U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-12-2011, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Near the water
8,231 posts, read 11,579,513 times
Reputation: 3877

Advertisements

They are running your plates.......no conspiracy.






Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
Sorry top tell you, but it is correct. I've seen it many times, and at least twice when pulled over myself. An officer pulls out behind, and the driver then sees the officer and slows down or whatever. The officer follows him 1/4 mile before turning on the lights.

I was driving behind 3 other cars, we were all moving from one location to a friends house. I was last in line. We were making a left at a lighted intersection and I caught it yellow, so I sped up a little to get through. In my truck I have locking rear differential so sometimes when I make a turn, the outside wheel will squeal a bit. The officer pulled out behind me and followed for about a 1/4 mile before pulling me over. Then writes me a ticket. In court I explained the locking rear differential, the officer said I was fishtailing through the intersection. I had a witness with me, and the officers camera didn't get the incident. His word against ours, his testimony was considered the only real truth. He lied.. And I feel like the delay to turn on the lights was only to assure his testimony would be the only evidence.

I couldn't tell you how many times I've seen the delay to turn on the lights. And I also hear that it's illegal for some reason to record the interaction with police officers yourself..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-12-2011, 04:08 PM
 
359 posts, read 503,276 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nativechief View Post
Yes I saw this in court and the guy even had a lawyer. Kid was given a ticket for 50 in a 25 and the lawyer pointed out that it was almost impossible for the little car to go from a stop to 50 mph in less than a block but cops said he did and thats the way it went. Judge wouldnt reduce it at all and the Kid had a very good lawyer too and explained how they dont have to have a speed gun or camera...I dont BS my man
I'm an officer myself and I can say I've never seen anything remotely close to what you have described. I can say for certainty that you must be radar certified to issue speeding citations using the radar gun and that 99% of speeding citations are giving based off a radar gun reading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
Sorry top tell you, but it is correct. I've seen it many times, and at least twice when pulled over myself. An officer pulls out behind, and the driver then sees the officer and slows down or whatever. The officer follows him 1/4 mile before turning on the lights.

I was driving behind 3 other cars, we were all moving from one location to a friends house. I was last in line. We were making a left at a lighted intersection and I caught it yellow, so I sped up a little to get through. In my truck I have locking rear differential so sometimes when I make a turn, the outside wheel will squeal a bit. The officer pulled out behind me and followed for about a 1/4 mile before pulling me over. Then writes me a ticket. In court I explained the locking rear differential, the officer said I was fishtailing through the intersection. I had a witness with me, and the officers camera didn't get the incident. His word against ours, his testimony was considered the only real truth. He lied.. And I feel like the delay to turn on the lights was only to assure his testimony would be the only evidence.

I couldn't tell you how many times I've seen the delay to turn on the lights. And I also hear that it's illegal for some reason to record the interaction with police officers yourself..
Well it is policy to call in a traffic stop, therefore an officer might have a delay in conducting a traffic stop. There could be radio traffic which lasts 15-30 seconds. Or the officer could be running your tag and the system is running slow (which happens daily). Officers would like to know whether or not the car they are about to pull over is stolen or been used in a robbery, which is only known through running the tags.

It is not illegal to record interactions and I have no idea where you get this nonsense. The misinformation of civilians is truly amazing, and in the unfortunate sense.

You sound like an individual who was cited and now has a bad taste in their mouth. I understand that as I was not happy to receive my speeding ticket a couple years ago.

By the way you did not state what you were cited for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 04:50 PM
 
103 posts, read 367,897 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty View Post
They are running your plates.......no conspiracy.
I'm only fueling the fire here, I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it's awful convenient that it works out that way.

If they plan on pulling you over anyways, why not go ahead and turn the lights on so the incident will be caught on tape? They could certainly still run the plates before they get out of the car.

What is the camera for? Why not make sure it becomes evidence of the incident? Waiting to turn it on almost certainly insures it can't be used to contest the officers testimony. What other purpose would there be to exclude the use as proof of the real crime or infraction? Why spend all that money to install the system and then not use it to it's full potential.

Basically "running the plates" isn't a good enough excuse for the lights not being turned on when it comes down to it. Because you don't have to run the plates first if you plan on pulling the car over anyways...

