Another Cop On An Authority Trip - The Terrorizing of Sandra Bland

Taser at the ready, TX highway cop Brian Encinia marches Sandra Bland out of her car, after she refused to put out a cigarette.

Here we go again! Another case of a cop losing his cool and over-reacting to a person of color, allowing badge to get the better of brain. Where does it end? After the Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Freddie Grey and Walter Scott incidents one would have thought that cops stopping black people would mind their Ps and Qs especially with the 'Black Lives Matter' group on the warpath.  Recall poor Walter Scott lost his life after being shot in the back by runaway, gunslinger cop Michael Slager - now cooling off in a SC jail - after stopping Scott initially for a busted tail light.

 

In the most recent case, gung ho Texas cowpoke (actually Texas highway patrol man) Brian Encinia stops a black woman named Sandra Bland - en route to her job at her alma mater - and terrorizes her the better part of 50 minutes. Where was this bozo trained anyway?  Watching four news programs last night which each featured expert, experienced cops - including from the NYPD and MD state police - all agreed Encinia totally blew it. He acted like an unchained beast as opposed to an officer of the law whose first duty is not to escalate an interaction but keep his cool.

 

As for the video itself, I've already viewed it at least seven times including on the Houston Chronicle site. Each time the impression is further reinforced that Encinia allowed his badge, ego and authority to go to his head. The 'breakpoint' to me occurred after he returned from his patrol car and then instead of completing the transaction and letting Bland off with the warning, asked her if she was "irritated"

 

After she said 'yes' and explained to him why he then got bolshy and asked: "Are you finished?" when she had to remind him HE was the one that brought it up! After all, if he didn't want that sort of negative response he shouldn't have asked her the damned question. It wasn't her duty to appease him and say "No, I'm just fine, sir." when she wasn't - especially after being stopped for a tiddly ass moving infraction.

 

The escalation then really explodes when he asks her to put out her cigarette. WHY? She's had to wait almost eight minutes for the guy to write up whatever (as shown on the Chronicle video) so instead of twiddling her thumbs decided to have a smoke. Was that against the law too? Anyway, as soon as she refuses (saying she can smoke in her own car if she wants), he demands that she exit the vehicle.

 

Was Encinia's demand to exit because of Bland's refusal? If so, what statute in Texas — or anywhere in America — stipulates that a citizen can’t smoke during a traffic stop? WHO made this law and where was it passed, under what statute?

 

The whole thing came over as Encinia trying to exert a capricious control over this black woman who was merely establishing her own boundaries and will. What...she's supposed to creep out of the car, get on her knees, look up at Mr. Southern Whitey Cop and say: "Yes, Massah! I'm here at your command!  Anything else you want from me? Kiss your boots maybe?"

 

What was he, afraid she'd use her cig as a weapon? Give me a break!

 

 One can actually argue that Encinia precipitated the incident himself - by his own aggressive driving. The video shows his car accelerating behind Bland’s and passing a sign indicating a speed limit of 20 miles per hour. How fast was he closing the distance on Bland before she changed lanes? Was it completely reasonable for her to attempt to move out of his way? The consensus last night on 'All In' with Chris Hayes, was 'yes'. Attorney Andrea Ritchie, when asked about this, observed:

"What was going through my mind is it was outrageous. ...I'm sure many of your viewers have failed to signal when they make a lane change particularly when you see lights from a police car in the rear view mirror.  The thing you most want to do is get out of the way and that's what the law requires you to do. To forget to turn on your turn signal at that point is certainly understandable ...but him trying to harass her when she was in fact trying to get out of the way of an emergency vehicle is truly outrageous."

Meanwhile, former NYPD Detective Marq Claxton - when asked - observed:

"The fact is we're observing a violation of law, not even a crime. So, you have to interact with the civilian population based on what it is you're investigating. If there's a question about a violent crime you may approach and interact one way, but we're talking about a traffic violation- not a crime. So it brings up the issue of whether this police officer was capable of interacting professionally or whether he exacerbated the situation and increased tensions, was provocative in his demeanor and his language. And that really is disturbing based on what we've seen in the video."

Regarding the breakdown and exchange when the cop asks Bland to put out her cigarette,  Attorney Andrea Ritchie  - like me- asserted she's aware of no law that requires a citizen to put out a cigarette at a traffic stop, or in order to appease a cop. As she noted on viewing the segment:

"I felt he had what he needed and was only unnecessarily prolonging the detention, He asked her a question of whether she was annoyed or not and she answered calmly and truthfully. If he wasn't prepared for the answer to the question he shouldn't have asked it. He decided at that point he was going to dig into her, and he did. But at that point she had had enough, including with the basis for the stop....which is highly discretionary."

