Please read the context Tulare and only celebrate the truly righteous auditors. I've been arrested illegally, and confronted multiple times besides where officers eventually acknowledged my rights, so I'm not opposed to what you do. But too many times you celebrate jerks who actually gave cause for law enforcement to be called. Those guys should not be celebrated, like this guy.
Just tell the cop to take his hearsay evidence and get a judge to sign a warrant. If you aren't in cuffs, they have no RAS and are fishing, waiting for the subject to testify against themselves, as they try to prove innocence when no guilt has been proven.
I think it’s amazing that I called the cops for a traffic violation, and was told that since they didn’t see it, they couldn’t do anything. But if someone calls on someone these cops think they can hassle a guy for something that they didn’t see.
WHY? IS YOUR BWC ON?, ARE YOU ANTI- US CONSTITUTIONALLY WITH MALICE A FORETHOUGHT, VERBALIZING THREATS AND TOO CLOSE INTIMIDATING PRESENCE FOR DEMANDING CONTRARY TO MY 5th AMENDMENT RIGHTS, AND AIDING? IN YOUR IINVESTIGATION?
The fact that at 6:13 the cop said "this is no different than a traffic stop" proves the pure disconnect between too many cops and the reality of our right and the law. WOW!!!!
The bank doesn't have a parking lot camera? Please, give me a break. There's like 12 in every intersection of the streets, but the bank doesn't have a camera! 🤣
BS on the Bank not having cameras on their parking lot. Every Bank has more cameras than a Police Station usually. These Cops are Lying and so is the Bank Manager if he says they don't have cameras.
lol. I'd rather not arrest you because I'm currently lying to you. And if I arrest you, you will sue me. So I'd rather just keep lying to you, because that's what we do.
As a retired police officer I will tell you that was an excellent video standing your ground. If everyone did this I think the police industry would change for the better in many many ways.
Disagree. Remove Qualified Immunity and allow citizens to go after Police Officers who violate their rights. If more officers are held accountable with real consequences and not just a filed complaint, then you might really see changes. Outside of the authority that the law provides, officers have no more authority than citizens. It is the EGO that cloaks them with the belief that they are ALWAYS more than a citizen. NO, they are citizens too UNTIL the law gives them elevated authority. Being protected by Qualified Immunity allows them to violate citizens rights and not be held personally accountable. This is the disconnect between the Police and the community they are supposed to serve. When Police are allowed to violate citizen's rights without being held accountable, how can you expect the community to have a trust relationship with the officers?! Would you? ADD: The possible consequences of a citizen being abused by the police (violated rights, high fines, jail time, criminal record) far out weight the possible consequences of the police who have Qualified Immunity protecting them. Citizens shouldn't have to stand up for their rights to have their rights respected by the people sworn to protect them. Innocent until proven guilty.
The “Good/Bad Cop” Question can be disposed of Decisively. We only need Consider the following: I. Every Cop as agreed, as part of his/her Job, is to Enforce Laws;, All of them. II. Many of the Laws are Manifestly Unjust, or even cruel & wicked. III. Therefore,every cop has agreed to Act as an Enforcer of Laws that are manifestly unjust,or even cruel and wicked IV. THERE ARE NO GOOD COPS. Stuart Pearce
"We're going to hang out with you in the parking lot and detain you until you confess or at least incriminate yourself because otherwise, we got nothing."
Again, why don't cops know that they CAN'T OBTAIN AN ID UNLESS THE PERSON HAS BEEN LAWFULLY ARRESTED FOR A SUSPECTED CRIME - ARS!!!??? A nation-wide campaign must be started to inform all law enforcement of this basic right.
@@jayk7149Furthermore, on *PRIVATE PROPERTY* being a bank. There is a reason traffic signs don't exist on private property. It's because its *PRIVATE PROPERTY* and not a public road. Street signs on private property are unenforceable by police, because they are not a public road.
You're not investigating a crime you're investigating a civil infraction. If it were a crime the government would have to provide him with an attorney.
