Tyreek Hill detainment

[i6pwr]

Cops are wrong, clear as day I would think.
He gave his license as required, told the cops to write up his ticket. Cop did not like that he rolled up his window or his attitude. Well, to bad as that is the cost of being a public servant.
Cop was wrong. You do not have to comply. Sickening honesty and I support the police but they are wrong this time. He does not have to comply other than to provide his license which he did, he doesnt even have to answer or talk to the police if he chooses not too. My guess is Police will be reprimanded or retrained or if he pursues this will sue and most likely win but will be settled before it gets that far.

Go ahead and flame me!

Tyreek needed to comply with the officers request, he's not above the law. He acted in a very unpredictable manner behind glass where the cop could not see in. At that point he was likely deemed a threat and needed to be detained. The fact he kept resisting and was uncooperative, he was taken to the ground textbook style. Nothing wrong with how the cops handled this, he made his bed.

Let me ask you, after the reckless maneuver, speeding, then not complying.....what part of this makes Tyreek not having to comply?

Driving is a privilege granted by the states, enforced by the police. If he did a burnout on your front lawn, would you high-five him?

He acted like a punk kid.

 

[alarmguy]

Tyreek needed to comply with the officers request, he's not above the law. He acted in a very unpredictable manner behind glass where the cop could not see in. At that point he was likely deemed a threat and needed to be detained. The fact he kept resisting and was uncooperative, he was taken to the ground textbook style. Nothing wrong with how the cops handled this, he made his bed.

Let me ask you, after the reckless maneuver, speeding, then not complying.....what part of this makes Tyreek not having to comply?

Driving is a privilege granted by the states, enforced by the police. If he did a burnout on your front lawn, would you high-five him?

He acted like a punk kid.

It’s clear don’t agree
Can’t wait to hear the outcome of the investigation
I posted my version which doesn’t match yours. I look forward to the outcome.

Post in thread 'Tyreek Hill detainment'
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/tyreek-hill-detainment.387107/post-7007356

 

[alarmguy]

Do you honestly think this kind of comment adds anything positive to the discussion?

Well you took one line out of a whole post to ask this question but yes, I think my post is everything about this conversation including the one line you singled out, it conveys my opinion of the police officers unprofessional behavior.

 

[alarmguy]

I assume tint is legal. It wouldn’t be in Calif.
He lowered window initially, but rolled back up and refused to roll back down. Just saying.
Here is screen shot of tint. You can’t see in as you would be able to under Ca rules.

View attachment 239752

We can’t speculate other than this legal since it was not ticketed.
Camera angles and glass can be deceptive.
But the only thing we can say is looks are not a measurement. Yes, it looks dark to me too.
The window was partly down when the officer lost his cool and dragged him out of the car, onto the pavement face down and cuffed him.
Previous photos and video seem to show his feet were already exiting the car obeying the officer.

I’m not defending the obnoxious behavior of the driver but that is the officers job to suck it up and defuse or find another occupation.
There was absolutely no reason to forcibly remove that man from the car and dragged to the ground and cuffed.
I’m sure this will be revealed after the investigation. Hey I support the police, truly, but there are bad ones out there and this gang of them is an example.

BTW my wife’s car has dark tinting on all windows, verified legal in our past state of SC but informed at a recent DMV inspection in our new state of NC that it is a shade too dark. They passed it but said every inspection will be subject to the inspectors discretion. Just the windows to the right and left of the driver.

 

[alarmguy]

Tyreek Hill now wants 27-year veteran officer Danny Torres fired immeadiatly. No due process: Hill's attorney, Julius Collins, released a statement on Hill's behalf Tuesday night demanding the "immediate termination" of the "escalating officer" who was placed on administrative leave as a result of Sunday's incident.

…

I’m glad to hear this. I was hoping Tyreek would not let this slide publicly. Good for him, it will insure a full investigation. I wonder if this officer has been reprimanded in the past?
It will be very hard for the police officer to defend his actions. I am sure of this.

 

[SC Maintenance]

This is a local article. Worth a read.

