lakeland cop pulled women's bra out during traffic stop (Tampa: salary, military)

[Spring Hillian]

You can nit pick it all day long. One of my statements had nothing to do with the other.

Originally Posted by jsun556

If it was a small handgun tucked away, then it wouldn't have been holstered would it.

[jsun556]

Originally Posted by tinytrump

Not saying the leo was right- but let them do what they think is right- and I detest any brutality or use of excessive force.

I'm extremely confused by this comment. What if the LEO believes brutality and excessive force is right? Does that still make it ok?

My point is, there are laws in place to protect the people. If some feel that any use of force is needed to make sure people aren't breaking the law, then why do we even have those protections in place?

Would people be ok with getting their doors busted down for random checks to make sure you have no illegal drugs or guns in your home? After all, you're not doing anything wrong. God forbid you have a small child inside that would be scarred for life by such a frightening experience.

Small transgressions should not be tolerated, as they usually lead to bigger and more invasive techniques. By then, it's too late.

[overit2]

"Small transgressions should not be tolerated, as they usually lead to bigger and more invasive techniques. By then, it's too late."

This is my point- I mean goign back to roadblocks-quite a few states have rendered them un-constitutional and dont' allow them regardless of the supreme court ruling.

It is EXTREMELY difficult to gain back any freedoms that were lost for a 'good reason'. Power always wants more power. The law is supposed to be to SERVE AND PROTECT- and it's not any longer-it's there to harrass, question, assume guilt and make people paranoid w/their constant intrustion and over-stepping. They are on power trips, not serving.

[The Villages Guy]

Some people are ready to bury the COP, without knowing all the facts. It is reasonable to WAIT to see what the investigation discovers and THEN have an adult conversation about everything. I do not think the COP should be automatically fired. I think they need to hear why he did what he did, if any superior told him to do it, if any or all of what he did makes sense. If there is just cause to continue this in official policy in part or in whole, then by all means let's do it. If they decide it should not be policy, then simply tell the COP he can no longer do that.

My God, hasn't anyone done anything at work you thought was the right thing to do, but later found out you should not have done it? Would you want to be fired, without the possibility of simply not doing it again once it was clarified that you should not do it?

I find it amazing how quickly armchair quarterbacks feel the need to be judge, jury and executioner.

[overit2]

Prius, if you had been burn in the past by an over-reaching, out of line power hungry cop, you may sing another tune.

[tinytrump]

final comment on this: unless you can see things from all sides- it is impossible to make a good judgement on any matter. The weirdest items confiscated by airport security - Telegraph

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by overit2

Prius, if you had been burn in the past by an over-reaching, out of line power hungry cop, you may sing another tune.

All I am saying is let's let this play out, hear ALL sides, listen to the pros and cons and then make an educated decision on best path forward.

Let's stop being judge, jury and executioner before all the facts are even known. You know, let's do it the way we are supposed to.

[bentlebee]

Originally Posted by PriusH8r

All I am saying is let's let this play out, hear ALL sides, listen to the pros and cons and then make an educated decision on best path forward.

Let's stop being judge, jury and executioner before all the facts are even known. You know, let's do it the way we are supposed to.

I agree with you! Btw I didn't see anything that is so over the top. Since when is shaking your books humiliating? She wasn't asked to undress. The cop must have had a reason to believe she was having something in her bra...maybe some kind of drugs?

I also learned a family member or family friend is a lawyer so I see someone making money of this. Go out there and being a cop on a daily base and deal with all the freaks and crazy liars...they risk their life on daily base for us.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by bentlebee

I agree with you! Btw I didn't see anything that is so over the top. Since when is shaking your books humiliating? She wasn't asked to undress. The cop must have had a reason to believe she was having something in her bra...maybe some kind of drugs?

I also learned a family member or family friend is a lawyer so I see someone making money of this. Go out there and being a cop on a daily base and deal with all the freaks and crazy liars...they risk their life on daily base for us.

I honestly don't know who would want to be a COP or someone in the military....for all the crap they have to take for little financial compensation. Let's remove all the cops for a year and see how many of these cop dislikers all of a sudden are crying for them.

[Occifer]

I didn't see any video footage on the news article posted, and I would want to see that before I made a comment either way about whether or not any search was appropriate.

Just because the officer asked for consent and the owner/driver didn't give consent doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't have probable cause to search the car. I frequently ask for consent to search a car even if I have probable cause. Why not? If they say no then the vehicle can be searched anyway. If they say yes then I'm searching based on BOTH consent and probable cause. That just makes the search legally stronger.

For example, if the car smelled like weed then the officer had probable cause to search it whether or not the driver gave consent. If the officer searched the car and any enclosed containers and still didn't find any weed, then courts have held that he has probable cause to search the occupants to see if they are hiding it on their person. You will run into problems only if you search the occupants before the car and/or don't get consent from the occupants first.

As to the bra portion of this, it is a well known fact that women hide drugs in the base of their bras. When women are searched, this area of their body is specifically searched because of this. If the officer had probable cause to search her then he did nothing illegal by having her shake out her bra. There's nothing in the law that says a male cannot search a female. Most agencies have policies on this and it is preferred that an officer of the same sex search someone, however if it's impractical then it doesn't happen. I've had to search females before because I knew that they were armed and I had to take the weapon out of their immediate reach before they could use it. There's nothing wrong with that.