As soon as it can be proven, the moment an officer lies about the law, they should lose their qualified immunity. Everything from that moment on should place accountability on the oinkity-oink! 🐷🚔
It's a shame that the US Supreme Court ruled that cops are allowed to lie. But we're not allowed to lie to them. "Rules for thee, but not for me." This is what needs to written in the "blue line" on that gang symbol the cops use.
Seriously though. The cop stated his RAS multiple times. The idea that you have to be convicted of a crime being the threshold for identifying yourself is a dangerous one to spread in this community. Convictions happen in courtrooms, not during stops.
@@ChazWalkerWonders yeah, it was annoying he kept using the wrong wording, but the cop didn't have RAS. RAS can't come from hearsay from whomever without there being some small modicum of evidence to go along with it to make it a reasonable suspicion.
@@iconamongidols I don't think they can get probable cause from hearsay, but RAS varies depending on the district. It'll be interesting to see if Audit the Audit picks up on this one.
3:37 "When we're investigating a crime you do have to identify yourself". Just once I want to hear the person say "Are you stupid, or, do you think I am?"
@Ari GSD Yeah, I wouldn't risk it. I hope that - in a similar circumstance - I would simply respond "No comment" to each question, keeping that 5th Amendment ace in the hole until needed.
“We got a call.” The cops’ current go to excuse to get their “ID crack” fix. Great job highlighting the cops’ ignorance of the law! This detainment is VERY different than a traffic stop…the cops would have witnessed an infraction in traffic.
Instead of "show me the proof" he should've said he's not required to help their "investigation." I do like it when he suggests contacting the person who called. I would even sarcastically suggest that the 911 center gets caller ID to help them since they are so confused. Also - don't forget, the process is the punishment. They're getting paid to stand around confused, they'll keep you there all day to avoid doing work.
And always be worried about any cop wearing a thin blue line anything. I feel the blue line is not pro constitutional law enforcement. It puts fellow LEO’s above the constitution and the public.
Yet another case of a cop lying to try to get what he wants. And he backed down when the citizen wouldn't buckle. He says when he asks for an ID, you have to provide it, but "I'm not gonna push it, though." ... That's because he knows what he's saying isn't true.
Look up California law on whether you have to identify when detained. Answer: --Y-E-S-!-- NO! Only after you're arrested, not detained. No idea why my first Google gave me wrong info. Thanks for the corrections!
This guy is under suspicion of a crime, so he must provide ID, but the cop knows it's petty and doesn't want to waste resources to prosecute a jerk for disorderly. This guy is lucky not wise.
@@JeffreyGoddin nope - he didn’t articulate any crime that was witnessed in his presence. He wasn’t lucky, he was correct. I’ll tell you what, I’ll call the cops in your town and tell them whatever the hell I want about you and cops should be able to demand your ID because I’m making an allegation. You do not have to ID when police are investigating a crime - only when you’re legally arrested. The guy was legally 100% right - “I’m not going to argue with you” is copspeak for “I know you’re right but my ego won’t let me admit it.”
Everyone has a right to face their accuser in court. Would have been best had he stated "I am invoking my 5th Amendment right and will not answer questions."
And when cops the auditor what he means by that, they tell the cop "you either respect my rights, or you violate them, falsely arrest me and I sue you for it." Simple as that.
"This is no different than a traffic stop." Yes it is. On a traffic stop the officer sees the infraction and makes the stop. He doesn't go off hearsay of what others saw. Edit: I stand corrected. This sadly is enough to make the stop.
@@bugmanmech Yes. And traffic infractions aren't issued because of what a witness saw. Traffic infractions have to be observed by the officer. So when he said, "this is no different than a traffic stop", it is because a witness is irrelevant.
Funny how LONG it takes a cop (due to ego and poor training)....to finally come to a conclusion that a "reasonable" person would have come up with a long time ago.
His shaking was due to a feeling of 'loss of control by a power-hungry fascist who is not use to being held accountable by a mere citizen, while being recorded.
