# 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:** 8
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/141 "2015-07-22T20:24:36Z")
I don’t know how to weigh the woman’s responsibility; she obviously paid 100% of the price. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/142 "2015-07-22T20:25:26Z")
> [@Emiliana](#): > > These comments are utterly stupid. ??? Are you able to debate (in the Great Debates forum) any of those comments? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/143 "2015-07-22T20:26:29Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Then she refuses the lawful order … That phrase makes my skin crawl. We are a free people and we don’t have to obey cops automatically, they need a damn good reason to ask us to do something and are not in any position to give us orders. Gas main is about to blow, sure they can order us not to go down that street. Putting out a cigarette or exercising free speech, not so much. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/144 "2015-07-22T20:27:13Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > What’s interesting about the thread, really, is how many posts it’s been since anyone talked about the title of the thread or what the most serious matter in the entire affair is, which is the doctored video. Which doesn’t seem to be doctored after all but we might as well myth this up. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/145 "2015-07-22T20:28:03Z")
> [@Gatopescado](#): > > This is all too much like “When Keeping It Real Goes Wrong” from \*Chappell Show.\*t! I LOLed. ---
**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, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/146 "2015-07-22T20:30:06Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > As I understand Texas law, the officer has the discretion to effect an arrest for even a minor offense as long as a citation has not been issued. It’s not completely clear to me what kind of effect a “warning citation” has. And undoubtedly, regardless of the legality of the contemplated arrest, I’m virtually certain the arrest violated his department’s policy. > > But speaking only to strict legality of his action, my best understanding is that until she signs the citation, the officer has the legal power to arrest her, even though her offense is itself only punishable by a fine. > > And if he is planning an arrest, then the order to extinguish the cigarette is a lawful one. He wasn’t planning an arrest, by the facts. If he was it was by subterfuge: He knew he had one thing over her which was the signature on the warning, and he exploited it to ask her to put out the cigarette first, basically to bait her. If he had told her to it might’ve had a different cast. But he asked and then treated that as a public safety directive from a cop which it doesn’t seem to have been. ---
**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, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/147 "2015-07-22T20:32:14Z")
> [@tnetennba](#): > > Which doesn’t seem to be doctored after all but we might as well myth this up. There doesn’t need to be a conspiracy about the tape. He did drag her out of the camera range to do his official business though. ---
**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 22, 2015, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/148 "2015-07-22T20:32:55Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > While I think the cop almost certainly over-reacted, I wonder if more of the blame needs to be on the folks administering the jail. Why was bail set so high, and why was she just not released after a few hours and given a fine? Do the folks administering the jail normally set the bail, whether it’s high or low? I thought that was done by a judge, not the jail. I could be wrong, though. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/149 "2015-07-22T20:33:50Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > What’s interesting about the thread, really, is how many posts it’s been since anyone talked about the title of the thread or what the most serious matter in the entire affair is, which is the doctored video. > > That right there is as smoking a gun as you can ask for in this scenario short of a signed confession. Any reasonable explanation for that is one that suggests serious, serious malfeasance. Because OMG she was mouthy and sassy! She probably rolled her eyes and swiveled her neck and everything! Forget what the officer did! Being uppity like that is an affront to everything America is about! You want to know what I find hilarious? Everyone cries “free speech, man”. It’s a kneejerk for everyone, conservative and liberal alike. But speech is only protected from the government. You can be fired for being mouthy and sassy. You can be kicked off the PTA for being mouthy and sassy. But you cannot be punished by the government for being mouthy and sassy. If someone asks me put me to put out a cigarette, I have the right to say no. If I don’t have the right, then I’m not being asked. I’m being ordered. He had no cause to order her to do anything after he issued that warning. I find it funny that if we were talking about private citizens doing what this police officer did, most of the folks here would be whining “free speech, man!” If we were talking about a DMV employee or a social worker, there woud be plenty of folks decrying the “overreach of government”. But because this is a police officer, the First Amendment gets casually tossed to the side. I swear, I’m almost looking forward to the day Hitler 2.0 gets elected. Maybe then people will finally appreciate that fascism is implemented by the police officer . If he can trample on the constitution with impunity, then we don’t have a constitution. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/150 "2015-07-22T20:39:32Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > I swear, I’m almost looking forward to the day Hitler 2.0 gets elected. In a landslide over Senator Godwin. ---
**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, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/151 "2015-07-22T20:41:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > …And if he is planning an arrest, then the order to extinguish the cigarette is a lawful one. “Planning an arrest”? Counselor, what in the blue fuck does that even mean? Is she under his custody when the thought crosses his brain pan? Or does he need to say something like, oh, I don’t know, “You’re under arrest for failure to exhibit appropriate respect for the guy with the gun and the badge!”? ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/152 "2015-07-22T20:41:35Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > There doesn’t need to be a conspiracy about the tape. He did drag her out of the camera range to do his official business though. No argument there. ---
**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, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/153 "2015-07-22T20:47:37Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Since when is a 28-year-old college graduate a “little girl”? Parental instinct … she’s not even old enough to be US Senator. > [@Shodan](#): > > So if a cop tells her to put out a cigarette and two days later she hangs herself, it’s murder? Expand your imagination, the dots are there … cause and effect … * * * Police officer decides to issue a warning citation – Police officer asks if Bad driver is irritated Bad driver begins mouthing off – Police officer asks if Bad driver is done – Bad driver says yes – Police officer asks “Do you mind putting out your cigarette?” – Bad driver says yes, she does mind Police officer orders her out of the car It’s the part where she ends her venting, I’m deeply troubled that the officer provokes her. He chose to escalate when he had a duty settle the encounter down. He wanted a reason to order her out of the car, without a reason he manufactured one. Does Texas Law require a signature for “promise to appear” when no appearance will be required? The officer issued a warning, not a citation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/154 "2015-07-22T20:52:57Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > What offense is committed by smoking a tobacco cigarette? What part of “Do you mind putting out your cigarette?” constitutes an order duly issued by a police officer. Where’s the “probable cause” or “reasonable suspicion” that a crime has taken place by the little girl’s “minding” to put her cigarette out. I’m sorry, I don’t believe the Supreme Court upholds officers slinging orders about willy-nilly, “Get on your knees and bark like a dog”. The answer to your irrelevant questions are: there is generally no offense created by smoking a tobacco cigarette, and thus no reasonable suspicion or probable cause that arises from the failure to extinguish it. Now to return to the question I asked you: > [@Bricker](#): > > Since Texas law permits an arrest even when the punishment for the offense is merely a fine, and since that law has been upheld by the Supreme Court, can you explain specifically why you believe the order was illegal? To review: the putative arrest would be for the crime of an illegal lane change, and probable cause existed for that arrest. As explained previously, Texas law permits such an arrest even when the maximum punishment is a fine. When an officer is planning to make an arrest, the command “Extinguish your cigarette,” is a lawful one for reasons of officer safety, since placing someone in handcuffs while they are carrying a burning ember is self-evidently unsafe. Can you explain specifically why you believe the order was illegal? > [@](#): > > I think police officer should be held to a higher standard than civilians … so ultimately fault lays with the officer … and now she’s dead … that’s murder. No, under Texas law that’s not murder. Can you quote the specific provision under Texas Penal Code 19.02 or 19.03 into which you believe this fits? Now, again to be clear, this officer’s actions were absolutely unjustified and a horrible, horrible example of police work. They almost certainly violated his department policy. I am not defending his actions as justified or right. I am suggesting that the order can be defended as lawful, and I am strongly arguing that the death is not murder on the part of the arresting officer, based on the facts adduced thus far. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/155 "2015-07-22T20:55:37Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > “Planning an arrest”? Counselor, what in the blue fuck does that even mean? > > Is she under his custody when the thought crosses his brain pan? Or does he need to say something like, oh, I don’t know, “You’re under arrest for failure to exhibit appropriate respect for the guy with the gun and the badge!”? She’s under his custody the moment she is seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, which occurs when a reasonable person in her position would not have felt free to leave. He does not need to say the specific words, “You’re under arrest.” ---
**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, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/156 "2015-07-22T20:55:53Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > What’s interesting about the thread, really, is how many posts it’s been since anyone talked about the title of the thread or what the most serious matter in the entire affair is, which is the doctored video. > > That right there is as smoking a gun as you can ask for in this scenario short of a signed confession. Any reasonable explanation for that is one that suggests serious, serious malfeasance. Oh heavens no, there were “problems” uploading the video. I’ve never personally uploaded a video but I understand it sometimes takes 20 or 30 tries to get it right. The only truism is that the internet is totally flaky. They’re hard at work getting the problem fixed. Besides, these cambots police use put a timestamp on the data, right? ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/157 "2015-07-22T20:58:11Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > He chose to escalate when he had a duty settle the encounter down. I think that’s the most salient point. You can see precisely where her shit is lost; I expect she was panicked and maybe a little keyed up because, well, because so much shit like this has been high-profile news. But he doesn’t really lose her shit so much as decide, I’m going to fuck with the person because she didn’t respect my authorit-AYE. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2015, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/158 "2015-07-22T20:59:36Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > He wasn’t planning an arrest, by the facts. > > If he was it was by subterfuge: He knew he had one thing over her which was the signature on the warning, and he exploited it to ask her to put out the cigarette first, basically to bait her. If he had told her to it might’ve had a different cast. But he asked and then treated that as a public safety directive from a cop which it doesn’t seem to have been. OK, let’s assume you’re correct. Do you believe that transforms it into an illegal arrest? What specific caselaw or statute are you relying upon to reach that conclusion? ---
**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 22, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/159 "2015-07-22T21:01:31Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Oh heavens no, there were “problems” uploading the video. Yes. There _were_ problems uploading the video, as evidenced by the fact that a video has been uploaded which lacks the video glitches previously seen and in which there are no incongruities between the video and audio. The assertion that the video was somehow “doctored” as part of some massive conspiracy has thus been refuted. ---
**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, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/160 "2015-07-22T21:02:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > When an officer is planning to make an arrest, the command “Extinguish your cigarette,” is a lawful one for reasons of officer safety, since placing someone in handcuffs while they are carrying a burning ember is self-evidently unsafe. I’ve only watched the first video, the one fouled up in the upload process. No where on that video does the officer order “Extinguish your cigarette”. I don’t see where the expectation of handcuffs comes in when issuing a warning. The girl said she was done, she broke no law answering the officer’s question truthfully. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=9)