Some highlights

Miami-Dade police identified Danny Torres, a 27-year veteran of the department, as the officer placed on administrative duty. He was one of four officers involved in pulling Hill over for speeding.

Torres earned about $171,000 as a county police officer last year, (puts him in the top 7% of income earners btw)

While Hill was lying flat on his stomach in the street, Torres pressed his palm onto the back of his neck, the footage shows.

Torres later wrapped his arm around Hill’s throat and and forced him to sit on the sidewalk curb.

Torres also handcuffed Dolphins’ defensive tackle Calais Campbell after he stopped to check on Hill. ( I read Campbell also complied even though he had no obligation to do so, and they still told him he was under arrest and handcuffed. - thats another interesting story if you care to look into it)

Full story: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article292252165.html#storylink=cpy

 

[PWMDMD]

This is a local article. Worth a read.

Some highlights

Miami-Dade police identified Danny Torres, a 27-year veteran of the department, as the officer placed on administrative duty. He was one of four officers involved in pulling Hill over for speeding.

Torres earned about $171,000 as a county police officer last year, (puts him in the top 7% of income earners btw)

While Hill was lying flat on his stomach in the street, Torres pressed his palm onto the back of his neck, the footage shows.

Torres later wrapped his arm around Hill’s throat and and forced him to sit on the sidewalk curb.

Torres also handcuffed Dolphins’ defensive tackle Calais Campbell after he stopped to check on Hill. ( I read Campbell also complied even though he had no obligation to do so, and they still told him he was under arrest and handcuffed. - thats another interesting story if you care to look into it)

Full story: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article292252165.html#storylink=cpy

So handcuffing bystanders now too? If so, what's the articulable crime that had or was about to happen?

I can appreciate officer safety, but not at the cost of someone's 4th amendment right.

 

[Mechanician]

This is a local article. Worth a read.

Some highlights

Miami-Dade police identified Danny Torres, a 27-year veteran of the department, as the officer placed on administrative duty. He was one of four officers involved in pulling Hill over for speeding.

Torres earned about $171,000 as a county police officer last year, (puts him in the top 7% of income earners btw)

While Hill was lying flat on his stomach in the street, Torres pressed his palm onto the back of his neck, the footage shows.

Torres later wrapped his arm around Hill’s throat and and forced him to sit on the sidewalk curb.

Torres also handcuffed Dolphins’ defensive tackle Calais Campbell after he stopped to check on Hill. ( I read Campbell also complied even though he had no obligation to do so, and they still told him he was under arrest and handcuffed. - thats another interesting story if you care to look into it)

Full story: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article292252165.html#storylink=cpy

I can understand why they would be worried about the size of the crowd gathering. These guys are all HUGE specimens.

I watch a cop "ride along" show, and it's fairly normal for officers to "detain" folks. The show follows several jurisdictions in various states.
The police often declare the right, and authority, to "detain" people for any reason while they sort out or decide, what they're going to do. And they will state "I am detaining you, you are not under arrest at this time." As they slap the cuffs on.
The article states Calais Campbell was detained.

Not saying that practice is right, just saying it's something that's established police procedure.

 

[SC Maintenance]

I can understand why they would be worried about the size of the crowd gathering. These guys are all HUGE specimens.

I watch a cop "ride along" show, and it's fairly normal for officers to "detain" folks. The show follows several jurisdictions in various states.
The police often declare the right, and authority, to "detain" people for any reason while they sort out or decide, what they're going to do. And they will state "I am detaining you, you are not under arrest at this time." As they slap the cuffs on.
The article states Calais Campbell was detained.

Not saying that practice is right, just saying it's something that's established police procedure.

So its OK to detain someone for being tall and black, for standing on a public sidewalk? What was the crime?

He was told to back up and he did. He was told to disperse - which is an illegal order - people can stand on the sidewalk. He was also handcuffed and told he was under arrest - not detained. I will await the bodycam if we ever get it.

 

[Mechanician]

So its OK to detain someone that is tall, and black, for standing on a public sidewalk? What was the crime?

He was told to back up and he did. He was told to disperse - which is an illegal order - people can stand on the sidewalk. He was also handcuffed and told he was under arrest - not detained. I will await the bodycam if we ever get it.

