Guilt By Perceived Association

[Ponch]

Someone needs to get fired.

 

http://www.bestvideosever.net/izle-117481-motorcycles-cops-screws-over-guy-on-a-motorcycle.html

 

 

[OoPEZoO]

Wow....hope that guy enjoys the rest of his career working strip mall security. The lawyers are going to filet him

[Glenn Reed]

The rider did himself no favors by cranking up the attitude right from the beginning. He was belligerent and antagonistic, probably because he was trying not to ride like the group that just passed him, and yet he was the one that got pulled over.

 

I can understand his frustration, but the rider is never going to win an argument with a cop, and continuing to yell at the cop all the way to getting put in the back of the car, he did himself no favors.

 

Did the cop pull him for an incredibly minor, yet plausible reason? (The license plate tucked up under the fender.) Yes. In my opinion, if the rider had not cranked up the attitude, I think we would have seen a considerably different ending. Write him a quick ticket and everybody goes on their way.

 

I'm not a cop, nor an apologist. I have been pulled over a few times over my decades of driving, and the results have been considerably different depending on how I approached the interaction. Some of the things I have done differently I actually learned reading discussions here...

 

Just my 2 cents.

[Ponch]

The cop didn't pull him over for that initially. He used it as an excuse when pushed for why later. Yes the kid cranked it up a bit, but the cop was unprofessional and a tyrant. I hope he was fired or reassigned to parking meters.

[aggieengineer]

This happened several years ago. Here's the rest of the story:

 

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/04/wrongfully-arrested-motorcyclist-who-had-helmet-cam-seized-by-dallas-county-sheriffs-deputy-sues-for-1-million.html/

 

Eventually, it was settled out of court for $25,000, paid by Dallas County.

[Ponch]

38 days suspension. I wonder if with or without pay?

[OoPEZoO]

I agree that the kid didn't do himself any favors, but I'd be a little irate as well if I was pulled over and the officer refused to give me a legitimate reason why. When he exited the car the 2nd time, he immediately told him he was under arrest. No reason, explanation, or dialog at all until the kid REALLY pushed for it. Thats not cool at all. Also not cool of the cop to reach for the kids throat to attempt to unbuckle his helmet. If you want my helmet off, then ask me to remove my helmet at the beginning of the conversation. Reaching for my throat after you have already been an unreasonable prick and thrown me against the hood of your car.....It probably wouldn't have ended much better if I was in that situation. I think the kid did an alright job attempting to protect his civil rights.

 

EDIT.....just saw the follow up. Interesting story. They said it was shortened to 30 days but he still wanted backpay. I'm guessing that means it was without pay. I'm still not sure I would want a guy like that back paroling the street, but its hard to judge things overall with seeing one isolated incident. Makes me never want to ride/drive without a camera rolling.

[Glenn Reed]

38 days suspension. I wonder if with or without pay?

 

From this article linked to in the original, it was without pay.

[Ponch]

Eggzackery.

 

“The reason you’re being pulled over is because I’m going to take your camera, and we’re going to use it as evidence in the crimes that have been committed by other bikers,” Westbrook told him.

Moore, who said he wasn’t with the other bikers, responded: What crimes?

 

Eventually Westbrook came up with one, accusing Moore of having a partially obscured license plate. “That was indeed a strange charge for [Westbrook] to make,” says the suit, “considering that before he stopped [Moore], he had radioed his police dispatcher telling the dispatcher the license plate number of [Moore's] vehicle which means the license plate was obviously not obstructed.”

[Ponch]

But was shortened to 30 days and he is suing to get back pay. He should have been fired.

[Glenn Reed]

EDIT.....just saw the follow up. Interesting story.

 

Yes. It also highlighted what the officer said when he originally got out of the car, which I did not hear when I watched it myself. That he was pulling him over to confiscate the helmet to use as evidence against the other riders. Nope, that's not the way that works. Get a warrant first. They went on to say that he had already called in the plate, so the obstructed plate charge was bogus too.

 

Makes me never want to ride/drive without a camera rolling.

 

I see stuff every day in the cage that makes me think about doing that. Just haven't been pushed over the edge to do so yet.

[Drakas]

 

I see stuff every day in the cage that makes me think about doing that. Just haven't been pushed over the edge to do so yet.

Me either. I went the more reliable route and bought a second chance vest and an open carry Five-Seven. And now all the pokies are SOOOOOOO polite when they address me.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Makes me never want to ride/drive without a camera rolling.