THIS INDICATES THEIR DUI OBSERVATIONS BUT VICTIM TELEGRAPHED TO THE NEXT STAGE OF MAG-DUMMPING VIOLENCE ETC. CAUTION ADVISED, PRE VOLCANIC RETALLIATIONS.
If the cop did not see anything, there is only an allegation. it's interesting how the cops refer to a parking lot altercation, with no physical contact and no property damage as a "CRIME".
Those cops got lucky that nobody wanted to do anything. That saved the city a lawsuit. They would have arrested the man for failing to ID, setting themselves up for a false arrest and expensive payout.
That cop went away because there was no traffic infraction on bank property. Traffic infractions happen on roads paid for and maintained by tax dollars.
I'd have thought the same thing ...but that's actually false...I got a reckless driving ticket as a teenager doing a donut in a mall parking lot....these clown cops didn't do anything because they had no video evidence...and didn't see anything first hand....I got the ticket because I was young and dumb and didn't see the cop sitting nearby.... doh!
Bank property isn't "private property" like you're thinking. It's open to the public, so there are different rules. Now, if you're on your own farm driving like a maniac with an unregistered car and no license, then they can't do anything.
So with eye witnesses and public complain against him, do you think he had nothing to do with anything? Do you think he was innocent or guilty and is that relevant in your mind?
"I have nothing to say, I'd like to see a lawyer, I do not consent to searches. Am I being detained or am I free to go?" These are the only words that come out of my mouth when I encounter police. I say nothing else. THE BEST WAY TO HONOR THOSE WHO DIED FOR OUR RIGHTS, IS TO EXERCISE YOUR RIGHTS!
Mr. Alan, you are correct. That is exactly how you should react. I was a cop for 30 years and individuals who responded like that actually made my job easier since I didn't have to note down their statements or try to corroborate them or break down any false statements. However, a person is still required to cooperate (Section 148 of the CA Penal Code) whether they believe the stop is justified or not. If it isn't, that is what court and/or Internal Affairs complaints are for. An officer's response to your response should be: "Sir, yes, you are being detained. (Unless it's a consensual contact, which is a whole other subject). I understand you, and those are absolutely your rights and I applaud your exercising them and giving me an opportunity to protect them. You can now do the same by following the law and cooperating with the stop so that I can do the job you pay me to do. Will you cooperate? If you do, this matter can probably be cleared up and will be concluded shortly. If you do not intend to cooperate then you are under arrest under Penal Code section 148 until I either determine whether there is or is not reason to cite you or to book you into jail. Now, I will ask you one last time, Will you cooperate, Yes or No? (The little Pooh-butt in this video would have gone to jail, he probably would have resisted arrest, physical force would have been necessary to overcome his resistance and effect the arrest, the amount of force used would have been dependent entirely on the amount of resistance HE DECIDED to use and which would then prompted the officers to overcome that resistance with counter force. The whole video would have been edited and posted out of context, gone viral, potentially caused outrage, incendiary media coverage leading to riots in the street, buildings and businesses burned to the ground, probably some loss of life, and all because some little snot-nose wouldn't follow the law and simply cooperate when contacted by law enforcement. This is what people posting here want???
@@frederichheisel6248 Well, first and foremost, thank you for your service for our communities. Second ,you live in California obviously , I live in a different state. State laws very. After I exercise my rights ,I cooperate 100% with the police. If they say they're going to detain me or arrest me, I don't say a word I let them arrest me, I make no sudden moves, I make no sudden jerks, I keep my face neutral, my body language neutral ,and, I always cooperate with them. Once I get to the jail, I only give the information they need to book me in . I am a cold war veteran, a two-time veteran, a one-time war veteran, and I come from a proud military family. My daughter is a fallen soldier in Afghanistan, after 16 years of being a military police officer. My two older brothers fell in Vietnam killing Communists. My father fought in World War II and in Korea, carried shrapnel in his body, three purple hearts and two metals of Honor . I served twice . Once in a war . A person's rights are no good if they do not cooperate with the police . Once again, thank you for your service and thank you for your opinion and exercising your First Amendment rights. THAT'S one of many reasons why I served my country, so people have the right to free speech.