Also, I know an officer in Meck that lives down here in Union. We have hung out together on numerous occasions and he is dedicated. He is as admit about his job as they come. He personally told me when I pressed him with the question (why do officers lie), "If the perp can lie to get himself acquitted, why can we lie to get the conviction?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:26 PM
 
103 posts, read 367,897 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
Well it is policy to call in a traffic stop, therefore an officer might have a delay in conducting a traffic stop. There could be radio traffic which lasts 15-30 seconds. Or the officer could be running your tag and the system is running slow (which happens daily). Officers would like to know whether or not the car they are about to pull over is stolen or been used in a robbery, which is only known through running the tags.
Just doesn't make sense. Why? Why would he have to wait to turn on the lights when the technology is available and has been paid for. The infraction could be caught on tape if the "policy" was different. Couldn't the information be acquired after the lights go on or after someone has been pulled over? I know there are times when there is no lapse between as well, so it's not all one way. I've seen officers pull out after someone with the lights on before...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
It is not illegal to record interactions and I have no idea where you get this nonsense. The misinformation of civilians is truly amazing, and in the unfortunate sense.
The issue comes when someone is recording and the officer tells them to turn off the camera. If they don't, they will be arrested for "failure to comply with a lawful order"

Though it has been an issue recently enough that there has been articles written, and there were news storys about it..

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
You sound like an individual who was cited and now has a bad taste in their mouth. I understand that as I was not happy to receive my speeding ticket a couple years ago.
I was truly doing nothing wrong...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
By the way you did not state what you were cited for.
He said I crossed a double yellow (while fishtailing) and wreck-less driving basically... I think initially he saw the squeal of my tires as an opportunity to pull me over and see if I was a potential DUI, because he asked if I had been drinking, conducted a field sobriety test, and breathalyzed me. I hadn't been drinking, but it was late at night...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:31 PM
 
359 posts, read 503,276 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
I'm only fueling the fire here, I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it's awful convenient that it works out that way.

If they plan on pulling you over anyways, why not go ahead and turn the lights on so the incident will be caught on tape? They could certainly still run the plates before they get out of the car.

What is the camera for? Why not make sure it becomes evidence of the incident? Waiting to turn it on almost certainly insures it can't be used to contest the officers testimony. What other purpose would there be to exclude the use as proof of the real crime or infraction? Why spend all that money to install the system and then not use it to it's full potential.

Basically "running the plates" isn't a good enough excuse for the lights not being turned on when it comes down to it. Because you don't have to run the plates first if you plan on pulling the car over anyways...

Also, I know an officer in Meck that lives down here in Union. We have hung out together on numerous occasions and he is dedicated. He is as admit about his job as they come. He personally told me when I pressed him with the question (why do officers lie), "If the perp can lie to get himself acquitted, why can we lie to get the conviction?"
You honestly think we sit there and say "Oh boy I'm about to pull this person over for no reason. I better wait over a minute before I pull them so I can lie about it to get a conviction?"

If your answer is "yes", I don't know what to tell you.

Did you not read my previous post?

If you all want to take one bad encounter or dishonest comment from an officer and paint all officers with the same brush, go right ahead. I'll be the first to call an officer out for acting inappropriately and I will always take responsibility for my actions.

My job is to rise above all the hate and disrespect towards myself and fellow officers. Don't worry I'll still be there to save you. Maybe like that guy in diabetic shock the other day who just crashed his car. I lifted the 200 lb man out of the car to get him to the ambulance. Oh and he had a gun right next to him along with a hunting knife. Or maybe I'll be there when you're in a fight for your life when some criminal wants your wallet.

I know this will go in one ear and out the other. You'll say "well that will never happen to me". I hope it doesn't, I'd love for there to be no crime and for none of you to violate NC motor vehicle laws. Unfortunately that's not realistic.

I'll step down off my soap box and go back to letting you all say what you want, regardless of how much I disagree with the sentiments of a few in this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:34 PM
 
Location: Up above the world so high!
45,270 posts, read 88,294,482 times
Reputation: 39844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
I agree, I've seen it many times..

Unless you have a lawyer.. Which is going to cost you as well.. but saves the points on your license.


CMPD does a good job and has an overall great reputation.

It's not a job I would personally want to do and I greatly respect those that do.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 04-14-2011 at 04:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:40 PM
 
359 posts, read 503,276 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
Just doesn't make sense. Why? Why would he have to wait to turn on the lights when the technology is available and has been paid for. The infraction could be caught on tape if the "policy" was different. Couldn't the information be acquired after the lights go on or after someone has been pulled over? I know there are times when there is no lapse between as well, so it's not all one way. I've seen officers pull out after someone with the lights on before...
Did you not understand what I wrote? What if your car is stolen? It changes from a normal traffic stop to a felony traffic stop which requires two officers. What if I run the tag and it comes back to a vehicle used in an armed robbery? This stuff happens!

I chose to run the tag before I pull a vehicle over for officer safety reasons. Also guess how many times I run a tag and it doesn't even belong to the vehicle it is on? Many, many times

As I have said before, the footage records one minute into the past. I highly doubt there was a one minute lapse from the time of your alleged driving offense to the time the officer activated lights and siren.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
The issue comes when someone is recording and the officer tells them to turn off the camera. If they don't, they will be arrested for "failure to comply with a lawful order"
No you won't. You can record all day long. Just don't get in the way of an officer doing their job. You can then face resist/delay/obstruct a public officer.