 

I see stuff every day in the cage that makes me think about doing that. Just haven't been pushed over the edge to do so yet.

 

A weatherproof dashcam for your bike is challenging/expensive, but you can CYA in your car for just $40, and it's painless to install with the included power supply (and not hard to wire up something more elegant).

[Bud]

 

I see stuff every day in the cage that makes me think about doing that. Just haven't been pushed over the edge to do so yet.

Me either. I went the more reliable route and bought a second chance vest and an open carry Five-Seven. And now all the pokies are SOOOOOOO polite when they address me.

 

Are "pokies" LEO's?

 

If so, it is an interesting solution to a problem that I've been lucky enough to not experience.

 

I've deserved every ticket I've gotten. Last one was in KS a few years ago. I was the out of state guy who got the ticked while KS vehicles got a pass. Happens. But he did cut it down to 10 over which saved me some $$$$

 

This thread is a reminder that there are some folks who are in the wrong line of work. I'm sure it PO's the other 99% of LEO's who do a good job.

 

 

[RPG]

whatever happened to the concept that the cops are judge, jury and executioners and as such, when pulled over, you do what you're told, with plenty of yes sir's, yes ma'am's? That's how I was raised.

 

The kid was an A-hole. It all could have been avoided with a little common sense and courtesy towards the Police Officer.

 

Some years ago, I was pulled over on my R90s for speeding. I was polite and sincere in all my responses and I got off with a warning and a thank you from the cop for being honest.

 

Me thinks there's too many people with attitudes, big mouths ("got things to do") and we need to get back to having respect for authority.

 

Maybe I'm old fashioned.

 

RPG

[eddd]

 

The recent proliferation of these types of videos along with police dash cam videos showing similar questionable/illegal types of actions by the police brings into focus a systemic problem that has been ongoing for as long as there have been police and is much more common than some people seem to think.

 

LEOs are not the judge, jury, and executioner, though too many seem to think they are. Nonsense profiling stops are common practice in some areas. The rights of citizens to travel freely down the road has been and continues to be violated on a regular basis. I experienced this first hand earlier this year when stopped under the totally false pretense of crossing the fog line when the real reason for the stop was that I was a single male occupant driving a car with out-of-state plates on I-10 in Louisiana.

[RPG]

LEOs are not the judge, jury, and executioner, though too many seem to think they are.

 

They are all that in the sense that they have a gun and the authority to use it. Only point I was making is that it's usually best to do what you're told. Police have a tough enough job. Even more so these days with every decision they make scrutinized by every matchbook attorney. I totally agree, based on the video footage that the cop was wrong, but the kid's attitude was atrocious. And if I had acted the same and my father was still on this earth, I would have surely gotten taken out by my dad. (

 

The courts are for resolving the legality/illegality of a traffic stop and its in your best interest to be courteous, friendly and cooperative when the officer is giving directions.

 

RPG

 

 

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

They are all that in the sense that they have a gun and the authority to use it. Only point I was making is that it's usually best to do what you're told.

 

Would you have surrendered your $300 GoPro camera to the cop when he made his first demand for it (with no warrant)?

[Ponch]

[RPG]

They are all that in the sense that they have a gun and the authority to use it. Only point I was making is that it's usually best to do what you're told.

 

Would you have surrendered your $300 GoPro camera to the cop when he made his first demand for it (with no warrant)?

 

I would have, followed by a request to the cop to see the warrant for it's surrender.

 

RPG

[OoPEZoO]

My Dad taught me to stand up for myself, my rights, and to defend myself from bullies.......even if they carry a gun and a badge. It has got me in hot water before, but never for the wrong reasons. For example, refusing to allow an officer to search my vehicle without a warrant as he was standing on the side of the road throwing a temper tantrum. He thought my window tint was too dark, but didn't have a meter to properly measure it. That would have ended poorly for me except that a senior officer showed up as backup. By the time I was back on the roadway, the original officer had already been forced to leave and I received an apology.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

I would have, followed by a request to the cop to see the warrant for it's surrender.

 

The rider in the video was verbally insisting that the officer needed to produce a warrant, but the officer did not do so. I'm pretty sure if the rider had surrendered his camera immediately as you are suggesting, no warrant would have been shown.

 

So then what?

[Coinneach]

whatever happened to the concept that the cops are judge, jury and executioners and as such, when pulled over, you do what you're told, with plenty of yes sir's, yes ma'am's? That's how I was raised.

