Cops are not heroes, but thugs

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
A generalization, sure, being that some cops act heroically on occasion, but generally true.

http://freewestradio.com/2013/07/ki...-day-reminder-from-the-sheriff-of-san-miguel/

Citing fair use for the paste: 17 USC § 107

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

Kidnapped in Telluride – An Independence Day Reminder From the Sheriff of San Miguel Posted by Friend of FWR on July 3rd, 2013

The following account is true and accurate. Last night, July 2nd, at approximately 11:00 PM, I was walking on Highway 145 from Telluride to Placerville, Colorado.

An off duty Sheriff pulled up behind me and asked where I was going, and if I was alright. I explained that I had had a little tiff with my wife and that I preferred to walk, rather than argue. He said he understood, and asked if he could give me a ride. I said, “sure”. He made some room in his vehicle, asked my name, asked if I had any weapons, asked me if there were any warrants for me, and then said he just needed to run me through the system to see if I was wanted for anything. I told him I appreciated the offer, that I didn’t have any warrants, wasn’t wanted for anything, but I would rather walk if he was uncomfortable. I just didn’t feel that I had to prove my innocence to someone offering me a ride.

He said he was uncomfortable with me walking on the highway. I explained that I could see cars approaching from half a mile away, and could easily move off of the road. Then I said, if he would prefer, I could walk along the river. He said that made him more uncomfortable. I asked if I was breaking any laws. He said no. I asked if he thought I was a danger to anyone. He said “no”.

I said, “in that case, I will just continue walking”.

I walked about 30 feet, and he flipped on his blue lights. Then he got out and said he wanted me to wait.

A few minutes later, a second Sheriff drove up and approached. Within minutes of that, a third Sheriff arrived. They asked the same questions, got the same answers. Then the third officer demanded my drivers license. I replied that I had given them my name, where I lived, where I was going, and that I didn’t need to give them my drivers license for walking in Colorado.

At that point, the third officer became angry, and said, “you DO need to give it to me, you are on MY highway! …”

“Your, highway?”, I asked, “I thought this belonged to the people of Colorado?”

Officer 3: “This is MY highway, and I need to ID you!”

Me: “You have ID’d me. I have told you my name, address, where I am going, and I have offered to leave the highway.”

At this point, officer 3 pulled his taser and pointed it at me.

“You’re pulling a gun on me?” I said in shock.

“It’s a taser. Now turn around and put your hands behind your back. You are under arrest!” he said.

After doing as I was told, I asked, “what is the charge?”

“You’re drunk” he claimed.

“No I’m not.” I objected.

“Well, I smell alcohol… you are going to jail.”

I said, “this is Telluride. It is not against the law to smell of alcohol.”

At no time, was I loud, belligerent, disorderly, or obnoxious. I followed every order, and answered every question politely. Despite this… I had a taser pointed at me, was handcuffed, put into the car, and driven to jail.

At jail, they took my shoes and socks, emptied my pockets, frisked me again. They said I had to fill out a booking document, and take a breathalyzer. I said I did not consent to a breathalizer (BAC), and that I would not fill out the form (or anything that would violate my 5th amendment).

They then then put me into an 8′ x 12′ cell. I was given two blankets a plastic pillow, and a plastic cup for water from the stainless steel toilet/sink, which offered no privacy and had a soaking wet roll of toilet paper.

I observed the booking officer going over every inch of my property, taking every card, credit card, business card, scrap of paper, and cash out of my wallet and entering ALL of the information from them into their database. I was being violated! I knocked on the glass and said, “I do not consent to you going through my personal items or information”.

His reply was, “I’m not, I just doing an inventory.” Another bold faced lie. I was watching him!

Next they sent in a paramedic, who said he wanted to check my vitals and see if I was OK. I said, “I’m fine. I do not consent to any testing.” He seemed disappointed, but repeated what I said and left.

A few minutes later, Adam, another paramedic, arrived and explained that he would be observing me for a while. I asked Adam if he knew why I was being held.

He said, “as I understand it, they can’t release you because there is nobody to come for you…”

I corrected him, “that isn’t true. I could have someone here in 10 minutes. They will not allow me to make a phone call. Then NEVER asked me if there was anyone who could come and get me.”

