Author Topic: NC Highway Patrol thuggery, or a lying lawyer? (Read 2647 times)

yellowtail3 · « **on:** July 01, 2011, 11:49:28 AM »

The NC state Highway Patrol is investigating the actions of a trooper accused of falsely arresting a Raleigh mother in Wilmington, mistreating her and then orchestrating an unjustified traffic stop of her husband.

Wow. What is known, is that gal is pulled over, arrested, blew a 0.0 twice on breathalizer, and no apology/release. S.O.P., even after blowing 00?

Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/06/30/1310947/trooper-accused-of-false-arrest.html#ixzz1Qsq047jY

I've long held the impression that HP are diff than your average sheriff/town LEO, at least in NC. Along with being a scandal-ridden ol' boy network rife with nepotism and favortism, they've got this militaristic thing going, along with an apparent sense of entitlement to act with impunity.

On the other hand, maybe she was blitzed and the breathlyzer didn't work, and that's why the officer didn't apologize & release her. Maybe it was a setup to make the public servant look thuggish. The husband IS a lawyer

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 06, 2011, 07:57:51 AM »

Looking more and more like HP thuggery - is this how LEO refers to citizens, when they blow a 0.0 on breathalyzer?

http://news.yahoo.com/video/raleighwral-15751121/messages-between-accused-troopers-released-25847183.html

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #2 on:** July 06, 2011, 08:53:01 AM »

The trooper arrest her for anything ? He lied to her lawyer/husban . He should lose his job and the second trooper should also if he can't come up with a logical reason for stopping her husban. Phone records would tie them togather in a plot.

nw_hunter · « **Reply #3 on:** July 06, 2011, 10:26:19 AM »

Quote from: yellowtail3 on July 06, 2011, 07:57:51 AM

Looking more and more like HP thuggery - is this how LEO refers to citizens, when they blow a 0.0 on breathalyzer?

http://news.yahoo.com/video/raleighwral-15751121/messages-between-accused-troopers-released-25847183.html

Be interesting to see how this one play's out.

hillbill · « **Reply #4 on:** July 06, 2011, 03:18:21 PM »

as far as the law goes, they can arrest yu for dwi even if yu blow a 0.0, if they are willing to testify that at that level yu appeared drunk.or so my lawyer told me years ago when as a kid i was arrested when i was arrested for blowing a .04 when the legal limit was .10.i was less than half of legally drunk.passed all their tests and they still charged me.the judge threw it out and apoligized for my inconveinance.my ex wife experieneced the same thing with a .00 bac.she went to the city council and they fired the cop and the police chief who backed him up. but mind yu now these were small town cops. ive always experienced professional behaviour from hiway patrol cops in the couple times ive ever been stopped by them.

gstewart44 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 06, 2011, 05:36:26 PM »

Things must be different today. In the 1980's I was heading down I 95 in NC was listening to loud music and going waaaaay to fast after my honeymoon. Got pulled over by NCHP. the officer was polite and cordial, explaining if he wrote the ticket up as he clocked me he was going to have to take me in and lock me up. He said he would drop the speed down to just below the threshold for said lockup. It ended up costing me several hundred dollars in fines, and the subsequent increase in insurance, but I stayed out of jail. He was older than me, so I don't know if it was a generational difference. But anyways I was thankful.

briarpatch · « **Reply #6 on:** July 06, 2011, 05:49:28 PM »

didnotseeanythingwrong. aintthatthewaytheyact/normal?
DONT-HAVE-A-RIGHT-MARGIN.----WHY?
CAN-MOVE-ANYWAY-BUT-RIGHT.

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #7 on:** July 06, 2011, 08:03:29 PM »

Not trying to defend actions of the troopers, because I don't know all the facts. Does anyone know the speed limit in the area that the husband was going 58mph? I didn't see it listed anywhere, but just from the speed the husband was going you can safely assume, that he was over the speed limit (30mph - 55mph), unless the speed limit was 60mph and above. This would make it a legal stop, as far as the husband, is concerned. You also have to remember, that he was only stopped, and warned, not ticketed. But the husband is an attorney, and he would know how to set up a defense for his case by making up a set of facts that make him the innocent party.
As far as the woman blowing a .00, I've had cases where a motorist was stopped for driving in an erratic manner, which led me to assume that the operator was intoxicated, the motorist blew a .00, but was still charged because there was evidence of the use of a controlled substance.
I've also had two or three instances of a person being arrested for DWI, where he was eventually let go, and the arrest voided, because he was suffering from a medical condition (diabetes, and the low blood sugar level was making him act like he was intoxicated). The individuals were provided with medical assistance, after the determination was made.
I don't feel it's fair to prejudge the incident. Like nw_hunter states, "Be interesting to see how this one play's out"

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 06, 2011, 09:49:14 PM »

We will have to see how it turns out. I'll tell you what rings true to me - cop taking off and speeding a bit, knowing husband is following him... then the following husband gets pulled over by a 2nd trooper.

LEO can exceed speed with near-impunity; not so following husband. It stinks.

beerbelly · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2011, 05:15:41 AM »

Cops are nothing more than a thug with a gun and a badge!