 

You're not old-fashioned, you're just wrong. The beat cop's job is to deliver suspects to court for trial, not to be Judge Dredd and dispense summary execution.

[RPG]

whatever happened to the concept that the cops are judge, jury and executioners and as such, when pulled over, you do what you're told, with plenty of yes sir's, yes ma'am's? That's how I was raised.

 

You're not old-fashioned, you're just wrong. The beat cop's job is to deliver suspects to court for trial, not to be Judge Dredd and dispense summary execution.

 

I admit to focusing on the rider's attitude in the video and allowing that to form my opinion. How many videos have we seen escalate into something bad because the cop's original directions weren't followed? A few, I think we can agree.

 

I get pulled over from time to time like the rest of society and I have to say that initial courtesy, respect seems to set the tone for how the officer will treat me. That's not to say I don't know my rights. I think I do and would hopefully not allow them to be trampled. But, initially, I'm going to do what the officer wants. There's a time for questions, negotiations, and I believe that's for later in the conversation, not at the beginning. Once, in a sobriety check lane in upstate NY, I did ask the cop for probable cause (citing our beloved Constitution) and was told to proceed.

 

Good discussion fellas......)

 

RPG

[Drakas]

My mom was a cop for about 2o years. She told me to say "yes sir I have my license right here."

 

And also "No sir, you may not search my vehicle. The Fourth Amendment guarantees me against unreasonable search, and if you had a 'reasonable' suspicion of a crime, you wouldn't have to ask. Since you're asking, your search must be unreasonable."

 

And also "What is your desk sgt's name, sir, and what barracks do you report to?" (that one always makes them look funny).

[upflying]

Did we ever find out if the kid got an obstructed plate ticket or not?

Glad to see race was not a motivation for roughing up the kid.

Cop attitude reminds me of the more current TX DPS stop of the late Ms Bland for failing to signal.

[Ponch]

I think it was dismissed with prejudice.

[beemerboy]

...........Me thinks there's too many people with attitudes, big mouths ("got things to do") and we need to get back to having respect for authority. RPG

 

Yes, we do!

 

Maybe I'm old fashioned.RPG

 

No, you're not.

[eddd]

...........Me thinks there's too many people with attitudes, big mouths ("got things to do") and we need to get back to having respect for authority. RPG

 

Yes, we do!

 

 

 

This is a two way street. Authority figures need to demonstrate that they have respect for all people and the law. If stopped for a legitimate reason that reason needs to be explained politely right away, and following the recent Supreme Court ruling, the length of the stop needs to be limited the time required to the deal with the reason for the stop.

 

While the Supreme Court's decision is welcomed I seriously doubt it will have an real affect on the day to day operations of LEOs in many (most?) jurisdictions.

 

 

 

[BailyD]

Concerning the reason for the stop only...the obstructed tag. I write that ticket EVERYDAY, every chance I can. I refuse to allow riders to hide or obstruct their license plates. If it's the first time I stop you, I give you a chance to bring the bike to court with the tag properly mounted "fix it" ticket. If you've been stopped before, you own the fine. WAY too many bikes running from the police and nearly 100% have their tags obstructed or hidden. It's not an obscure violation. Would you hide the tag on your Ford F150 and not expect to get stopped?

[Ponch]

Concerning the reason for the stop only...the obstructed tag. I write that ticket EVERYDAY, every chance I can. I refuse to allow riders to hide or obstruct their license plates. If it's the first time I stop you, I give you a chance to bring the bike to court with the tag properly mounted "fix it" ticket. If you've been stopped before, you own the fine. WAY too many bikes running from the police and nearly 100% have their tags obstructed or hidden. It's not an obscure violation. Would you hide the tag on your Ford F150 and not expect to get stopped?

 

But that's not why he pulled him over.

[OoPEZoO]

Totally agree about pulling him over and giving him a ticket for an obstructed tag. I see lots of guys running around on crotch rockets with their tags shoved way up under the seats. I'm surprised they don't crack down on it harder around here. BUT.....as Ponch points out, thats not the reason given for pulling him over. The "reason" was so the officer could confiscate his helmet mounted video camera as evidence for a potential crime that were not even sure was committed. Last I checked.....that ain't ok.

