Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
213. Your hypotheticals are interesting
Tue Sep 16, 2014, 03:02 PM
Sep 2014

But still don't take away from my experiences when it comes to people calling the police and being a nosey busbody.

Many minorities are hesitant to call police because there's simply a lack of trust between police and minorities. People having sex in a car? Out of all the problems in the world, that ranks pretty low on many peoples lists.

Also, statistics show that cops do indeed engage in racial profiling and tend to target minorities more often than other races. See 'stop and frisk' and the contraband stats from cities like Ferguson. See people having sex in a public place? Better to just go about your own business than call folks who disproportionately target you.

I think you could use a little more education when it comes to these issues. It's clear you don't really understand the dynamic between police and minorities.

That's the case with people who grew up in sheltered/homogeneous environments.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

She'd have been cuffed for something different if that was the case. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #1
He gave them his ID. She refused. The cop gave her more than one opportunity cali Sep 2014 #3
How does giving ID show that he wasn't engaged in sex in public? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #4
it doesn't demonstrate that. My only point is that he had the legal right to ask for ID cali Sep 2014 #7
Nope. jeff47 Sep 2014 #31
True...ID or none if they we're having sex in public the id.... uponit7771 Sep 2014 #14
I think often a cop asks for an ID to simply see the individual's reaction. randome Sep 2014 #17
He assumed she was a prostitute TexasMommaWithAHat Sep 2014 #32
If he assumed anything, he never told her. LisaL Sep 2014 #87
Well, he did TexasMommaWithAHat Sep 2014 #173
Cop was trying to ID her since she refused to provide an ID. LisaL Sep 2014 #176
He must have thought she could be a prostitute TexasMommaWithAHat Sep 2014 #181
if she is a prostitute hfojvt Sep 2014 #52
That was my read on it. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #56
But she wasn't arrested for that. She was arrested for not giving her ID, pnwmom Sep 2014 #95
She was not arrested. She was detained. LisaL Sep 2014 #107
But this all hinges on reasonable suspicion. Should they have had any reasonable suspicion, pnwmom Sep 2014 #108
Per police, there was a 911 call about lewd acts being committed in the car. LisaL Sep 2014 #110
There is no law against making out, and no reasonable suspicion to me pnwmom Sep 2014 #118
What action did police took other than asking her for an ID? LisaL Sep 2014 #119
They detained her. They put her in handcuffs. And it would have been more reasonable pnwmom Sep 2014 #121
This message was self-deleted by its author LisaL Sep 2014 #123
The police did detain her (or arrest her -- that's unclear) on suspicion of prostitution. pnwmom Sep 2014 #124
It appears to be a poorly written article. LisaL Sep 2014 #129
I agree. But the bottom line to me is that the police didn't find any sign of a crime. pnwmom Sep 2014 #130
So police can only arrest/detain someone if they personally see a crime? LisaL Sep 2014 #131
If the crime consists of a DISPLAY, then yes, the police should SEE it. pnwmom Sep 2014 #134
so some flasher in the park shouldn't be bothered because the police didn't see that DISPLAY cali Sep 2014 #143
Either the cop has to see it, or a witness has to be with the cop saying "That's him, officer". jeff47 Sep 2014 #162
How do you know what witness said or didn't say? LisaL Sep 2014 #171
There were no witnesses present in the video of the arrest. jeff47 Sep 2014 #198
And Watts and Lucas weren't arrested. cali Sep 2014 #185
Actually, she was jeff47 Sep 2014 #197
YES. n/t pnwmom Sep 2014 #191
Ludicrous, isn't it? LisaL Sep 2014 #170
But that's different. It's appropriate to ask other people in the park if they've seen something, pnwmom Sep 2014 #192
Not if their only evidence was a phoned-in tip, no. That would be a way to harass anyone pnwmom Sep 2014 #190
A witness would... tonedevil Sep 2014 #208
Audio available here: KurtNYC Sep 2014 #64
All of which is fine, but... Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #66
Did not "stand." She tried to walk away. That will get you cuffed no matter who you are. KurtNYC Sep 2014 #73
One more time: she was not cuffed for indecent exposure or lewd acts cali Sep 2014 #90
A telephone call is not probable cause. jeff47 Sep 2014 #164