Ritchie did acknowledge that officers have the right to order a person out of a car, but this is based on probable cause that the officer suspects a threat to his safety. She added:

"At that point she had been pulled over for quite some time and there's no indication from the video that he thought or believed there was a weapon. So really at that point he was ordering her out of the car and exercising control simply for the sake of exercising control over her. So technically whether he had the legal right  or not is not the point. It was completely superfluous at that point  for the purposes of the stop."

In other words, his ego and badge got the better of him.

Former Detective Marq Claxton then weighed in citing Pennsylvania vs Mims regarding the power of police to order people out of a car during a routine traffic stop. As he put it:

"For that to be valid there has to be some reasonable fear for that individual police officer's safety. And that's the key word missing in so much of the discussion we have. We can't just say 'the police officer was afraid for his life' or 'the police officer was fearful, that's not good enough.  There is a standard and that standard is reasonable.

It is unreasonable, for example, to see  a straw in a person's mouth and say 'I fear for my life' because the straw can be shot into my eye, my brain etcetera. That's not reasonable. We should be dealing with what is reasonable along with what is legally, constitutionally correct."

Andrea Ritchie then summarizes the trajectory of Encinia literally running amuck:

"Clearly she was speaking in a calm voice, explaining her irritation but speaking calmly and never, ever suggested she posed any kind of physical threat to him. So for him to go straight from a verbal command to leave the car to threatening to light her up is going from zero to what's supposed to be a substitute for lethal force in less than a second."

And this, in the context of, "pretextual stops" is what must give every black person, especially, nightmares. Because if it can happen to a Sandra Bland it can happen to anyone. Hence, the need to get all the cops under control, with better training, across the country.

Of course, the slimers will try to make specious rationalizations for the cop's actions as they seek to tar Bland with a broad brush. Likely insisting that the whole failure of the transaction was her fault,  invoking whatever balderdash, i.e. "she ought to have been more polite" (read appeasing and subservient) they can imagine. But if they do so, they have not learned a thing....from any of the previous incidents- and are thus more likely dedicated Foxites, i.e. not part of the reality community. Sadly, there is no cure for unreality or spurious convictions based upon it.

See also:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/23/if_you_don%e2%80%99t_want_to_get_shot_just_do_what_i_tell_you_american_cops_are_on_a_dangerous_power_trip/

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-boardman/63197/sandra-blands-death-is-part-of-white-americas-killing-spree

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/22/if_i_die_in_police_custody_why_sandra_blands_death_is_just_the_latest_evidence_that_black_america_is_under_attack/

Conservative Twitterati Try to Go After Marilyn Mosby - End Up Looking Like Damned Fools

How dumb is dumb? Well, when ignorant, dumbo conservatives can't handle the truth, and especially can't wrap their febrile minds around a person with a fearless sense of justice and impeccable integrity seeking it. That this person - Marilyn Mosby - is the product of five generations of police officers would seem to indicate more support than attacks - but not for the conservo Twitterati, most of them brainwashed by Hannity, O'Reilly and "Fox n' Friends".

When I saw Prosecutor Mosby's announcement yesterday, I told my wife: "Make no mistake she will be attacked by the racist knuckledraggers". They hide behind the veneer of politics  and pseudo-justice but as the Southern Poverty Law Center's recent "Intelligence Report" noted - it is all about racism since Obama's 2008 election.  While the numbers have somewhat diminished, a residue of hardcore hate groups remain. See e.g.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2015/spring

 So no one can tell those of us involved in deep politics that the nasty flood of backlash that's followed the Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Walter Scott and now Freddie Gray incidents - deaths is merely ordinary expression of  "un- PC" pinions. Oh no! Not now, not ever. Each vile backlash which cast the murdered victim as bringing on his own death and in addition referring to them  as "apes" or "gorillas" discloses the comments are not value -neutral regarding race. They are imbued with the same sickening racism that cast Obama as a "skunk" on a Facebook page - creating the incident that led me to break off any family relations with a brother in OK.

The latest example erupted from the right wing noise machine on Twitter yesterday - with some of the tweets given below with the Twitter addresses of the sorry senders:

Ben Shapiro:

This is a textbook case for recusal for Marilyn Mosby, by the way. Here's her husband blowing off looting

--
Here,  as one salon.com writer put it: "to Ben Shapiro,  Breitbart’s Editor-at-Large, the conservative calculus is clear: five generations of police officers — including, at a minimum, at least five members of her immediate family — don’t even remotely equal one husband. Her husband essentially functions like a zero, so no matter how many other family members you multiply against him"

Of course, Shapiro's other inexcusable transgression is conflating Ms. Mosby with her husband - a Baltimore councilman - intimating their interests must be the same.