Bigeasy · « **Reply #10 on:** July 07, 2011, 06:05:52 AM »

R/E the original post - The "Facts" supplied on the link are one sided, and obviously biased. Most states I know of, you refuse a field sobriety test / breathalyzer, you are charged the same as if you are drunk. The fact a magistrate let her go that night without further issue was actually a break for her.

Quote from: beerbelly on July 07, 2011, 05:15:41 AM

Cops are nothing more than a thug with a gun and a badge!

R/E the above post, it sounds like you had issues with prison food..

Larry

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #11 on:** July 07, 2011, 08:19:37 AM »

Cops are like everyone else some good some not so good. Their leaders are much the same. In todays world in some/many places the police are pushing their power to the limit and beyond in some cases just to test the publics reaction. As citizens we all need to hold them to the consitutional limits of their power or we will be subjects .

hillbill · « **Reply #12 on:** July 07, 2011, 02:59:00 PM »

Quote from: beerbelly on July 07, 2011, 05:15:41 AM

Cops are nothing more than a thug with a gun and a badge!

now i wouldnt quite say that.cops do a great service to us in that they keep me from haveing to shoot a lot of people i otherwise would have lol

beerbelly · « **Reply #13 on:** July 10, 2011, 02:20:32 AM »

R/E the above post, it sounds like you had issues with prison food.. ::)

Nope, never been in prison, but it's for sure you were a cop that jumps to conclusions and not about to admit you are wrong!

turk762 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 10, 2011, 07:31:31 AM »

Just because you blow a 0.00 does not mean you are not under the influence of something, at least that is the way it works in WI. The story about the husband does sound unusual.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2011, 03:59:20 PM »

If I were going to bet on this case I would take lying lawyer. 1% of cops give the other 99% a bad name while 99% of all lawyers give the other 1% a bad name. No knowledge of this case but good gambling sense.

beerbelly · « **Reply #16 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:36:57 PM »

I have to disagree Billy, cops and lawyers draw the same percentages

hillbill · « **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2011, 03:52:27 PM »

wow beerbelly! souns like yu dont have much use for the men in blue?souns like yu got busted for sumpin yu did not do? clue us in dude.

hillbill · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2011, 04:03:32 PM »

if memory serves me, here in MO, if yu refuse a breath test, they take yu to the hospital and give yu a bac blood test. which is almost impossible to beat.if yu refuse that, they just go ahead and charge yu with dwi.since yu refused both tests they assume yu are guilty and its hard to beat.id love to hear from sumone with more knowledge?

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2011, 05:40:50 PM »

Quote from: hillbill on July 15, 2011, 03:52:27 PM

wow beerbelly! souns like yu dont have much use for the men in blue?souns like yu got busted for sumpin yu did not do? clue us in dude.

Lawyers occasionally do something useful (if overpriced) if they're working for you; all HP do is give ticketes, condescending lectures, and occasionaly bounce head off hood/tase those who don't kowtow quickly enough... and they pretty much do it with impunity, whilst considering themselves some kind of proud elite.

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2011, 08:33:24 PM »

Quote from: hillbill on July 15, 2011, 04:03:32 PM

if memory serves me, here in MO, if yu refuse a breath test, they take yu to the hospital and give yu a bac blood test. which is almost impossible to beat.if yu refuse that, they just go ahead and charge yu with dwi.since yu refused both tests they assume yu are guilty and its hard to beat.id love to hear from sumone with more knowledge?

Hate to be the one to tell you, but your right on all the above. The BAC blood test is impossible to beat. But, you are aware that you have the right to refuse the BAC blood test, unless the police get a warrant, which they will do if a serious accident is involved (possibility of death, death or serious physical injury).
You are also correct in saying that if you refuse the tests, the police will charge you. But if you do refuse both tests, you have a chance to beat the case. That's what lawyers are for.

jlwilliams · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2011, 03:30:08 AM »

She didn't refuse a blood-alcohol test; she invoked her right to take that test with a witness present. There is a huge difference.

As an aside. I once knew a cop who would go on verbal tirades about how much he hated college educated people. Said he took every oportunity to pull someone over with college stickers on their vehicles and 'cut them down to size' by 'busting' them for anything he could manipulate up. This could be a similar type of guy putting the well dressed, educated lady 'in her place'. I have known some really good people who were police, and I've known some angry, insecure people who got into it to have power over others. The good cops I've known were all on the forces before 9-11. Every single post 9-11 cop I've met was a humorless robot with a mission to kick ass. That's the only type they hire now, aparently.

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #22 on:** July 17, 2011, 10:44:01 AM »

Quote from: jlwilliams on July 16, 2011, 03:30:08 AM

She didn't refuse a blood-alcohol test; she invoked her right to take that test with a witness present. There is a huge difference.

