NJ: Man sues after officers allegedly shot, paralyzed him while he retrieved ice tea from car

Its happened to me. They took my driver's license and asked me and the girl I was necking with to move on (after checking my record).

Let me tell you how this works. If the police get a call from a citizen about a suspicious car parked on the street, IT IS THEIR DUTY TO INVESTIGATE. Do you understand that concept? The police have no choice, this is in the job description.

If you are a citizen, IT IS YOUR DUTY to supply your ID when asked by the police. This is non-negotiable. They had a valid reason to ask him for ID because a citizen complained about where he was parked. More than a dozen felonies in his record including child rape means that this guy was a effin menace to society. If this thug was parked outside your house, you would be pissing yourself (and with good reason). He was eventually going to murder somebody or get killed. That was the way this gang-banger rolled.

If you don't see any legal reason for him to comply, perhaps you should spend a little more time studying the law. It is not that difficult. According to the ACLU, your rights do not include just driving away when the police are talking to you. They certainly don't include attempting to run them over.

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/stopped-by-police/

 

“If you are a citizen, IT IS YOUR DUTY to supply your ID when asked by the police. This is non-negotiable.”
This is just not true. We have a 4th amendment, you have no obligation to identify unless you’re legally detained.
They’re free to investigate, but you don’t have to help them.

 

So you don't know the difference between sitting on the side of the road and sitting in your driveway?
No wonder you have no clue.

How many ridiculous excuses can you come up with?

 

What crime is sitting in your car on the side of the road? Was he parked illegally?

 

Hundreds of millions of traffic stops and magically, all of a sudden, you think nobody has to provide their ID and they can't be pulled over if they didn't commit a crime.
News flash, hundreds of millions of people who have been pulled over know if they are pulled over they have to provide identification to verify the ownership and insurance.
That would be everyone but you.
And out of those hundreds of millions pulled over, nobody committed a crime. lol
You're just posting nonsense.

 

Again, was he sitting or was it a traffic stop? Pick one and we’ll discuss that. I read he was sitting.

 

If you don't know you don't have to commit a crime to get pulled over and asked for your license, registration, and insurance, why would anyone have a discussion with you about this.
If you’re vehicle is on a public road, and you are behind the wheel, you have to produce your license and registration, because drivers must have an active, valid driver’s license to drive and the vehicle must have a valid registration to be on the road and it must be insured. He wasn't sitting in front of his house. He was sitting on a public road and a concerned citizen calling police about a suspicious vehicle and driver sitting outside their house.

All states consider anyone who is seated in the drivers position of a vehicle on all public roads as the operator of the vehicle. If the vehicle is running or even being pushed, the person behind the wheel is the operator.

Driving is not a right. Its a privilege. And any officer that approaches your vehicle sitting on public roads has every right to verify the vehicle and driver are legal.
You signed such a waver when you got your drivers license.

In EVERY drivers handbook you will find the following condition to getting your license.
if you’re operating a vehicle, you have to produce your license and registration, because operators must have an active, valid driver’s license to drive and the vehicle must have a valid registration to be on the road.

So you can stop with all the ID laws that have nothing to do with operating a motor vehicle on the public roads of the state.

 

Ok, I read he was just sitting and then detained and the car wasn’t running. If that isn’t accurate then obviously that changes it.

 

Doesn't have to be running. Just on a public road with him behind the wheel.
He can be asked for license and registration.
He refused to comply (as all these seem to start)
Turned a nothing license check into 4 shots in the back.
Stupid is as stupid does

 

Yah i don’t know about that. Not sure where you’re getting that. Got a source?

 

You have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously, go read up.

 

I did, I posted case law and links.

 

LMAO, really

You can be detained for anything, especially suspicion OF, up to 72 hours.

 

Simply false. Google terry vs Ohio. They need a crime. cops can’t detain you for any reason! This isn’t North Korea.

 

Don't have to, you have a quote of the permitted 72 hour hold that the large majority of the states can use for almost anything they can fabricate

 

Fabricate being the key word. They need a crime to detain you and definitely need probable cause to arrest you.
I’m surprised you’re ok with this, I thought righties were more invested in our constitutional rights than this.

 

NOPE. they can detain you for 72 hours without accusing you of a crime.. They use the 72 hours to *coughs* verify what ever they want, even hold you for a line up If you had constitution rights you would be "Innocent until proven guilty" and NEVER spend a minute in jail, bond out and simply be given a date to appear in court for a trial

BTW I thought you said this did pertain to the topic

 

No they have to have probable cause to arrest you, they don’t have to charge you.

 

What Constitutes Unlawful Detainment?
Unlawful detainment is the act of keeping an individual in police custody or preventing them from leaving without probable cause. While a law enforcement officer is within their rights to keep you at a location to ask you reasonable questions and examine the situation, if the officer does not have probable cause that a person was involved in a crime and did not see that individual commit a crime, the officer is not permitted to detain the person.

 

LMFAO Like that is hard to come up with.. Sometimes probable cause is simply someone jacking their mouth off to an officer about his right and the law

 

You're right. You don't surrender your 4th Amendment rights just because you're sitting in your car on a public street and if the police wanted to check out a "suspicious" person, they should have sent at least one uniformed LEO in a marked vehicle.

I've read several accounts of this incident and it seems like nothing can be resolved until the body-cam videos are made available since the victim and the police officers offer very different accounts of what happened.

I also don't think that it's unreasonable to be suspicious of LEOs in plain clothes and / or unmarked vehicles since anyone can impersonate a LEO.

 

Take it to court, you might win you might lose.. But the catch is probable cause And judges favor Police

 

Yah it’s not but I understand your lack of interest in our rights.

 

I think you’re seeing more judges who support our constitutional rights. But yah that’ll be how it’s settled.
If you’re interested in this stuff check out 1st amendment auditors on YouTube. Mostly conservatives going around exercising their rights and seeing if cops respect them. Many don’t but many are starting to realize they better start,

 

LOL. So-k, lots of folks siting in jail preaching the same "My Rights" fallacy