yes it is. the caller described the couple and the attire they were wearing. cali Sep 2014 #186
And I bet I could find several identical couples in LA. jeff47 Sep 2014 #199
Per the police, witness gave a license plate number. LisaL Sep 2014 #221
UGH. The 911 callers = snitches. nt alp227 Sep 2014 #125
Snitches? TexasMommaWithAHat Sep 2014 #174
Good for them. kiva Sep 2014 #215
"pubic" sex? cwydro Sep 2014 #217
A typo, kiva Sep 2014 #220
Not in America ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #80
Evidence seems to indicate that is not the case here. joeglow3 Sep 2014 #149
Ahhh, evidence! ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #158
I don't disagree with that joeglow3 Sep 2014 #178
I have to admit it changes the way I look at the story. hughee99 Sep 2014 #2
You know, I heard about crying after sex snooper2 Sep 2014 #5
Your concern is noted, however... Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #6
yeah, yeah. why not just have some guts and call me a racist. cali Sep 2014 #13
I said that I have no idea what happened Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #29
You claimed the witnesses were "most likely white" joeglow3 Sep 2014 #150
Why are the witnesses most likely white? NCTraveler Sep 2014 #201
I grew up in a diverse area with a good amount of whites, blacks asians etc... Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #204
You summed it up nicely in your last two sentences. NCTraveler Sep 2014 #212
Your hypotheticals are interesting Cali_Democrat Sep 2014 #213
Hey Daniele Watts, Good luck ever getting another job in the industry. NEXT! n/t 951-Riverside Sep 2014 #8
Didn't get enough victim-blaming in yet? nt geek tragedy Sep 2014 #12
She is not a victim Egnever Sep 2014 #83
+1 TexasMommaWithAHat Sep 2014 #175
What is this, 1950? progressoid Sep 2014 #92
If this were Joe and Beverly Schmoe saying it was racism, joeybee12 Sep 2014 #9
to some a white person kissing a black person is lewd... uponit7771 Sep 2014 #10
what lack of specifics? Witnesses claimed they were having sex in the passenger seat of their car. cali Sep 2014 #15
Witness could be dead wrong, cops should check first and the question of why they weren't uponit7771 Sep 2014 #43
What is it that you expect cop to check? LisaL Sep 2014 #72
How do they check? joeglow3 Sep 2014 #151
No, because the school personnel are complaining witnesses. jeff47 Sep 2014 #165
I disagree. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #11
He was asked to produce ID and immediately complied. cali Sep 2014 #16
She was not free to leave. Thus she was arrested. jeff47 Sep 2014 #21
No, no...the new term for it now is 'detained'. Rex Sep 2014 #65
Unfortunately for the officers, it's still legally an arrest no matter what they call it (nt) jeff47 Sep 2014 #99
"Just do what we say and there won't be any trouble" 951-Riverside Sep 2014 #25
Oh my! In_The_Wind Sep 2014 #138
They had intent to arrest--they figured she was a street prostitute geek tragedy Sep 2014 #26
Have you listened to the tape? kiva Sep 2014 #62
Exactly. LisaL Sep 2014 #86
Cops make an assessment on the spur of the moment sometimes. randome Sep 2014 #18
So, cops get to ignore the law when they are a tad suspicious? jeff47 Sep 2014 #23
When they arrive on the scene, what are they supposed to do? Nothing? randome Sep 2014 #28
Yes, nothing. Look around, see no evidence of a crime, move on. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #33
Did you listen to the recordings? WillowTree Sep 2014 #166
Legally, they were entitled to say "Hi, what's up?" jeff47 Sep 2014 #35
Agree with everything you said. But you're "simply" stating facts. randome Sep 2014 #36
Breaking the law is a lot more problematic for police jeff47 Sep 2014 #40
I hope the cops who are now in "deep shit for false arrest" are punished for it. They violated the Louisiana1976 Sep 2014 #53
No, they didn't. LisaL Sep 2014 #106
Legit call? geek tragedy Sep 2014 #24
Were there other cars around? Maybe they had reason to think the call related to these two. randome Sep 2014 #27
Even so, no crime in progress/in evidence. geek tragedy Sep 2014 #30
I think the cops were not smart. randome Sep 2014 #34
Having never been racially profiled by cops, geek tragedy Sep 2014 #37
I hear that. randome Sep 2014 #38
so you still haven't listened to the audio I take it snooper2 Sep 2014 #182
I take it you haven't listed to the audio snooper2 Sep 2014 #20
Then sell it to TMZ for big $$$. LisaL Sep 2014 #69
And they didn't arrest/cite him because...........? jeff47 Sep 2014 #19