As an aside. I once knew a cop who would go on verbal tirades about how much he hated college educated people. Said he took every oportunity to pull someone over with college stickers on their vehicles and 'cut them down to size' by 'busting' them for anything he could manipulate up. This could be a similar type of guy putting the well dressed, educated lady 'in her place'. I have known some really good people who were police, and I've known some angry, insecure people who got into it to have power over others. The good cops I've known were all on the forces before 9-11. Every single post 9-11 cop I've met was a humorless robot with a mission to kick ass. That's the only type they hire now, aparently.

jlwilliams - my comment was in answer to hillbill comment. I am aware that the lady took the tests, and listed reasons why she could still have been arrested, or been guilty of the charge.
I also addresses that issue in post #8 (7/7/11).
In NY, you now need to have the an Associates Degree or corresponding number of credits to become a P.O., and you need at least a Bachelors degree to be promoted beyond patrolman. Now why would your cop hate college educated people? He had to have been college educated himself. The "cop" you are referring to is obviously a not your average normal cop. Your comment about post 9-11 cops mentality, is flawed. I know quite a few post 9-11 cops, and they have the same percentage of jerks as pre 9-11 cops.

jlwilliams · « **Reply #23 on:** July 18, 2011, 03:21:16 AM »

The guy I knew was a long time back, and not in NY state. Aparently at that time and place no degree was needed. Why did he hate college educated people? I don't know. I never got to know the guy real well. He was kind of a jerk. And no, he wasn't 'your normal average cop'. He was a guy who's attitude fit with the sort of behavior displayed in the linked article. I certainly didn't mean to present that guy or the one in the article as 'average cops'. They may well be birds of a feather, but not average birds.

My observation about post 9-11 cops is my observation. I'm glad you are seeing something better than I am.

I'm far from being a "cop hater" and don't mean any slite to your profession, without which we'd all be screwed. I do mean to criticise wrong where I see it, particularly when I see it done under the color of law and when I see it done on my tax paying dime.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #24 on:** July 18, 2011, 04:41:52 AM »

Most cops don't play games like this. But a few do . We had a truck pulled for going over a bridge with a weight limit lower than the GVW of the truck empty . The trooper had the driver follow him to a weigh station to weigh it . He knew the truck was over weight and extra lbs didn't matter the way the ticket was written. The driver was a 22 year old girl .

OldSchoolRanger · « **Reply #25 on:** July 19, 2011, 07:50:52 PM »

Quote from: jlwilliams on July 18, 2011, 03:21:16 AM

I'm far from being a "cop hater" and don't mean any slite to your profession, without which we'd all be screwed. I do mean to criticise wrong where I see it, particularly when I see it done under the color of law and when I see it done on my tax paying dime.

jlwilliams - No offense taken, I've been retired for 4 years, to me this is just a friendly discussion. But I just wanted to put out what I believe to be the facts. You are 100% correct, in your determination to criticize wrong being done under the color of the law. As a matter of fact the Federal government agrees with you, it's a violation of Federal law to do so.

Quote from: SHOOTALL on July 18, 2011, 04:41:52 AM

Most cops don't play games like this. But a few do . We had a truck pulled for going over a bridge with a weight limit lower than the GVW of the truck empty . The trooper had the driver follow him to a weigh station to weigh it . He knew the truck was over weight and extra lbs didn't matter the way the ticket was written. The driver was a 22 year old girl .

SHOOTALL - Was there a crackdown, on overweight trucks using bridges not built to hold the weight of the illegal trucks? This problem is costing millions of dollars in repairs to bridges damaged by overweight trucks, this money could have been used for other purposes. Not to mention the possible deaths that might happen if the bridge structure fails like what happened in Minneapolis, MN. I'm not claiming that excessive weight caused the collapse, but it did contribute to the collapse.
Some jurisdictions require "proof" that the truck is overweight. This proof is usually the information (weight) determined by the scales. That might have been the reason for the use of the scales.
I do have to agree with you that some municipalities use truck enforcement penalties, along with speeding penalties to (self) finance their police forces.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #26 on:** July 20, 2011, 02:19:58 AM »

I'm kinda wondering what you are talking about shootall? So the person was ticketed because she drove a truck over a bridge and this truck was over the bridges weight limit?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #27 on:** July 20, 2011, 03:08:39 AM »

Yes no problem there but why make her drive 20 miles to be weighed when the regstration card showed she was OW ?
The bridge had just had its weight limit down graded to 3 tons , she was wrong in crossing and had no problem with the ticket . What was the problem was tieing up a service truck for a few hours at night when they had calls to catch. The truck was over the limit empty . Even the other State troopers at the weigh station ask why ? and shook their heads which pizzed the trooper off more .

billy_56081 · « **Reply #28 on:** July 20, 2011, 03:21:18 AM »

Shootall what the trooper did was, was he certified the over weight. He closed a loophole which a lawyer could use to fight it. Heck here the DOT just goes into the grain elevators and picks up load tickets and sends out over weight tickets. I have seen twin screw straight trucks come in over 90,000 lb. These trucks destroy our roads and bridges.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #29 on:** July 20, 2011, 03:33:47 AM »

there was no loop hole the EVW was over the bridge limit to start with , the other troopers pointed that out at the weigh station . The fine was 128 dollars which I paid as a lawyer would cost three times that. What he was doing was going overboard. There was no ticket for extra weight , it is a F350 service truck not a ICC lic. carrier.