That probably works in the white gated community but you probably never lived in the hood where cops would probably beat you and then take your camera after saying that. Sounds good in theory though.
Without a formal written agreement between the property owner and the police, etc. including 'public notification of same' ..... They do not have any basis.
Bank parking isn't private property, because it's open to the public. For example, if someone trips on a pothole in the bank's parking lot, the bank can be liable. If someone trips on a hole in your driveway (when you didn't invite them) then you're not liable.
Again celebrating jerks. He selfishly drove the wrong way down a one way, they rather than apologizing when confronted, he escalated to the point where a responsible individual felt the need to ask for law enforcement intervention. Great exposition of how our Constitution in its pursuit of protecting the innocent also lets the guilty get away with bad behavior, congrats. He may not have been breaking a law, but he was clearly breaking the peace, and these officers respectfully came to the scene looking to see if there was danger of further escalation, as they should.
@@JeffreyGoddin yes, we have rights. Don't like it then move to North Korea where they will just shoot you and throw you in the ditch. I joined the army to protect our rights, along with many others in our history and many died. Don't spit in their graves.
@@darrennew8211 Bank parking is private property that is open to the public. No, you don't have to pay for a trespassers injury. Although I do remember a case where a guy broke into a house to rob it and hurt himself and sued, I think he won.
Cop logic: Show your ID then and only then you will be accused of committing a crime, but first, you have to show ID so we don't charge you with failing to produce ID. Then we will talk ourselves into releasing you from detainment. How much drool did those officers get on their admission exam? Ultimately, who gives guns and badges to these goofs? Bigger goofs!
I don't believe that's true. In Stop-and-ID states (which is about half of them), all police need to get your ID is Reasonable Articulable Suspicion. I'm pretty sure a person claiming you committed a crime could be sufficient for RAS. Sucks, but there it is. That's why I'm glad I don't live in a Stop-and-ID state.
Plus it’s a private bank parking lot. I would think a cop cannot give you a ticket for driving the wrong way on private property, if that even happened.
There is no law in any state that requires you to ID unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have committed, are about to commit, or are planning to commit a A CRIME. NOT ONE.
"We are investigating a crime." So driving the wrong way on a one-way street is a crime that has to be investigated by law enforcement, by two cops? What the hell have we come to?
@@harrisbaker4723 That's a different class of criminal than someone who accidentally drives the wrong way on a one-way street, imo. Dealing with drug dealers and rapists is much harder work for LE.
You Americans are soooooo lucky to enjoy such a Constitution. I say this Constitution is by far the most sacred document that ever existed in human history. In no other countries the Constitution ( if they have one) have such a level of power over TPTB. You should all pray every night thanking God for being born in USA with this powerful paper.
🤣😂😝😆 Convict you of a crime! They don’t have to convict you of a crime before they identify you! A jury convicts you of a crime goober! If you’re going to be a drama Queen make sure you get it right!
They tried to incriminate him on a '' call '' without any proof or even any evidence, and he's not required to help the cops in any way with their '' investigation ''. Good job !
I really love this how citizens are now stopping cops in their tracks by knowing their rights. For two long cops have been used to walking up to citizens demanding things and citizens just rolling over. They call that " complying " and somehow convinced themselves that the law and the way things are going to work. Very happy to see citizens starting to put a stop to that.
They were investigating an infraction (not a crime) based on another citizens "word", without proof. Just shows they will use anything they can to try and identify someone in order to run for warrants.
This is so common, one of the cops' favorite ways to abuse citizens. Half the time their "we received a call" is a lie, and even if they did get a call it isn't grounds for demanding ID. Innocent until proven guilty still means what it says.
If a cop says, "I'm being polite", they are far more likely 'feigning' a right to police this man. "Your words sound polite but your actions speak louder than your words."