Because 95% of cops aren't going to arrest a married straight couple for screwing around in a car ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #57
As far as I can tell, they aren't actually married. LisaL Sep 2014 #68
I've heard all sorts of different reports as to what the relationship is ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #75
Cop was going to let her go after she showed her ID. Which he told her repeatedly. LisaL Sep 2014 #84
How dare she expect the cop to follow the law. jeff47 Sep 2014 #100
Police did follow the law. LisaL Sep 2014 #104
Nope. jeff47 Sep 2014 #112
Per TMZ, there were witnesses. LisaL Sep 2014 #116
There were people who talked to TMZ. However, the cops showed up and put on the cuffs jeff47 Sep 2014 #140
Utterly wrong. jeff47 Sep 2014 #102
We've already been through ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #109
The cop had no complaining witness, and did not see the lewd acts himself. jeff47 Sep 2014 #113
You're writing that with a straight face? ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #115
Yes, seriously. jeff47 Sep 2014 #141
You think that is what a police state is like? joeglow3 Sep 2014 #152
Demanding people carry ID at all times and show it to the police on demand jeff47 Sep 2014 #154
What if police are called to a school because of a creepy man in a trenchcoat flashing kids? joeglow3 Sep 2014 #177
CA law allows cops to check idea if they have probable cause cali Sep 2014 #145
No, the phone calls do not. The calls do not identify the suspect. jeff47 Sep 2014 #147
Did we hear the 911 calls or just speculating? ksoze Sep 2014 #148
Because ID the type of car, color, etc isn't enough. jeff47 Sep 2014 #153
A description that matches car & suspects is detainable ksoze Sep 2014 #157
Again, description of the car is not reasonable suspicion. jeff47 Sep 2014 #160
We disagree on what is reasonable suspicion ksoze Sep 2014 #167
And since they need an arrest to demand ID..... jeff47 Sep 2014 #169
Incorrect again ksoze Sep 2014 #172
Which is called "arrest". jeff47 Sep 2014 #203
No, it's actually not - there is a difference legally ksoze Sep 2014 #205
If you are not free to leave, you are under arrest. Doesn't matter if people call it "detention". jeff47 Sep 2014 #206
In your mind yes, legally there is a difference ksoze Sep 2014 #207
What reasonable suspicion? tonedevil Sep 2014 #210
Legally there is a definition ksoze Sep 2014 #211
911, Operator, yes, There is a late model blue civic with a black spoiler on 47th and Elm Street snooper2 Sep 2014 #183
Again, not sufficient. jeff47 Sep 2014 #202
Per the police, witness gave them a license plate number. LisaL Sep 2014 #222
He was cooperative. They asked him for ID, he gave it to them. LisaL Sep 2014 #70
Doesn't matter that she refused. CA law does not allow the cops to ask for ID. jeff47 Sep 2014 #103
That's not true. LisaL Sep 2014 #105
He would have to have evidence that she was the suspect jeff47 Sep 2014 #114
Where exactly did you get this idea? LisaL Sep 2014 #117
There were people who talked to TMZ. There were no witnesses talking to the cop. (nt) jeff47 Sep 2014 #139
And one is allowed to refuse in CA. Gormy Cuss Sep 2014 #195
Disagree. If they were engaging in sex in public / people were seeing the show, IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #22
I sure agree with you...Sometimes I hear a person scoff at a young couple hugging Tikki Sep 2014 #39
"Where you dancing the dance of the seven veils while chanting odes to the Dark Lord when you were s logosoco Sep 2014 #77
Thank you - I am kicking myself for using "where" instead of "were" -- IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #81
My problems with this are varied The Traveler Sep 2014 #41
And they will continue to do this until we fight back Generic Other Sep 2014 #82
I have to say The Traveler Sep 2014 #135
Pile on? kcr Sep 2014 #42
Before I heard the audio I had read that kiva Sep 2014 #44
If they were having sex why weren't they arrested for doing so? Kissin a black person is lewd to som uponit7771 Sep 2014 #45
By no definition I've ever heard is making out the same as having sex kcr Sep 2014 #46
And saying that the police kiva Sep 2014 #48
No. It is not an overreaction. kcr Sep 2014 #49
Why? kiva Sep 2014 #61
Racism does happen to individuals kcr Sep 2014 #76
I have a hard time believing kiva Sep 2014 #78
And I have no problem believing it kcr Sep 2014 #96
"but they aren't entitled to facts" kiva Sep 2014 #97
You should heed your own advice. joeglow3 Sep 2014 #155
