Sitting while Black

[CaDan]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/238041348/St-Paul-police-report

He had been rousted from his seat and was leaving. Got tased and arrested anyway.

Link has a video with some not-appropriate-for-White-kids language and the police reports.

ETA: Link changed after consultation with Staff to go directly to the police reports. If you want to see the video, go find it yourself.

 

[SummerMadness]

And herein lies the problem, police officers making illegal demands and then arresting the citizen for nothing. And for all the Tea Party talk about government intrusion and abuse, they are quite mum on the subject when it involves black people. Suddenly they demand complete submission to authority regardless of the justification (or lack thereof).

 

[cow451]

And herein lies the problem, police officers making illegal demands and then arresting the citizen for nothing. And for all the Tea Party talk about government intrusion and abuse, they are quite mum on the subject when it involves black people. Suddenly they demand complete submission to authority regardless of the justification (or lack thereof).

The Tea Party has lots of milk in its tea.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

On one hand, kinda ridiculous to charge the guy with trespassing.

On the other, had the guy just gotten up and left, he would probably still have his marijuana.

I don't know...why didn't he just simply explain to the police he didn't know it wasn't a private area? Instead he ignores them repeatedly, tells them to go ask the racist security guards, and continues to get more unruly. Nothing they asked him was illegal. They were asking him what happened and his name.

It's a pretty classic example of how NOT to act when police are questioning you. His phone video actually proves it - it doesn't really help him.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Oh the headlines for this are just special. Several news sources had the headline as "man tasered and arrested while picking up kids".

 

[JustOneWay]

Papers please....

Your papers please.

 

[SummerMadness]

On one hand, kinda ridiculous to charge the guy with trespassing.

On the other, had the guy just gotten up and left, he would probably still have his marijuana.

I don't know...why didn't he just simply explain to the police he didn't know it wasn't a private area? Instead he ignores them repeatedly, tells them to go ask the racist security guards, and continues to get more unruly. Nothing they asked him was illegal. They were asking him what happened and his name.

He is not obligated to give them his name and he was entirely cordial with the police officer. The area was not marked as private (I doubt it was private in the first place), so the police officer should have shown discretion. The other officer comes and escalates the situation by grabbing him, for what? Was he violent? Was he running away? Somehow people think the police have license to mishandle citizens however they see fit.

It's a pretty classic example of how NOT to act when police are questioning you. His phone video actually proves it - it doesn't really help him.

Actually, he is not required to identify himself just because a police officer demands name and identification. That's the Constitution talking there. If you are walking home, the police cannot just get out their cars and ask for your identification unless they are arresting you.

 

[JustOneWay]

police brutality.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

He is not obligated to give them his name and he was entirely cordial with the police officer. The area was not marked as private (I doubt it was private in the first place), so the police officer should have shown discretion. The other officer comes and escalates the situation by grabbing him, for what? Was he violent? Was he running away? Somehow people think the police have license to mishandle citizens however they see fit.

Where are you seeing the area he was sitting in? I've only seen the phone video.

And the ACLU says you should give your name if asked. Now, the ACLU does also say you have a right to remain silent. But then you should tell the officer you are exercising that right and then REMAIN SILENT.

This video, like many others, misses portions of the incident that are very much relevant to the situation. Which makes it nearly impossible for anyone not involved to really make any definitive statement.

Actually, he is not required to identify himself just because a police officer demands name and identification. That's the Constitution talking there. If you are walking home, the police cannot just get out their cars and ask for your identification unless they are arresting you.

You wanna show me that part of the constitution? Even the ACLU seems to disagree with you, and I'd expect they'd be first in line in these types of cases if there was a violation of rights.

https://www.aclu.org/drug-law-refor...acial-justice/know-your-rights-what-do-if-you

I think this part would be key:

IF YOU FEEL YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED
Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. Don't physically resist officers or threaten to file a complaint.

 

[CaDan]

On one hand, kinda ridiculous to charge the guy with trespassing.

On the other, had the guy just gotten up and left, he would probably still have his marijuana.

I don't know...why didn't he just simply explain to the police he didn't know it wasn't a private area? Instead he ignores them repeatedly, tells them to go ask the racist security guards, and continues to get more unruly. Nothing they asked him was illegal. They were asking him what happened and his name.

It's a pretty classic example of how NOT to act when police are questioning you. His phone video actually proves it - it doesn't really help him.

And . . . he had left the "private" bench. This all takes place after that. He had already been rousted.

I will enter into a friendly wager. This area is right by the skyway to the Saint Paul federal courthouse. Next time I have an appearance there, I will sit there for fifteen minutes. Ten thousand CF Blessings says I can sit there for twenty minutes as a white guy in a suit and nothing happens.

 

[DaisyDay]

And . . . he had left the "private" bench. This all takes place after that. He had already been rousted.

I will enter into a friendly wager. This area is right by the skyway to the Saint Paul federal courthouse. Next time I have an appearance there, I will sit there for fifteen minutes. Ten thousand CF Blessings says I can sit there for twenty minutes as a white guy in a suit and nothing happens.

I won't bet against you on this.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

And . . . he had left the "private" bench. This all takes place after that. He had already been rousted.

