on? The dash cam shows him performing a u-turn and then moving at a pretty good clip to catch up with the perpetrating criminal arch-fiend Sandra Bland. The speed limit is 20 mph, and if _that’s_ 20 mph… Granted, there was little enough traffic to be concerned with, but, by the same token, little enough traffic for signaling lane changes. So, he’s in pursuit, then? He can brush aside rules about using lights and sirens because…why? Oh, and be specific. ---
**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:** [July 27, 2015, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1156 "2015-07-27T13:48:00Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > But not within department policy. His actions may have violated policy. That’s the department’s decision to make, not yours or mine. > [@](#): > > Nor common sense. In my experience, “common sense” is a meaningless platitude tossed around by people who can’t form a coherent argument for why everyone else should just shut up and agree with them. It’s certainly not something you can legislate. > [@](#): > > So either you’re ostensibly a) incapable of forming your own opinion here, or b) avoiding an admission, one way or the other, for some reason. The officer did his job. It’s not his fault that Bland decided she wanted to go to jail that day. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1157 "2015-07-27T13:52:38Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It’s funny just how everyone who is blaming the cop for the suicide is immediately coming up with a long list of excuses for the family/friends when the subject comes up. So, this is why I dislike debates about “moral culpability,” with interlocutors who do not share a moral system with me, and indeed do not have a rigorous moral system at all, but rely strongly on what feels right at a particular moment, or with a particular set of actors. In contrast, a legal point is undeniably defined by statute and caselaw. (And even then, some commentators strenuously resist the truth of claims grounded solely on the legal system). All that said, I have an answer for the point you raise: the cop’s actions are arguably a reflection of what we as a society endorse. The cop is responsible for enforcing our laws, at our behest. We rightfully demand from him, and his department, a high level of professionalism and courtesy. The family may well be flakes, or they may have been reasonable people without two nickels to rub together. Regardless of the reasons for their inability to help, we as a society don’t see their failures as ours. We see the police officer’s failures as ours. In my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1158 "2015-07-27T13:54:12Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > …Bland decided she wanted to go to jail that day. That’s a highly questionable conclusion. The video evidence run contrary to this assertion. She does not appear to have made that decision at all. She seems downright distraught at the turn events take. Afaict, that’s a clear indication that she had not decided that she wished to go to jail. But to you, Bland’s actions indicate a desire? ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2015, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1159 "2015-07-27T13:56:41Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > By the way, if you thought that Sandra Bland may not have had much experience with police during traffic stops and that may explain her uncooperation: > > [Investigations – NBC Chicago](http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Suburban-Woman-Found-Dead-in-Jail-Had-Previous-Encounters-With-Police-316025661.html#ixzz3geb6z8s6) > > And NBC5 Investigates has found that – at the time of her death last Friday – she still owed a total of $7,579.00 in court fines resulting from five traffic stops in various Chicago suburbs (including a DUI), and she had been cited several times for her failure to pay those fines. > > One of those stops was for, among other infractions (such as DUI), failing to signal when changing lanes. I LOLed. I swear we should raise Paul Harvey from the dead and have him participate in most of these threads. ---
**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:** [July 27, 2015, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1160 "2015-07-27T13:57:24Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > She seems downright distraught at the turn events take. > Afaict, that’s a clear indication that she had not decided that she wished to go to jail. > But to you, Bland’s actions indicate a desire? She chose to disregard the rules of the road, mouth off to the officer, blow smoke in his face, refuse to step out of the car, and struggle and kick at him. All those actions indicate either a desire to be arrested or a wanton disregard for one’s own fate. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=57) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=59)