 

Just out of curiosity for our LEO's......would an obstructed tag typically lead to an automatic arrest? This is more of a general question not so much related to the above story, as things obviously got out of hand. I can easily see a ticket, but could an officer justify an arrest under those circumstances? I could understand if there was no tag because they would want to run the numbers on the bike and such, but an obstructed tag when its there (just not properly displayed) and the rider has his paperwork?

[4wheeldog]

My Dad taught me to stand up for myself, my rights, and to defend myself from bullies.......even if they carry a gun and a badge. It has got me in hot water before, but never for the wrong reasons. For example, refusing to allow an officer to search my vehicle without a warrant as he was standing on the side of the road throwing a temper tantrum. He thought my window tint was too dark, but didn't have a meter to properly measure it. That would have ended poorly for me except that a senior officer showed up as backup. By the time I was back on the roadway, the original officer had already been forced to leave and I received an apology.

 

I got pulled over by a cop a couple of months ago in ABQ. I was on my KLR, and had just exited a parking lot. The lot had speed bumps, so I stood up on the pegs to go over them, slowly. He told me he was giving me a ticket for "Failure to control" and "Stunting". Wow......Really?. I did not argue. I was polite. I did ask him what the actual vehicle code section I violated might be. I never did get to see the response, as he said it would be on the ticket.

 

Around here, they ask you if you plan to appear before they finish writing the ticket. I told him "Hell yes, I am retired, and have all the time in the world to embarass you in the courtroom". I already had my own pen in my hand, ready to sign the ticket, I said it nicely, in a low tone, without any nastiness. I just truly meant it.

 

He interpreted that as being confrontational, so he called his Sargent, who apparently actually was familiar with motorcycles. The Sargent asked the first guy "What did he do? How fast was he doing it? Did either wheel leave the ground? Did any previous violations come up?" And so on. Pretty soon, first cop gets pissed, jumps in his car and peels out. Sargent gives me back my paperwork, and half assed apologized for junior.

 

This was my first time being pulled over, with 12 years living in NM. It did not improve my sour taste for ABQ police. I guess I am lucky I was not shot......Which ABQ cops are known for, more than cuffing and stuffing.

[Skywagon]

Interesting all the bad experiences. I travel to the south coast of Texas to fish quite regularly. It is close enough to Mexico they often set up road stops with DPS and Border Patrol. They are pretty clever in the way they set it up as you will have no way to go around or turn around. Usually there are two to three cars in front of me. Before I get to the #1 spot I roll down all the windows in my car, turn on the interior lights if dark, pull up slowly and place my car in park and my hands on the window where they can see them. Before they can say anything I tell them Officer I have so and so loaded weapon on me and I have a permit for it. I've never been pulled out of line for further inspection nor have they ever asked to see the permit or the weapon. They ask me a few questions and I am on my way. I do my best to be respectful, I do my best to make them feel safe, and on departure I always tell them to be safe.

 

So..not debating at all when LEO's stretch, but for me I found courtesy and cooperation goes a very long way. My father taught me you get the respect you give. Don't expect more than you are willing to give FIRST.....just saying.

[Antimatter]

I guess my feeling is that I'd like respond the way I think a police officer would respond. Will I answer questions? Sure, with a lawyer present - something I would guess most officers would say if internal affairs has questions for them. Will I consent to a search of my personal possessions? Nope. If you think I'm a bad person, follow procedure and we'll see how it washes out in court. All I'm asking is that the officer understand that I'll exercise my rights the same way he or she would in any situation. There's no animosity, just an expectation that we all get to play by the same rule book.

 

The vast majority of cops are good people, but they are subject to the same flaws and prejudices all of us are. Cops make mistakes, and the process should weed out those mistakes.

[BailyD]

 

Just out of curiosity for our LEO's......would an obstructed tag typically lead to an automatic arrest? This is more of a general question not so much related to the above story, as things obviously got out of hand. I can easily see a ticket, but could an officer justify an arrest under those circumstances? I could understand if there was no tag because they would want to run the numbers on the bike and such, but an obstructed tag when its there (just not properly displayed) and the rider has his paperwork?

 

 

Absolutely NOT....Only if there was an ID issue or something more significant, BUT.....every obstructed tag gets stopped and ticketed as I mentioned. I have no time for riders who purposely obstruct their tags.

 

[chrisolson]

... I have no time for riders who purposely obstruct their tags.

Agree completely

[OoPEZoO]

... I have no time for riders who purposely obstruct their tags.