He just shrugged and said, “I’m just telling you what they told me. I’m not here to judge this.”

This got me wondering… had they lied to Adam about why I was there??? He observed me for around 4 hours, making occasional notes. At 2:30 AM, I told him that I had a nasty cut on my hand, and that I would like a new dressing on it – a bandaid and some anti-bacterial ointment.

He said, “would you like me to look at that?”

I said, “yes please.”

He called one of the booking officers, and asked it he would let him in the cell. He never came. At 3:30 AM, I asked if he was gonna look at my hand. He mumbled something that I couldn’t hear, and shook his head no.

I asked if he could just slide a band-aid, some cream, and an antiseptic wipe under the door. He informed me that he was not allowed to do that.

Ten minutes passed, and I asked again if I could make a phone call. I was told I could not make a phone call until I complied with their process. So I sat down.

Every two hours, I asked if I could make a phone call to let my wife know I was OK. Each time, I was given a different lie – “I’ll ask the supervisor”… “it is against our policy”… “not until you fill out the booking form”… they never did get back to me.

At one point, I said, “let me see the booking form, maybe I can fill that out.”

To which they replied – “are you gonna blow into the BAC?”

Me: “No”

End of conversation. No form was presented.

This went on all night. For 10 hours, I asked for a phone call to call my wife or an attorney, and was denied.

Finally, an hour or so after the morning shift came in, one of the officers said, “…if you don’t like it, you should have called an attorney”.

I said, “sir, I asked if I could call an attorney and was told “NO”. I have been asking for 10 hours and not been allowed to make a call yet.”

He looked very surprised, but didn’t say anything. Fifteen minutes later, he asked me if I would like to make a phone call.

I said, “yes please”, and called my wife. While I spoke to her, explaining my situation, I observed his body language. I explained where I was, and that there was no point in coming since they told me they would not release me to her, unless I complied with their policies. I confirmed this by saying, “is that correct officer?” and he nodded.

She asked to speak to the officer. I handed over the phone. During the call, he said, “yes, if someone will come and pick him up, we can release him.” Just like that, the truth came out and they began the procedure to release me.

I had been disappeared, falsely arrested, been forced to sit in a cold cell for 10 hours, all based on a lie! This entire illegal detention could have been avoided if they had allowed me to call my wife 10 hours earlier.

This was an absolute abuse of power. An illegal detention, bordering on kidnapping. An illegal search and seizure.

Clearly this had NOTHING to do with my safety, and everything to do with the ego of an angry civil servant in a costume who was infuriated that I wouldn’t follow his every demand. How dare I exercise my right to walk freely. How dare I not give him my state issued driver’s license when the servant demanded my “papers”. And just like Nazi Germany, this costumed thug decided he would disappear me to teach me who the boss was. After all who was I to dare to walk on his highway?!

As I left the jail – on my own – I asked for a copy of the police report. I was told that there was none. (can they really be this ignorant?) I pressed them and said I needed a copy of all the paperwork on my arrest and detention. I want the names and the complete account. They told me that I had to go to the administration office next door, and walked outside with me and pointed at the door. The office was closed. I called them and was told that they might be there Thursday or Friday, and I could try back then… but they might not have it.

I suppose I should be thankful that there were two eye-witnesses there with the hot-headed officer number 3, who refused to give me his name, or I might have ended up in the ditch or with a bullet in my head like so many Germans who dared to challenge the authority of the Stasi. After all, if he killed me, who would question his account of the story on his highway? If he claimed that I attacked him and he had no choice but to “put me down”, or some other absurd excuse that the blue line would stand behind, who would doubt him?

So let this be a reminder and a warning to everyone out there this Independence Day. You are not free. The law enforcement forces of America don’t “follow” the law, they “invent” it. The law is whatever they say it is. They don’t protect your rights, they violate them at will. They are not there to protect you, they are there to tax and harass you and remind you that you are among the great unwashed who needs to be kept in your place, and lick their boots when the SAY to! They are not heroes or defenders of the legal process, but an elite gang of thugs who operates outside the law, and will gladly press their jackboots into the neck of any pedestrian who fails to worship their costume.