As I said not defending the action, just stating it's established procedure, and it wasn't a huge step out of normal.

 

[SC Maintenance]

As I said not defending the action, just stating it's established procedure, and it wasn't a huge step out of normal.

You need reasonable suspicion to detain someone.

Yes, I agree, it happens all the time. Another thing that happens all the time is departments are sued for illegal detention, and they quietly pay to settle the civil suit using taxpayer money.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

So its OK to detain someone for being tall and black, for standing on a public sidewalk? What was the crime?

He was told to back up and he did. He was told to disperse - which is an illegal order - people can stand on the sidewalk. He was also handcuffed and told he was under arrest - not detained. I will await the bodycam if we ever get it.

IIRC his vehicle was illegally stopped on the side of the road and he refused to move it.

 

[PWMDMD]

I can understand why they would be worried about the size of the crowd gathering. These guys are all HUGE specimens.

I watch a cop "ride along" show, and it's fairly normal for officers to "detain" folks. The show follows several jurisdictions in various states.
The police often declare the right, and authority, to "detain" people for any reason while they sort out or decide, what they're going to do. And they will state "I am detaining you, you are not under arrest at this time." As they slap the cuffs on.
The article states Calais Campbell was detained.

Not saying that practice is right, just saying it's something that's established police procedure.

There are too many police officers who have no idea what the law is or how to apply it to very common situations. Watch a handful of auditor videos and it's easy to see this in action.

 

[SC Maintenance]

IIRC his vehicle was illegally stopped on the side of the road and he refused to move it.

Which is a civil infraction not an arrest able offence, so have it towed.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Which is a civil infraction not an arrest able offence, so have it towed.

Yes and no. There are two things at play. The act of illegally parking the vehicle, and the act of disobeying the officers lawful request to move the vehicle. IIRC they detained him because he disobeyed the instruction of the officer.

Edit: True story. My mother got detained by Charleston PD because she disobeyed an order to drive her car down a specific street when she wanted to take and did take the bridge to the Sullivan's Island.

 

[burbguy82]

How can you get a speeding ticked based on a "visual observation"? That won't hold up in court.

sure it would, if it would get to that point

 

[JeffKeryk]

Scheffler was manhandled. He did not buck the cops. He forgave them.

What would you say if an officer did this to your elderly mother of father?

 

[SC Maintenance]

Yes and no. There are two things at play. The act of illegally parking the vehicle, and the act of disobeying the officers lawful request to move the vehicle. IIRC they detained him because he refused the request to move the car.

Edit: True story. My mother got detained by Charleston PD because she disobeyed an order to drive her car down a specific street when she wanted to take and did take the bridge to the Sullivan's Island.

If your actually driving you must follow police direction.

The car was stopped, and the driver was on the sidewalk. He was no longer the driver. You can't order him to do anything, he is a bystander at that point.

You can't arrest the car. You can impound and tow it though.

Your mixing metaphors. A doesn't connect to B.

 

[TheOilWizard]

sure it would, if it would get to that point

Exactly.
Florida allows trained officers to cite for visual speed violations. Maybe his lawyer can get him off on a technicality after charging 10x the cost of the ticket. Some posters have a disconnect between what they want to be true and reality.

 

[burbguy82]

Do you honestly think this kind of comment adds anything positive to the discussion?

Hmmm, interesting question. I am surprised this thread has lasted so long on here without getting locked. So since it seems as though it is fair game......

Those who find that the situation could have been solved with a "de-escalation" are wrong. You cannot deescalate a situation with no reasonable communication. Nor can it be done with a near blacked out window. Sign language in this situation would not have even worked for instance. The driver meaningfully rolled up his window, and refused to have any type of meaningful conversation with the officer.

Further, if you have never walked up on a vehicle, gun in hand, with a reasonable lack of intelligence on whether the driver was holding his keys or a gun, you dont have any room to comment on "de-escalation".

De-escalation starts with compliance, or willingness to cooperate. It is the officer's inmplyed job to de-escalate as a measure to follow suit to the vehicle or person being interdicted, starts with the citizen.