Hear-say for a traffic infraction... not a crime.... a traffic infraction. COP: "Can I see your ID?" ME: "I'm assuming you can because your vision doesn't appear to be impaired."
I hate these people who say "This is not a 'Stop and ID' state" because it makes it seem like there are states in which the police can demand ID for absolutely no reason and that's simply NOT the case. Even in a "stop and ID" state, the police still NEED reasonable, articuable suspicion that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed in order to demand ID. There is ABSOLUTELY NO STATE IN THIS COUNTRY where the cops can randomly select someone and demand ID for absolutely no reason
1rst- If he was "LEGALLY REQUIRED"TO SHOW HIS ID IN AN INVESTIGATION FIRST I WANT TO SEE WHERE THAT'S ACTUALLY WRITTEN proof. 2nd- if he actually was required to by law they have already arrested him on "failure to ID"
Smash that thumbs up 👍 please it helps a lot RUclips will recommend it to more viewers
You have made a difference
THANK'S man
Get rid of the foul language, in your intro. It helps a lot. You tube tell you NOT to use obscenity in the first 30 seconds of your video.
Don't trust yt to help you!
Please read the context Tulare and only celebrate the truly righteous auditors. I've been arrested illegally, and confronted multiple times besides where officers eventually acknowledged my rights, so I'm not opposed to what you do. But too many times you celebrate jerks who actually gave cause for law enforcement to be called. Those guys should not be celebrated, like this guy.
Just tell the cop to take his hearsay evidence and get a judge to sign a warrant.
If you aren't in cuffs, they have no RAS and are fishing, waiting for the subject to testify against themselves, as they try to prove innocence when no guilt has been proven.
I think it’s amazing that I called the cops for a traffic violation, and was told that since they didn’t see it, they couldn’t do anything. But if someone calls on someone these cops think they can hassle a guy for something that they didn’t see.
do not talk to police, except to get them on record as to an unlawful detainment or arrest.
File a complaint and sue the shit out of them.
@@priestley749 sue them is a must, otherwise, auditing is just reality TV.
He just needed to tell the cops he was done talking to them. And he should have walked away. It would have been over at that point.
When a cop wants to talk he calls it a "conversation." When you talk, he calls it arguing.
Same as the UK. "Let's have a chat", means interrogation.
Cops NEVER "just" have a conversation.
"I'm not answering any questions"
"Why?"
"Because its my constitutionally guaranteed right."
WHY? IS YOUR BWC ON?, ARE YOU ANTI- US CONSTITUTIONALLY WITH MALICE A FORETHOUGHT, VERBALIZING THREATS AND TOO CLOSE INTIMIDATING PRESENCE FOR DEMANDING CONTRARY TO MY 5th AMENDMENT RIGHTS, AND AIDING? IN YOUR IINVESTIGATION?
"I don't answer questions" is my standard response.
The fact that at 6:13 the cop said "this is no different than a traffic stop" proves the pure disconnect between too many cops and the reality of our right and the law. WOW!!!!
The bank doesn't have a parking lot camera? Please, give me a break. There's like 12 in every intersection of the streets, but the bank doesn't have a camera! 🤣
Yep cop is a lying sack of sh*t! If that bank indeed doesn’t have any cameras at all they would literally be begging for people to rob them! 😂
BS on the Bank not having cameras on their parking lot. Every Bank has more cameras than a Police Station usually.
These Cops are Lying and so is the Bank Manager if he says they don't have cameras.
More likely that the camera proved the lie. Oops, we have no footage. I’ll call our ISP first AM!
A bank without cameras, I don’t believe that.
Bank without a car park camera, nice easy getaway after a bank robbery 😁
lol. I'd rather not arrest you because I'm currently lying to you. And if I arrest you, you will sue me. So I'd rather just keep lying to you, because that's what we do.
😆😆😆😆🤣🤣
perfect...
Sue the City. Cops are granted qualified immunity
😺
MR SUPERMAN: I TRY TO SUBSCRIBE AND THEY TOLD ME TO FLY A KITE
The bank doesn't have cameras. lol. Get your money out of that bank asap.