How did this happen? Could this happen to you? I did absolutely nothing to provoke this. If it could happen to me, why couldn’t it happen to you? I was simply walking home on a quiet country road – Minding my own business. Yet, the sheriffs violated my rights, without provocation:

4th amendment – Prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and sets out requirements for search warrants based on probable cause

5th amendment – Sets out rules for indictment by grand jury and eminent domain, protects the right to due process, and prohibits self-incrimination and double jeopardy

Illegally Detained - Arbitrary arrest and arbitrary detention are the arrest or detention of an individual in a case in which there is no likelihood or evidence that they committed a crime against legal statute, or in which there has been no proper due process of law.[1]

(Every officer told me that I was not under arrest, and that I had not broken any law, yet I was locked in a cold, brightly lit cell for over 10 hours and not permitted to make a phone call or seek legal council.)

This Independence Day, please thank the costumed thugs at San Miguel County Sheriff’s Office for their service.
 

runrunner

Veteran Expediter
I believe they are allowed to hold you for 24 hrs to identify you. Not defending the officers actions as I agree that the police are not your friends,but maybe you could have saved your self a lot of heartache by just showing ID. Well the subject could have.
 
Last edited:

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
I believe they are allowed to hold you for 24 hrs to identify you. Not defending the officers actions as I agree that the police are not your friends,but maybe you could have saved your self a lot of heartache by just showing ID. Well the subject could have.
Laws vary by state, of course, and there are several in which someone who's not driving is not required to display ID. That should be the law everywhere. You'll notice, however, that though they wanted to identify him, they brought him in on suspicion of public drunkenness, which is also apparently not a crime there, so it's bogus on both counts.
As for your last point, imagine the tyranny that would--and does--occur if we are told we must do something we can't be required to do to avoid penalty. Forex, I occasionally travel the Illinois toll roads. The ITA is a horribly corrupt organization, mafia-level, really, so there's no way I'm getting a transponder linked to a credit card and giving that number to the mafia. That means I have to stop at the plazas on the on-ramps and throw coins in the bucket. The machine goes chinka-chinka-chinka, the light turns green, and I can proceed.
Sometimes though, there's a malfunction. Either the machine mis-counts my coins, or the sorter is broken or whatever, but I don't get a green light. I figure, what the heck, maybe I'm the one that mis-counted so I throw in another dime...and another...and another. Eventually it becomes obvious that I'm wasting time and money here, so my choices are live there or leave. As I leave, my picture is taken and a violation is mailed.
So I call the local mafia don, er, the tollway authority and inform them of the malfunction. They have both still pictures of me there and video of me tossing coins in but not getting the green light. Surely I won't get a violation if I tell them their machine is malfunctioning, right? Know what they say?
"Well, you can always go online and pay the toll again with a credit card."
Now, I could always do that--save myself some heartache, as you put it--but like the guy who was assaulted in Colorado, should I have to do what I don't have to do, or should the criminals just not do us wrong in the first place?
If your bank cashes your mortgage check but then loses the record of the payment, should you save yourself the heartache by sending them another payment that month?
If you're arrested and invoke your right to remain silent, should you waive that right against your will because the cops tell you it'll go easier for you?
We have rights and legal protections for a reason, but if we can get penalized for invoking them, do we have them?
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Well, the officers acted improperly and the author refused simple things that could have ended the situation. Then you've got an OP that hates all police and considers every law enforcement officer evil. So this coin is only showing 1 of it's 3 sides.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Well, the officers acted improperly and the author refused simple things that could have ended the situation. Then you've got an OP that hates all police and considers every law enforcement officer evil. So this coin is only showing 1 of it's 3 sides.
Or the police could've acted properly and there wouldn't have been a situation in the first place. Should you have to waive your rights to not "have a situation?"

And I don't hate all police. There was that lesbian cop in Bogota, NJ who behaved honorably and it cost her her career. There was that mature yet rookie cop in Austin, TX who refused to tase an elderly man that didn't need tasing, and it cost him his career. There was that cop in Washington who testified honestly in the Meade-Meservy murder case when the pressure was on to lie. I don't know what it cost him, but probably "Look at your watch; not everybody gets to know when their career ends."