I don't know what you quote "failure to comply with a lawful order" as that isn't even a valid charge. Where do you get this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
Though it has been an issue recently enough that there has been articles written, and there were news storys about it..
Ok yea let's believe everything that we read in newspapers because they don't hold any bias.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
I was truly doing nothing wrong...
I wasn't there so I obviously have no idea if you were in the right or wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rampart2 View Post
He said I crossed a double yellow (while fishtailing) and wreck-less driving basically... I think initially he saw the squeal of my tires as an opportunity to pull me over and see if I was a potential DUI, because he asked if I had been drinking, conducted a field sobriety test, and breathalyzed me. I hadn't been drinking, but it was late at night...
Like I said, I wasn't there so I can't comment on what you did. I was just curious what you were cited for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 05:56 PM
 
103 posts, read 367,897 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
You honestly think we sit there and say "Oh boy I'm about to pull this person over for no reason. I better wait over a minute before I pull them so I can lie about it to get a conviction?"
No there most certainly is a reason, but it doesn't end there. Pulling someone over on a friday/saturday night for some meager infraction is most certainly looking for the opportunity to find someone drinking and driving or worse. The city/county needs money, ticketing supplies part of that money. There are certainly people out there breaking the law, and sometimes it just takes having the opportunity to catch them. So pulling people over gives that opportunity. Some officers will take any little issue they can as an opportunity..


Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
If you all want to take one bad encounter or dishonest comment from an officer and paint all officers with the same brush, go right ahead. I'll be the first to call an officer out for acting inappropriately and I will always take responsibility for my actions.

My job is to rise above all the hate and disrespect towards myself and fellow officers. Don't worry I'll still be there to save you. Maybe like that guy in diabetic shock the other day who just crashed his car. I lifted the 200 lb man out of the car to get him to the ambulance. Oh and he had a gun right next to him along with a hunting knife. Or maybe I'll be there when you're in a fight for your life when some criminal wants your wallet.

I know this will go in one ear and out the other. You'll say "well that will never happen to me". I hope it doesn't, I'd love for there to be no crime and for none of you to violate NC motor vehicle laws. Unfortunately that's not realistic.

I'll step down off my soap box and go back to letting you all say what you want, regardless of how much I disagree with the sentiments of a few in this thread.
There are honest and dishonest people in ever walk and profession. I know there are good and bad officers. I'm in no way saying "they all do this".. More voicing my frustration that it happens. This a;ll started with one person saying that an officers testimony in court without conflicting evidence, leads to conviction. Some officers embellish, exaggerate, or flat out Lie. And thats a really big problem when they are the authority, are given the power, and their testomony is looked upon as fact in a court setting. There is no "my word against his" when it comes to a defendant and an officer. The officer is right and the defendant is wrong.

That in no way means that the officer doesn't at some point, and probably most of the time, do the job and follow the rules as designed. And it doesn't mean that the officer or any other officer can't be a decent human being when it comes to situations as described above. I would expect an officer to do those things. Civilians also do the community a service as well... Any decent human being, law enforcement or civilian, has the moral obligation to help when they can. Whether that means stopping for and helping someone with a heath emergency or helping an old lady carry groceries to her car.

I commend you for doing good deeds. And you are probably a great guy. Sadly this isn't the standard with all of our population, and that population includes law enforcement among many other professions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 06:03 PM
 
103 posts, read 367,897 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
Did you not understand what I wrote? What if your car is stolen? It changes from a normal traffic stop to a felony traffic stop which requires two officers. What if I run the tag and it comes back to a vehicle used in an armed robbery? This stuff happens!

I chose to run the tag before I pull a vehicle over for officer safety reasons. Also guess how many times I run a tag and it doesn't even belong to the vehicle it is on? Many, many times
Maybe you can help me understand why. You are going to make the stop anyways right? So, what difference does it make? You aren't going to wait for a second officer before you turn on your lights...

What does the difference in the crime have to do with whether or not you turn on your lights first? Are you expecting the incident to play out differently if you check the tags before you turn on the lights rather then after? Are you just trying to be prepared for whether or not he's going to try to run? What changes? And why then does it ever happen the other way around? Sometimes the lights are turned on as the officer is pulling out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDAlum View Post
As I have said before, the footage records one minute into the past. I highly doubt there was a one minute lapse from the time of your alleged driving offense to the time the officer activated lights and siren.
But yet sadly enough, there was....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2011, 06:09 PM
 
103 posts, read 367,897 times
Reputation: 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovesMountains View Post
Why am I not surprised that you two agree.

CMPD does a good job and has an overall great reputation.

It's not a job I would personally want to do and I greatly respect those that do.
It shouldn't surprise you. And you should agree as well... When it's left to a defendants word against an officers, in court, the officers word is taken as the truth.. Should be a great way to do buisness.. And I'd find nothing wrong with that, if it weren't for the fact that some officers "bend the truth"..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top