Return to “Carrollton PD Sued for Civil Right Violations”
WildBill wrote:Wow, both your Espanol is mucho goodo.puma guy wrote:No problemo. You're Welcome. Mucho!wgoforth wrote:Thank you mucho!
I learned from Peggy Hill! Though put to good use in my youth the only real Spanish I know is useless now as I no longer drink. "Senor, dos cervezas frio por favor; uno para mi y uno para mi amigo." Spelling don't count. Neither does punctuation! 
No problemo. You're Welcome. Mucho!wgoforth wrote:Thank you mucho!
Just found this link. I didn't click the Docket links but it appears to be ongoing. Slow wheels of the Justice System turning......... creaking sound!wgoforth wrote:Anyone seen updates on this story? Last I saw he was filing a law suit.
The outcome of this will take years. The strongest evidence is the video and it has some gaps. I read his lawsuit and the responses. He was arrested when he went to the police station according to the suit.Griz44 wrote:So many things done wrong, by both of them.
I teach in my classes, as we were taught by the DPS.
STAY IN THE CAR,
Hands on dash.
Wait for the officer to approach.
Declare yourself as a CHL holder and ask for instructions.
Follow those instructions.
He exited the car after he was told STAY IN THE CAR.
The declaration AFTER he exited the car against instructions, was to declare the gun - I would have seen that as a threat too.
The only crime committed was the PD threatening him when he went to pick up records. That should get several PD employees fired.
And as always this is JMHO.
handog, any update from Round Rock on your OP?handog wrote:They look like the LEOs that pulled me over in Round Rock. Maybe they went to the same academy.
The arrogance of power on video. :blowupThey should be suspended without pay before being terminated.
srothstein wrote:There are two points to take into account on this. The first and most important is that this is an edited video and not continuous coverage that the news is showing. I am always very leery of edited videos. Even given that, the news story does make it look very bad for the police involved. The big questions is what evidence he will have of the second assault while walking down the hallway. The second point is that we do not yet know enough about the subsequent arrest. If the police filed the charges on him, they would have had the warrant by the time he came back in. That arrest might be legal, even though the news story makes it look like it was revenge. Resisting and failure to display a CHL are both misdemeanors. You can arrest at the scene or with a warrant, but not legally arrest without the warrant several days later.
I also wonder what happened to the complaint. If he was adamant about filing it, was the complaint taken? Was it investigated? What are the results of that investigation?
Puma guy, yes there is a law saying you cannot get out of the car, sort of. Transportation Code section 542.501 requires people to obey the lawful orders of police officers. SCOTUS has ruled several times that this includes getting in and out of the car. As a matter of fact, two years ago they ruled that this even applied to passengers who can now consider themselves under arrest as part of the traffic stop, giving them the right to question the grounds for the stop.
Basically, the courts have ruled that any time you are in a situation with the police, they are in charge and can tell you what and what not to do. And you are not supposed to do anything they do not tell you to. Obviously, they cannot legally violate your rights though.
From the facts reported by the paper and pending hearing the other side's story, I have to agree that Carrollton PD is about to be out some big bucks and two officers, plus one sergeant especially (laughing at the scene) should not be in law enforcement.
While it wasn't the wisest thing to do getting out of a vehicle is not against any law that I'm aware of. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here. The officer waited until he was out of the vehicle before saying anything. He never ordered him to stay in his car. He said "Don't jump out of the car like that". The the guy was turned as he was telling the officer he had his CHL ; he is disarmed by the LEO and thrown to the ground. He has the guy in front of him disarmed and throws him to the ground. What threat is the LEO reacting (over reacting) to? I could give the LEO a break if at this point, having him disarmed, ordered him to the ground. Don't misunderstand I respect, admire and support all LEO's but when they do a wrong thing and then try to intimidate it's wrong and needs to be punished. I have to hand it to the officer for his quick thinking to say "Quit resisting", after the guy said he hadn't broken the law, which was a true. Trying to interpret what the officer's thinking was is no more enlightening to the facts than trying to read the guy's mind as to why he got out in the first place. He did and the facts are the facts as to what happened as a result. IMHO Mr. Staten was wronged.... twice!garcia946 wrote:Granted CPD was way out of line, but I think if the guy remained in the car everything would have turned out different.