I certainly don't hate them or the small percentage of other cops who act honorably at a cost to themselves, who refuse to be militarized, who remember who works for whom and uphold the Bill of Rights above all else.
 

Dreamer

Administrator Emeritus
Charter Member
I've met a lot more good cops than bad.. I'd say it's all in that initial impression you give. I've met cops all over the US.. and very rarely meet one with an attitude.. and I've been told I meet the criteria for looking suspicious LOL.. seriously, if you give them an attitude, or act nervous, that is acting suspicious.. and it gives them probably cause to check you out!


You look a cop in the eye and act decent, 99% of the time, you're not gonna get hassled.. most of them are just average joe's trying to do their job.


Oh.. and yes, I have cops in my family, friends that are cops, and my great grandpa was a County Sheriff.. so I've seen both sides. I've seen cops with attitudes, and I've seen the ones that gave the local idiot 5 or 6 more chances than he deserved.. over all tho, I haven't known too many bad ones.


Dale
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
seriously, if you give them an attitude, or act nervous, that is acting suspicious.. and it gives them probably cause to check you out!
No, being/acting nervous unquestionably does not constitute probable cause. iirc that's been decided by SCOTUS.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
The following account is true and accurate.
[SUP]That's a [/SUP]
redflag.gif
[SUP]if I ever saw one.[/SUP]
 

Scuba

Veteran Expediter
You never have to id yourself to any policeman unless you are a suspect in a crime and then they must tell you what you are suspected of doing.
 

tenntrucker

Expert Expediter
My son was a LEO in New Orleans for 4 years, and I always told the only thing that separates most police and the thugs they arrest is which side if the bars they get to look through.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
A generalization, sure, being that some cops act heroically on occasion, but generally true.

Kidnapped in Telluride ? An Independence Day Reminder From the Sheriff of San Miguel | FreeWestRadio.com

I have to say that after reading the account of this man's ordeal in Colorado, assuming it is all true, there isn't much to it that isn't protocol, in my experience. I have on occasion been broke down, left at a bar. mad at my gf, etc., and found myself walking down a highway myself, sometimes late at night. On several occasions an LEO stopped by to see what my story was. He, or maybe she, asked what I was doing there and also asked for my identification. Now I could have taken the same stance as the author in this article, it certainly is my nature, but I did not and always complied. In all the instances I was involved in I was thanked and even a few times transported to where I wanted to go.

As far as his treatment after being arrested for not complying with what the LEO asked, I find his account almost step for step what has happened to me after being arrested. ( Yes, that's right, I know it's hard to believe but I've been arrested a time or two). Once you are under arrest and booked, an inventory of your personal stuff is taken. As far as the phone call is concerned, almost all jails have a pay phone in the cell block so I believe he was not telling truth about that. Al in all what he described is accurate. Not complying with an order from a police officer can result in a charge of Obstructing Official Business, Disorderly Conduct, and maybe more...

Most murders are a result of domestic violence. A guy walking down the road, at night, says he just argued with his wife. He tells this to a cop. Red flag in my opinion. Then he doesn't want to show identification. Pretty suspicious. The cop could have easily wanted to make sure the guy's wife was ok.


C'mon... This is a non story.
 

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
Additionally, smelling like alcohol is potentially a crime in itself. He could have been arrested on suspicion of public intoxication.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
You never have to id yourself to any policeman unless you are a suspect in a crime and then they must tell you what you are suspected of doing.

Laws vary from state-to-state. I think in most states, you do. You shouldn't have to, but in most, you do.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
I have to say that after reading the account of this man's ordeal in Colorado, assuming it is all true, there isn't much to it that isn't protocol, in my experience.

In this country, the Bill of Rights supersedes "protocol."
I have on occasion been broke down, left at a bar. mad at my gf, etc., and found myself walking down a highway myself, sometimes late at night. On several occasions an LEO stopped by to see what my story was. He, or maybe she, asked what I was doing there and also asked for my identification. Now I could have taken the same stance as the author in this article, it certainly is my nature, but I did not and always complied. In all the instances I was involved in I was thanked and even a few times transported to where I wanted to go.

And that was your choice. You're welcome to make it--for yourself.
Once you are under arrest and booked, an inventory of your personal stuff is taken.