Other idiotic tweets from the conservo backwaters:

Adam@keepitrealist:

Wow, Marilyn Mosby is married to Nick Mosby, the riot and looter apologist. Can you say conflict of interest?

Mythos@victorsteve:

marilyn mosby:"I have a racist narrative that matches my ideological bias & corrupted brain. all cops are murderers until further notice"

mike matheson @mikematheson5

@FoxNews WRONG cops r innocent! mosby let being BLACK LIB KKKrat influence Being BLACK lib kkkrat comes 1st 2 them This decsn is RACIST

Richard Colon @porthosposrtosp

The prosecutor is a rookie, racist and political and working with the mayor, al shapton and the White House in this case

This is just a sampling but the rest aren't any better: all drenched in blatant racism and/or unfathomable ignorance.  The typical trash racist, of course, will always seek to re-interpret the views of her husband and impute them to her, or seek to conflate the two separate people as one. The fallacy of "re-composition".

The dreck from the likes of "Mythos" discloses a foolish twit incapable of even processing the special prosecutor's words when - after her charging statement- she noted that the Baltimore Police Department deserved high praise and could not be sullied based on the actions of a few. She re-asserted that in her interview last night, telling Chris Hayes: "I understand and respect that most police officers are risking their lives day in and day out. They're on the streets of every urban city, not just Baltimore, and risking their lives for the betterment of their communities."

And again, let's bear in mind she comes from five generations of police officers and both her parents were cops.

The other congenital morons who bring up  Ms. Mosby's "conflict of interest" are also averse to the facts at hand, including that there can be no such "conflict" between a prosecutor and councilman. One "makes the laws" the other enforces them. As she also told Chris Hayes in her interview:

"There is no conflict of interest! My husband represents the district in which I live. I am the Baltimore city state attorney. I represent his district and thirteen other districts throughout the city. I prosecute crimes there. I don't have to turn on the news or open a newspaper to see the impact of crime there. All I need to do is open up the door. So there is no conflict of interest."

As for the claim by Richard Colon (funny how his surname describes the human large intestines), that the "prosecutor is a rookie" - this is an out and out red herring. As Mosby pointed out in her Hayes' interview: "The people of Baltimore elected me to exercise my discretion to apply justice fairly and equally with or without a badge."

Colon also errs by imputing that experience trumps integrity in such a case, when - given that one is properly qualified for the position,  it is always integrity that is of highest import. Something that LBJ and his "Warren Commission" might have contemplated and invoked  - but then it was never LBJ's intent to do that, but rather to cover up his own role in the JFK assassination.

She also pointed out that any alleged "independent prosecutor" would in fact be a political  appointee, not elected.:

"Where's the accountability? Someone political is going to appoint someone else."

Hence, the political nature of the appointment would likely undermine any pursuit of justice in the case.

The tweet by Mike Matheson, meanwhile, is classic racist. Anyone who would scrawl such keyboard feces as:

mosby let being BLACK LIB KKKrat influence Being BLACK lib kkkrat comes 1st 2 them This decsn is RACIST

Is projecting his own blatant racism - in this case against all blacks - onto the person. He, in fact, is likely a "KKK" or at least a KKK sympathizer, who probably gets off when they burn crosses on the lawns of black people. He also probably calls Obama a "monkey" or represents him as a skunk as my now disowned Okie brother did once upon a time.

As for the claim of a "rush to judgment" as asserted by the head of the Baltimore Police Union, this canard was also easily dispatched by Ms. Mosby who informed Chris that:

"From the time we learned of this tragic event, we started canvassing the area, speaking to witnesses, reviewed hours and hours of video surveillance, reviewed hours and hours of statements in the case, and medical records. This wasn't something that was quick, fast or in a hurry or a rush to judgment. This was a thorough investigation that we were conducting in parallel with the police department. So the information that was provided to us yesterday by the police department is information we already knew. ....This was a thorough investigation, we applied the facts to the law and we pursued this case fairly and appropriately."

Make no mistake that the backlash by racist conservatives against Marilyn Mosby is not about to end soon, not by a  long shot. There is way too much racist hatred in this country to keep it stoked - as the SPLC Intelligence Report notes. But she should know those of us who are sane and sensible back her up to the fullest!

The racist knuckledraggers may try all they want to slander her as an "out of control ape" or "racist tramp" but such reckless invective is all they have in their disgusting corner. We see her as the epitome of fearlessness and adherence to the rule of law - not merely dismissing charges because the crimes were committed by those wearing badges.