This is where things are hazy. I'd have to reread the police report to see what they say as far as him leaving. From what I saw on the video both the cops and the guy were rather rude to each other, though.

I will enter into a friendly wager. This area is right by the skyway to the Saint Paul federal courthouse. Next time I have an appearance there, I will sit there for fifteen minutes. Ten thousand CF Blessings says I can sit there for twenty minutes as a white guy in a suit and nothing happens.

If CF blessings were worth anything I might take ya up on that.

I don't know where the area is. Slate Magazine had people thinking it was right in front of a retail store. Apparently his kids school is in that same building or something? The details from 4 different articles were all...different.

 

[CaDan]

You wanna show me that part of the constitution? Even the ACLU seems to disagree with you, and I'd expect they'd be first in line in these types of cases if there was a violation of rights.

Minn. Const., Art. I, Sec. 10.

Minnesota is not a stop-and-identify state and the SPD has done nothing to establish they had grounds for a Terry stop.

I am glad this did not turn out worse than it did, but still, no one should have to put up with this sort of behavior from cops.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Minn. Const., Art. I, Sec. 10.

Minnesota is not a stop-and-identify state and the SPD has done nothing to establish they had grounds for a Terry stop.

I am glad this did not turn out worse than it did, but still, no one should have to put up with this sort of behavior from cops.

That applies to searches. They weren't trying to search him, they just wanted to know his name. They weren't even trying to arrest him at that juncture. They just wanted his name.

And while it's a technicality, he wasn't arrested for not id'ing himself but for trespassing, which like I said is rather ridiculous. But, he did do everything in a very classical wrong way. Unless, of course, you want to argue with the ACLU.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Is it possible, at all, at the very least, that this guy acted the way he did BECAUSE he had marijuana on him?

 

[JustOneWay]

Yes, he had pot, and I bet he had marijuana in his system. Good thing he did not go into a rage like Brown and Martin




Everybody who has pot on them give cops a hard time because that is the easiest way to no be caught.

 

[SummerMadness]

Where are you seeing the area he was sitting in? I've only seen the phone video.

CaDan, do it, do it! And please take a video of your subsequent arrest.

And the ACLU says you should give your name if asked. Now, the ACLU does also say you have a right to remain silent. But then you should tell the officer you are exercising that right and then REMAIN SILENT.

Reread that, you are only required to give your name if it is a law in that state. Fortunately, Minnesota doesn't follow that nonsense, the man knows his rights, he is not required to give his name.

This video, like many others, misses portions of the incident that are very much relevant to the situation. Which makes it nearly impossible for anyone not involved to really make any definitive statement.

Given that officer is walking with the man calmly and he is not assaulted until the second officer arrives, I think we can gather that he's done nothing wrong. If he did anything wrong, why were all charges dropped?

Once he left the area of the bank, the officer did not require his identification, he's not refusing to leave the area, he left the area.

You wanna show me that part of the constitution? Even the ACLU seems to disagree with you, and I'd expect they'd be first in line in these types of cases if there was a violation of rights.

Fourth Amendment

IF YOU FEEL YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED
Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. Don't physically resist officers or threaten to file a complaint.

He did not resist arrest, asking someone to not touch you is not resisting arrest.

 

[CaDan]

This is where things are hazy. I'd have to reread the police report to see what they say as far as him leaving. From what I saw on the video both the cops and the guy were rather rude to each other, though.



If CF blessings were worth anything I might take ya up on that.

I don't know where the area is. Slate Magazine had people thinking it was right in front of a retail store. Apparently his kids school is in that same building or something? The details from 4 different articles were all...different.

It's in the St. Paul skyway system, not on the street. That can be hard for folks from "back east" to understand.

But 332 Minnesota St. was not where the videoed incident occurred. It occurred several blocks away at 401 N. Robert. They chased him down after he obeyed their cop orders to "move along". It's right there in their reports.

 

[CaDan]

That applies to searches. They weren't trying to search him, they just wanted to know his name. They weren't even trying to arrest him at that juncture. They just wanted his name.

And while it's a technicality, he wasn't arrested for not id'ing himself but for trespassing, which like I said is rather ridiculous. But, he did do everything in a very classical wrong way. Unless, of course, you want to argue with the ACLU.

There's "good advice to avoid being killed" and "what your rights are". Not necessarily the same thing.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

It's in the St. Paul skyway system, not on the street. That can be hard for folks from "back east" to understand.

But 332 Minnesota St. was not where the videoed incident occurred. It occurred several blocks away at 401 N. Robert. They chased him down after he obeyed their cop orders to "move along". It's right there in their reports.

The impression I got is that Officer Hayne (the woman) was with him before he started walking away and that the other two officers met up with them as they were coming down from the skywalk. Again, not being overly familiar with that set up (I can guess what it looked like) I don't know how long it took to get from one area to the other)

And his video doesn't show them chasing him down. They're walking with him.

Which building is the day care in? Mr. Lollie claimed he was picking up his children, was heard yelling for someone to pick up kids, but then when the police asked back at the station if they needed to call someone to pick up his kids, he answered that they weren't there yet.

C'mon guys, tell me this isn't weird.