First, his arrest was completely bogus. Second, his information was apparently being entered into a database. They wanted to ID him and he didn't want to provide it, so they made up a bogus charge to get his info by force, so that's what they were doing.
As far as the phone call is concerned, almost all jails have a pay phone in the cell block so I believe he was not telling truth about that.

I doubt that very much, nor would you be in a position to know. I've been called from a payphone from jail before, but I doubt that all or even most prisoners have access to a phone at all times.
Al in all what he described is accurate. Not complying with an order from a police officer can result in a charge of Obstructing Official Business, Disorderly Conduct, and maybe more...

In certain circumstances. Police don't have the right or authority to show up and start giving orders. They have authority to give some orders in some circumstances. In others, you have the right to tell them to buzz the truck off. In Colorado and several other states, you don't automatically have to identify yourself, especially for just walking down what an arrogant qrick mistakenly calls "his highway."
Most murders are a result of domestic violence.

Probably false, but let's go with it for the moment.
A guy walking down the road, at night, says he just argued with his wife. He tells this to a cop. Red flag in my opinion. Then he doesn't want to show identification. Pretty suspicious. The cop could have easily wanted to make sure the guy's wife was ok.

We want lots of things. That doesn't entitle us to have them. There are several things I want Jennifer Aniston to do, but her lawyer says, and at least one judge agrees, that my desire doesn't create an obligation on her part. So now I have to stay at least 50 feet from her for at least the next 90 days.

Think of all the things government agents want to know. Both the Bill of Rights and the laws of several states limit their right to that to specific circumstances. Some of those limits are known by terms like probable cause , which enables them to get a warrant to find out what they want, and, very importantly, particularized suspicion
--an articulable suspicion that
this particular guy is suspected of a particular crime, which they plainly did not have. It can't be that the last few guys he busted for burglary were wearing dark shirts, and you have on a dark shirt; or lots of guys who argued with their wife and then walked down the street had committed criminal acts so he gets to search guys doing that.

Did they say this guy had physical marks on him that made him look like he had been in an altercation? Apparently not. Did they find this guy's wife beaten up a couple miles back? Apparently not. No, this guy had the temerity to claim his rights and not genuflect to someone wearing certain-colored laundry. Contempt of extremely-arrogant cop. As the victim stated, he's lucky he didn't end up with a bullet to the base of the skull.
C'mon... This is a non story.
This is a major story that should end up with at least one cop unemployed and maybe prosecuted.
 
Last edited:

letzrockexpress

Veteran Expediter
In this country, the Bill of Rights supersedes "protocol."

Read the Fourth Amendment. Reasonable Suspicion is enough to hold him.


And that was your choice. You're welcome to make it--for yourself.

True.

irst, his arrest was completely bogus.

That wasn't established.

Second, his information was apparently being entered into a database. They wanted to ID him and he didn't want to provide it, so they made up a bogus charge to get his info by force, so that's what they were doing.

No evidence of that and he didn't say that.


I doubt that very much, nor would you be in a position to know. I've been called from a payphone from jail before, but I doubt that all or even most prisoners have access to a phone at all times.

From personal experience, both as a detainee and someone who has received calls from many a jail, it is a fact based hypothesis...


I
you have the right to tell them to buzz the truck off.
Yeah, I suppose that's right.. You also have the right to receive a size 12 in your behind too.

In Colorado and several other states, you don't automatically have to identify yourself

Not sure if that's true but it's pretty stupid and costly in time, freedom, and probably cash if you don't. Win the battle, lose the war.


Probably false, but let's go with it for the moment.

Maybe not most (51%), but a huge percentage nonetheless.

Local News | Higher percentage of murders caused by domestic violence | Seattle Times Newspaper


Think of all the things government agents want to know. Both the Bill of Rights and the laws of several states limit their right to that to specific circumstances. Some of those limits are known by terms like probable cause , which enables them to get a warrant to find out what they want, and, very importantly, particularized suspicion
--an articulable suspicion that
this particular guy is suspected of a particular crime, which they plainly did not have. It can't be that the last few guys he busted for burglary were wearing dark shirts, and you have on a dark shirt; or lots of guys who argued with their wife and then walked down the street had committed criminal acts so he gets to search guys doing that.