Agree completely

 

+1

[BailyD]

Had another one run from me at the end of my shift tonight. Riding like a jack wagon, swerving in and out......quietly pulled up shoulder at red light, got alongside, opened my door and made a dash for him...he saw me (tag hidden) and split the lanes, through the red light at major intersection, 90 to 100 mph away......Shrugged my shoulders at the traffic sitting and watching "can't blame a guy for trying!"

[Fubar]

whatever happened to the concept that the cops are judge, jury and executioners and as such, when pulled over, you do what you're told, with plenty of yes sir's, yes ma'am's? That's how I was raised.

 

That's a fear-based fallacy. They were NEVER judge, jury & executioner. The judge is the judge, the jury plays it's role and they don't execute for traffic offenses.

 

The kid was an A-hole. It all could have been avoided with a little common sense and courtesy towards the Police Officer.

 

Exercising your 1st Amendment rights isn't illegal but there are certainly times when it is better to shut the hell up and move on. Politely bring up the point but don't expect to get anywhere with the vast majority of LEOs. Save the arguing until you get before the judge.

 

RPG

[RPG]

whatever happened to the concept that the cops are judge, jury and executioners and as such, when pulled over, you do what you're told, with plenty of yes sir's, yes ma'am's? That's how I was raised.

 

That's a fear-based fallacy. They were NEVER judge, jury & executioner. The judge is the judge, the jury plays it's role and they don't execute for traffic offenses.

 

Nope, it's a respect based form of behavior, born from an earlier generation (I admit I'm old!)

 

Respect for the badge, the law and the fact that these men and women risk their lives on a daily basis for a public that is seldom appreciative. Of course they're not judge, jury and executioner in the real sense. They are the first line interaction with the law however, so it pays dividends to afford them the respect they deserve, until proven....in court, otherwise. )

 

RPG

 

 

[Beemer Dood]

My mom was a cop for about 2o years. She told me to say "yes sir I have my license right here."

 

And also "No sir, you may not search my vehicle. The Fourth Amendment guarantees me against unreasonable search, and if you had a 'reasonable' suspicion of a crime, you wouldn't have to ask. Since you're asking, your search must be unreasonable."

 

All respect to you mother but just because the officer asks for consent does not mean that he does not have "reasonable suspicion." It's better for a case if he has both. If the court later decides that he did not have "reasonable suspicion" he still has consent.

 

Smart police officers ask for consent even if they have a warrant or probable cause.

 

[DJ_Fission]

38 days suspension. I wonder if with or without pay?

 

There's no way it wasn't a paid vacation.

[Beemer Dood]

There's no way it wasn't a paid vacation.

 

If Ponch's earlier post was correct, "he is suing to get back pay." he wasn't getting paid during his suspension. How do you know he was getting paid? Any links?

 

 

[Ponch]

There's no way it wasn't a paid vacation.

 

If Ponch's earlier post was correct, "he is suing to get back pay." he wasn't getting paid during his suspension. How do you know he was getting paid? Any links?

 

 

The guy should be grateful he wasn't fired.

[Drakas]

My mom was a cop for about 2o years. She told me to say "yes sir I have my license right here."

 

And also "No sir, you may not search my vehicle. The Fourth Amendment guarantees me against unreasonable search, and if you had a 'reasonable' suspicion of a crime, you wouldn't have to ask. Since you're asking, your search must be unreasonable."

 

All respect to you mother but just because the officer asks for consent does not mean that he does not have "reasonable suspicion." It's better for a case if he has both. If the court later decides that he did not have "reasonable suspicion" he still has consent.

 

Smart police officers ask for consent even if they have a warrant or probable cause.

 

 

All due respect for your observations, but I've never had an officer insist on searching after the aforementioned exchange. I assumed it was because they figured it was easier to just go find some young black guy, or some kid on a skateboard, or anyone who wasn't talking all this "law" shit. Still, it serves its purpose.

[Beemer Dood]

All due respect for your observations, but I've never had an officer insist on searching after the aforementioned exchange.

 

I doubt that you've been stopped enough times for your experience to be much of a sample. With law enforcement in your family I also doubt that you're involved in much criminal activity.

 

Sometimes police officers ask for consent because it's slow, they're bored, nothing else of note is going on, and they sometimes discover contraband during such searches. If they lac reasonable suspicion and they don't get it, they move on. I always tell people not to give consent, but don't think that refusing consent is going to stop an officer from searching if he has reasonable suspicion.

 

 

As I said, a smart police officer will ask for consent even if he has a warrant in his hand, as long as there's no exigency.