Kudos also to the ex-Baltimore cop whistleblower, Pete Castle, who exposed the crimes of  two of his mates (beating shackled prisoners),  highlighted last night on 'All In'. He was abandoned by fellow cops as a 'snitch' - disclosing their ethics as no better than those felons who try to hide their crimes while in the 'can'.

See also:

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/02/america_is_back_to_lynching_baltimore_freddie_gray_and_the_noxious_legacy_of_white_supremacy/


And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/05/02/bill_maher_compares_baltimore_police_to_the_catholic_church_the_institution_covered_for_pedophiles/

Michael Slager Is A Dirtbag Who Merits NO Exoneration

For sure there will be oblivious hardheads out there who, just like they may cry 'My country right or wrong' will also cry 'I'm for any cop right or wrong!'- and make lame excuses for any cop misbehavior they see.  But they'd be dead wrong in the case of ex-North Charleston, SC cop and dirtbag Michael Slager. The video of this maggot shooting an unarmed man in the back as he's running away has now been seen millions of times and is as glaring, real and unrelenting as an ice pick in the chest. NO sane human watching it could possibly come away with the belief Slager had any extenuating circumstances by which to justify his feral actions. It's there for all to see!

And for that we have to thank one alert citizen with a cell phone , Feidin Santana, without whose footage this rat would very likely have gotten away with it  -including (as an FBI observer on CBS News showed this evening) tampering with evidence at the scene in trying to plant the taser on the guy even with (apparently) other cops assisting.  (Feidin told NBC on Wednesday that he approached the scene because he noticed Slager controlling his 50 year old victim and father of four Walter Scott on the ground, and heard the sound of a taser).

Nervous, he secretly began videoing the events from behind a fence - after which he turned the video over to the family, which released it to the media and then law enforcement. The video also prompted the FBI and Justice Dept. to announce a federal probe based on possible civil rights violations. Interviews with other people in N. Charleston by Chris Hayes tonight also confirm this is not a lone outlier event but that these cops seem to have a power trip way about them. But at least the Police chief has now declared the need to distribute body cameras which may keep a tighter rein on his charges (who he referred to in a press conference Wednesday as "my children". Well, best keep your "children" on a tighter leash,  pops!)

The video itself is so graphic (google Walter Scott shooting if you've not yet seen it) that even Slager's defense attorney, David Aylor, was prompted to drop his client the day after it appeared and after Slager had clearly been exposed as an inveterate liar. (The PD dropped him on account of his bald-faced lies, no other reason) He claimed he had to shoot to "save his life" because Scott had taken his Taser but the video shows no evidence of that. Zero. None, as in nada.

The former FBI official on CBS who watched it this evening asserted there was no doubt in his mind that Slager was guilty of murder. You do not, NOT ..shoot a fleeing suspect in the fucking back, especially a guy only stopped for a freaking busted traffic light!   The former FBI agent on CBS said the proper approach was to chase him down by foot and subdue him with no more than the necessary force needed.

In some cases, not many, the visual evidence is unimpeachable and the truth shouts out at people at the hundred decibel level. In the case of the JFK assassination, the images that exploded the codswallop that "Oswald did it" or the "kill shot came from the rear" were Kennedy's head wound - massive excavation in the rear of his skull- visible in the autopsy black and whites.

In the case of Slager's claim he was acting in "self defense" the clear visual evidence of him standing there firing at a man while running away - hitting him at least four times in the back - destroys the claim as effectively as the JFK autopsy images destroyed the Warren Commission's.  (Admittedly, in the latter case, too many still haven't put 2 + 2 together)

Slager, by the force of the video, has revealed himself to be an assassin - like the guy ("badge man" so called) in the cop uniform who killed JFK in Dallas. He's currently being held without bail for murder (which is the appropriate charge) and could get 30 years for his act.   If justice in North Charleston, South Carolina is worth more than doggie lickspittle, jurors will hold him to account and he will get what he has coming - no dismissals, or "not guilty".  There can be no exoneration for this dirtbag and people around the nation won't settle for another case of a rogue cop getting the benefit of the doubt.

Having a "field day" with this one? (And don't even hand me that BS that cop 'haters' are doing it!) You'd best believe it! And Slager was the one who made it possible by putting HIS own ass in the sling, no one did it for him.  His mistake - like lots of rogue cops - was believing because he saw no one around there wouldn't be witnesses especially equipped with cell phones.

Other potential rogue cops need to get their heads on straight that even though they may not yet be equipped with body cameras someone will always be watching and waiting to catch them in the act with their own cell phones.