Did they say this guy had physical marks on him that made him look like he had been in an altercation? Apparently not. Did they find this guy's wife beaten up a couple miles back? Apparently not. No, this guy had the temerity to claim his rights and not genuflect to someone wearing certain-colored laundry. Contempt of extremely-arrogant cop. As the victim stated, he's lucky he didn't end up with a bullet to the base of the skull.
This is a major story that should end up with at least one cop unemployed and maybe prosecuted.

Huh?
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Those who don't ever get to see the LEO's side of things might enjoy reading the Facebook posts of Chief Oliver of the Brimfield, Oh, PD. He is quite popular, both for his plain spoken ways, [the stupidity of "mopes" drives him nuts] and for his habit of rewarding good behavior: he 'tickets' kids spotted wearing helmets while riding their bikes with a ticket good for a free ice cream cone. [I think that led to his new name: a little fan declared "I LOVE Cheap Otter!" and that's what everyone calls him now, lol.
It's an eye opening look at the other side of the coin, if you haven't any LEO family or friends to hear it from.
I rather like Cheap Otter, too: he humanizes the whole faceless authority aspect of law enforcement, and I think it helps people respect the job they do. I believe he requires his officers to behave in a way that people will respect, same as he does himself. He's a great counterpoint to the quasi-military hotheads that give LEOs a bad name.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Read the Fourth Amendment. Reasonable Suspicion is enough to hold him.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I don't know what you thought was in there, but it's not.

Yeah, I suppose that's right.. You also have the right to receive a size 12 in your behind too.
I suppose I do, if I want it and find someone to agree to put it there. But what you're talking about is a negation of rights--to say that you have the right to something but can receive a boot in your behind if you exercise it. This is foolishness.
Termination and prosecution, absolutely. We give cops authority to do under certain circumstances what is otherwise illegal. It's only legal in those circumstances. Outside of them, it's a crime, in this case unlawful detention and aggravated battery. And in this case, conspiracy, too.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter

I rather like Cheap Otter, too: he humanizes the whole faceless authority aspect of law enforcement, and I think it helps people respect the job they do. I believe he requires his officers to behave in a way that people will respect, same as he does himself. He's a great counterpoint to the quasi-military hotheads that give LEOs a bad name.
Speaking of this, I wrote a post quite some time ago about getting jacked up by a deputy in Iowa. There was no grounds for stopping me, other than a DOT guy wanted my van checked out and didn't know if he had jurisdiction. And just prior to this, I had posted something about when to say, "Officer, I don't consent to any search and would like to go on my way." So when he sauntered up to my window, I had my speech all ready.

But this deputy was cool as a cucumber. He must've come from the Cheap Otter school of P.R. because he was so nice, it was only after he gave me back my credentials and left that I realized I had forgotten to be rude to him.

Treat people like dogs, and they'll eventually bite. Make like Patrick Sawyze and BE NICE until it's time to not be nice, and people will forget to be rude.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
Read the Fourth Amendment. Reasonable Suspicion is enough to hold him.

Ok, I've been wondering about how we can be on opposite pages here, though with a libertarian and a statist, I guess it's inevitable.

I'm not familiar with the writings of the Founding Fathers regarding the specifics of what they meant by probable cause or an unreasonable search, or why they didn't delineate between a seizure after a search separated from a criminal act occurring at the time. But what they left us with is what we have. So we're left trying to determine what they meant by reasonable. And here's where those other details come in.

I was reading the Wiki article on Terry stops, and there are several citations from various cases at the bottom, and in those various cases, and others not cited there, is where we find SCOTUS having defined what reasonable is: suspicion that is both articulable and particularized. And the Colorado cops in the OP didn't have either, having first said they were demanding ID, which isn't a legal demand under the circumstances at the time when the writer was walking along what the deputy considered HIS highway (a thought that demonstrates he's unfit to be a cop in this country), and then changed their story to the possibility of the writer being under the influence, which isn't even against the law in Telluride. That being the case --their suspicion being neither articulable nor particularized-- how can we put this in any category other than UNREASONABLE?

It was clearly contempt of cop, and therefore an unlawful detention.
 
Top