 

I assumed it was because they figured it was easier to just go find some young black guy ...

 

Really? Sounds like racial profiling to me! LOL

 

or some kid on a skateboard, or anyone who wasn't talking all this "law" shit.

 

If an officer has reasonable suspicion he's going to search, whether you give consent or not. You consider refusing consent to search, asking for an officer's badge number and his barracks to be "all this 'law' shit?" You should see some of the YouTube compilations of 'sovereign citizens.'

 

[Drakas]

 

I doubt that you've been stopped enough times for your experience to be much of a sample. With law enforcement in your family I also doubt that you're involved in much criminal activity.

 

Sometimes police officers ask for consent because it's slow, they're bored, nothing else of note is going on, and they sometimes discover contraband during such searches. If they lac reasonable suspicion and they don't get it, they move on. I always tell people not to give consent, but don't think that refusing consent is going to stop an officer from searching if he has reasonable suspicion.

 

 

As I said, a smart police officer will ask for consent even if he has a warrant in his hand, as long as there's no exigency.

 

Maybe I just haven't been stopped enough times for my experience to be much of a sample of these "smart" police you extoll.

 

I assumed it was because they figured it was easier to just go find some young black guy ...

Really? Sounds like racial profiling to me! LOL

It IS Alabama and/or Tennessee I'm talking about. It doesn't just "sound like" racial profiling.

 

or some kid on a skateboard, or anyone who wasn't talking all this "law" shit.

If an officer has reasonable suspicion he's going to search, whether you give consent or not. You consider refusing consent to search, asking for an officer's badge number and his barracks to be "all this 'law' shit?" You should see some of the YouTube compilations of 'sovereign citizens.'

But we've already established that he doesn't have reasonable suspicion. Otherwise he'd be doing more searching, and less asking....

YMMV.......

[Beemer Dood]

Earlier I wrote,

I doubt that you've been stopped enough times for your experience to be much of a sample.

 

Maybe I just haven't been stopped enough times for my experience to be much of a sample of these "smart" police you extoll.

 

Thanks for confirming my suspicion about your experience.

 

Earlier Drakas wrote,

I assumed it was because they figured it was easier to just go find some young black guy ...

 

And I responded,

Really? Sounds like racial profiling to me! LOL

 

It IS Alabama and/or Tennessee I'm talking about. It doesn't just "sound like" racial profiling.

 

If a police officer is looking to stop "some young black guy" it's racial profiling, even if it's Harlem.

 

But we've already established that he doesn't have reasonable suspicion. Otherwise he'd be doing more searching, and less asking....

YMMV.......

 

We have "established" this? When? Smart police officers who have a warrant in their hands ask for consent. Smart police officers who have probable cause ask for consent. Smart police officers who have reasonable suspicion ask for consent. Smart police officers who have neither a warrant, PC nor reasonable suspicion, ask for consent. In truth, a police officer who is asking for consent to search, tells you nothing, except that he wants to search. And if he has a warrant or PC and you refuse to consent, he's going to search without it. He doesn't need it.

 

[Drakas]

 

thanks for confirming my suspicion about your experience.

 

 

LoL that you thought that's what just happened. Speaks volumes about "smart" cops, doesn't it?

 

 

If a police officer is looking to stop "some young black guy" it's racial profiling, even if it's Harlem.

 

 

What's that got to do with the price of eggs in China, or the fact that it happens here all the time and from what I hear, not a that a infrequently in Harlem, too.

 

 

 

We have "established" this? When? Smart police officers who have a warrant in their hands ask f

 

or consent. Smart police officers who have probable cause ask for consent. Smart police officers who have reasonable suspicion ask for consent. Smart police officers who have neither a warrant, PC nor reasonable suspicion, ask for consent. In truth, a police officer who is asking for consent to search, tells you nothing, except that he wants to search. And if he has a warrant or PC and you refuse to consent, he's going to search without it. He doesn't need it.

Where can I find one of these "smart" cops? As we already established, there seems to be q local shortage of them. We established that the police-in-question didn't have reasonable suspicion, when every cop who ever heard those words come out of my mouth subsequently DID NOT search my vehicle, thereby acknowledging (as you so repeatedly pointed out) that he had NO reasonable suspicion to be conducting a search in the first place. Which is why he generally fell back to more proven, if just as legally questionable tactics like (as you repeatedly pointed out) racial profiling.