OH! AND GET YOUR TRUST OUT OF THAT LEO PD 'CAUSE OF ZERO ACCUNTABILITY FOR RECORDED TRUTH.
5 simple words: "I refuse to answer questions."
As a retired police officer I will tell you that was an excellent video standing your ground. If everyone did this I think the police industry would change for the better in many many ways.
Disagree. Remove Qualified Immunity and allow citizens to go after Police Officers who violate their rights. If more officers are held accountable with real consequences and not just a filed complaint, then you might really see changes. Outside of the authority that the law provides, officers have no more authority than citizens. It is the EGO that cloaks them with the belief that they are ALWAYS more than a citizen. NO, they are citizens too UNTIL the law gives them elevated authority. Being protected by Qualified Immunity allows them to violate citizens rights and not be held personally accountable. This is the disconnect between the Police and the community they are supposed to serve. When Police are allowed to violate citizen's rights without being held accountable, how can you expect the community to have a trust relationship with the officers?! Would you? ADD: The possible consequences of a citizen being abused by the police (violated rights, high fines, jail time, criminal record) far out weight the possible consequences of the police who have Qualified Immunity protecting them. Citizens shouldn't have to stand up for their rights to have their rights respected by the people sworn to protect them. Innocent until proven guilty.
how many years were you a police officer? favorite parts of the jobs? the cons? would love to know more? whyd ya leave ?
As a retired citizen, the more excellent video'd be like:
police: G'day, howz goin?
Me: Fuck off!!!
The “Good/Bad Cop” Question can be disposed of Decisively.
We only need Consider the following:
I. Every Cop as agreed, as part of his/her Job, is to Enforce Laws;, All of them.
II. Many of the Laws are Manifestly Unjust, or even cruel & wicked.
III. Therefore,every cop has agreed to Act as an Enforcer of Laws that are manifestly unjust,or even cruel and wicked
IV. THERE ARE NO GOOD COPS.
Stuart Pearce
Like we all have live cameras,, only reason he not tazed n cuffed
"We're going to hang out with you in the parking lot and detain you until you confess or at least incriminate yourself because otherwise, we got nothing."
When the cop said it was no cameras that showed him doing it. He knew he didn't have proof
Yes, I agree. That's why the cop tried to get the fellow to agree that he admitted to driving the wrong way. But it didn't work.
Ah yes ... that old evidentiary gold standard... "somebody told me, so it must be true."
Again, why don't cops know that they CAN'T OBTAIN AN ID UNLESS THE PERSON HAS BEEN LAWFULLY ARRESTED FOR A SUSPECTED CRIME - ARS!!!??? A nation-wide campaign must be started to inform all law enforcement of this basic right.
Hey Cops, if you want to dress up like a solider, sign up as a soldier. It’s that simple
seriously! They always look like they're ready for war...against us apparently
Since when is an alleged reckless driving complaint a crime?
especially without any proof
@@jayk7149Furthermore, on *PRIVATE PROPERTY* being a bank.
There is a reason traffic signs don't exist on private property. It's because its *PRIVATE PROPERTY* and not a public road. Street signs on private property are unenforceable by police, because they are not a public road.
@@Cline3911True, I forgot about that
Since the Cop made that Law up, all by himself ?
When cops feel like turning it into one.
You're not investigating a crime you're investigating a civil infraction. If it were a crime the government would have to provide him with an attorney.
A bank that has no cameras? This is the old "give me the man and I'll find the crime"
I think before he leaves he should march into the bank, get the contact info for the bank manager's boss, and then close his account.
As soon as it can be proven, the moment an officer lies about the law, they should lose their qualified immunity. Everything from that moment on should place accountability on the oinkity-oink! 🐷🚔
Every time! No accountability.
MS JIMMYTHE LOOSER: WE LIKE YOUR NEW SHOES
It's a shame that the US Supreme Court ruled that cops are allowed to lie. But we're not allowed to lie to them.