What advice would that be? n/t kcr Sep 2014 #200
Look at the facts BEFORE coming to a conclusion. joeglow3 Sep 2014 #214
Someone upset by interracial relationships and PDA could have called in this report. kwassa Sep 2014 #50
No proof they were having sex. trumad Sep 2014 #47
The witnesses said they were having sex Evergreen Emerald Sep 2014 #54
And if the cops don't witness the actual act NickB79 Sep 2014 #60
Not true. They can investigate. If police could only investigate crimes they witnessed Evergreen Emerald Sep 2014 #63
Yes, they can investigate NickB79 Sep 2014 #93
They can investigate and ask for ID and send them on their way ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #111
If you report someone threatened to kill you and then left the scene.. Mercy_Queen Sep 2014 #71
It is legal for them to talk to the couple, and ask them to move along. jeff47 Sep 2014 #168
Your understand of the CA requirement is simply incorrect. Mercy_Queen Sep 2014 #196
Eyewitness testimony is among the least reliable evidence. stevenleser Sep 2014 #122
In their interview on CNN they sure didn't deny it n/t cali Sep 2014 #146
Given that nowdays almost everything is videotaped, it LisaL Sep 2014 #67
When I was young, "making out" just meant good old fashioned "necking," NOT sexual intercourse. nt tblue37 Sep 2014 #51
This whole case is why most cops would prefer to take a nap behind the Sav-A-Lot ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #55
Never call the cops about trivial things. Never. hunter Sep 2014 #58
I completely agree. cali Sep 2014 #74
what is trivial is in the eye of beholder KT2000 Sep 2014 #127
I don't know if it's my teaching experience or if I'm turning into a grumpy old man yelling... hunter Sep 2014 #180
If that's the case, yes, it would change my view quite a bit. NaturalHigh Sep 2014 #59
I think the cops make on the spot decisions gwheezie Sep 2014 #79
they were having..... SEX???????? Warren DeMontague Sep 2014 #85
Just to clarify the law on this: Vattel Sep 2014 #88
Per law, cop didn't do anything wrong here. LisaL Sep 2014 #89
That seems to be the case. Not that I like the way the 4th amendment has been interpreted. Vattel Sep 2014 #91
Sounds like she is getting the publicity whistler162 Sep 2014 #94
Someone asked "Why was the door left open" while they screwed? ProudToBeBlueInRhody Sep 2014 #120
I wonder if they will trace the 911 caller... whistler162 Sep 2014 #137
The cop was responding to a report. Calista241 Sep 2014 #98
Uh huh. And Michael Brown was charging, Trayvon Martin was stealing, yada yada ecstatic Sep 2014 #101
THREAD WINNER. Number23 Sep 2014 #219
Who in the hell are 'Daniele Watts and Brian Lucas'? Seriously, I recognized neither Purveyor Sep 2014 #126
I admit to re-thinking my stance on the police action. WinkyDink Sep 2014 #128
Lots of people defending the cops here. That is sad. BillZBubb Sep 2014 #132
Either you want the police to follow proper whistler162 Sep 2014 #136
first of all, there doesn't have to be a crime in progress for police to investigate cali Sep 2014 #142
Name Calling Crap .... Trajan Sep 2014 #156
lol. I can't help but laugh at you. cali Sep 2014 #209
The anti-police thing here is getting weird ksoze Sep 2014 #144
it got way past that years ago n/t TorchTheWitch Sep 2014 #161
Completely agree. That's what my other thread was about, by the way. closeupready Sep 2014 #133
When the cop stated that if she just produced her license it would have been over 15 minutes ago. dilby Sep 2014 #159
What is their definition of "sex"? tularetom Sep 2014 #163
old fashioned fucking. cali Sep 2014 #187
Maybe I'm old fashioned but I think it's disrespectful to ask a woman to have public sex with you. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2014 #179
Maybe she initiated it. cali Sep 2014 #188
Why do you automatically think he asked her? n/t OnlinePoker Sep 2014 #193
Except that, to still far too many liberalhistorian Sep 2014 #184
except it wasn't. it was fucking. cali Sep 2014 #189
But we don't liberalhistorian Sep 2014 #216
they didn't deny it in the CNN interview cali Sep 2014 #218
Not denying something liberalhistorian Sep 2014 #223
no it doesn't TorchTheWitch Sep 2014 #194
Evidently, there are now photos and more details cali Sep 2014 #224
somewhat appropriate kick. agreed with your analysis from the beginning. maximillian1974 Sep 2014 #226
somewhat smug kick cali Sep 2014 #225
Well, it looks like the narrative has now been changed. NaturalHigh Sep 2014 #227
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In my opinion, it changes...»Reply #213