I had quite forgotten your spotless record in that regard. Truly, you are a beacon to us all.
Should I start a new thread … don’t know. The Guardian is reporting:
Young black man jailed since April for alleged $5 theft found dead in cell
4 months without bail - that sounds like your US $tax working well.
Just goes to show: Cigarettes and junk food are bad for your health.
Did he know Sandra Bland? 
If you haven’t quite twigged after 38 pages, this thread is about what happened to Bland, not Bland the person.
It happened in custody, in the absence of bail, she was black. Let me know if you need more dots joined up.
Not Bland the person? That doesn’t make any sense.
FYI - There is an omnibus thread about controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians. just sayin’
I’d say start a new thread. There are a lot of unanswered questions in this case, and it will get lost in the omnibus thread.
I don’t know how. I remind you often enough.
Well played, sir.
The grand jury has found no cause to indict any of the jail staff in connection to Bland’s death.
This will doubtless do nothing to assuage the truthers who insist there was some vast conspiracy to murder Bland, but it’s clear the right decision was made. There are still other questions pending before the grand jury, so it’s possible that someone might face charges for failing to check on her hourly as the law requires.
I can see firing him for using the Taser, but perjury seems like a bit of a stretch.
According to the Model Penal Code, the elements of perjury are
Would the prosecution need to show somehow that Encinia didn’t intend to conduct a safer traffic investigation? How would they show what he really intended?
Regards,
Shodan
Wouldn’t his actions immediately following provide some insight into his intentions?
They could. The burden would be on the prosecution to show that arresting her, Tasing her when she resisted and handcuffing her, showed somehow that he did not intend to conduct a safer traffic investigation. Also, that saying he ordered her out of the car and to put out her cigarette for that reason instead of whatever they can prove he really intended, is material to the investigation.
I read the article, but I didn’t see any indication of what the prosecution is going to allege was his real motivation. Is it racism? That too seems a bit of a stretch. No doubt the grand jury heard things that aren’t in the public press, but it appears at first blush that a conviction will be an uphill battle.
Regards,
Shodan
Well he had already written up her warning when he ordered Bland out of the car. What further investigating was going to happen?
Find out if she appeared drunk or high. (Apparently she was high, as it turns out.) Or see how she reacts to the standard lecture.
I think we have thrashed out the fact that the traffic stop isn’t over the instant the cop writes up the citation, and that the order to get out of the car was legal.
Regards,
Shodan
I never heard anything about her being high. Asking her iut of the car to investigate how she reacts to his standard lecture? Oooookay.
No, ordering her out of the car is in response to how she reacts to his standard lecture.
Regards,
Shodan