"Rules for thee, but not for me." This is what needs to written in the "blue line" on that gang symbol the cops use.
Don't forget, they are trained to lie and are legally protected in doing so.
@@avraamkalaitzogloy285 Keep licking those boots. 👅👢
Any time they detain you with no crime it's a lawsuit. I seen a guy get detained for 5 minutes and got 45,000 dollars. So yes this is a lawsuit.
Omg, cop said 500 times what the crime was.
@@TheBooban we found the good little doggy boys 🐕
Seriously though. The cop stated his RAS multiple times. The idea that you have to be convicted of a crime being the threshold for identifying yourself is a dangerous one to spread in this community. Convictions happen in courtrooms, not during stops.
@@ChazWalkerWonders yeah, it was annoying he kept using the wrong wording, but the cop didn't have RAS. RAS can't come from hearsay from whomever without there being some small modicum of evidence to go along with it to make it a reasonable suspicion.
@@iconamongidols I don't think they can get probable cause from hearsay, but RAS varies depending on the district. It'll be interesting to see if Audit the Audit picks up on this one.
3:37 "When we're investigating a crime you do have to identify yourself".
Just once I want to hear the person say "Are you stupid, or, do you think I am?"
WHY do people who have been hassled by the cops say, "have a good day", at the end??? Are they crazy?
These officers are very very DANGEROUS!!!
For someone who doesn’t want a conversation he does a hell of a lot of talking ! 😂😂
Frustrating to hear someone invoke the 5th and then revoke it, and then invoke it, and then revoke... !
@@desertblacksmith I know that drives me nuts. So many times you will hear I don't answer questions when just seconds before they did.
It makes for a good learning video
@Ari GSD Yeah, I wouldn't risk it. I hope that - in a similar circumstance - I would simply respond "No comment" to each question, keeping that 5th Amendment ace in the hole until needed.
“We got a call.” The cops’ current go to excuse to get their “ID crack” fix. Great job highlighting the cops’ ignorance of the law! This detainment is VERY different than a traffic stop…the cops would have witnessed an infraction in traffic.
WHEN APPROACHED, STATE "WE'VE GOT A CALL ABOUT SUSPICIOUS LEOS, SUSPICIOUS SPEWINGS." CAN YOU CONFIRM???
We have to agree that the auditor movement in the US has done an awesome job educating the police and the public about laws a rights.
No such thing as an honest cop ALL are rotten to the core!
Instead of "show me the proof" he should've said he's not required to help their "investigation." I do like it when he suggests contacting the person who called. I would even sarcastically suggest that the 911 center gets caller ID to help them since they are so confused.
Also - don't forget, the process is the punishment. They're getting paid to stand around confused, they'll keep you there all day to avoid doing work.
Love how you handled these cops. There is no situation a cop can't escalate.
This is a mirrored video. TulareCCW didn't handle these cops.
And always be worried about any cop wearing a thin blue line anything. I feel the blue line is not pro constitutional law enforcement. It puts fellow LEO’s above the constitution and the public.
Look what they did to Daniel Shaver.
Badged bullies flaunting fragile egos imposing their shameless ignorance on those they have sworn to "serve and protect".
Corrupt Cop Culture.
Yet another case of a cop lying to try to get what he wants. And he backed down when the citizen wouldn't buckle. He says when he asks for an ID, you have to provide it, but "I'm not gonna push it, though." ... That's because he knows what he's saying isn't true.
Look up California law on whether you have to identify when detained. Answer: --Y-E-S-!-- NO! Only after you're arrested, not detained. No idea why my first Google gave me wrong info. Thanks for the corrections!
@@darrennew8211 not when he is unlawfully detained, which the officers knew that, and they left without an i.d.
This guy is under suspicion of a crime, so he must provide ID, but the cop knows it's petty and doesn't want to waste resources to prosecute a jerk for disorderly. This guy is lucky not wise.
@@darrennew8211 nope - it’s secondary and you only have to do when you’re legally arrested.
@@JeffreyGoddin nope - he didn’t articulate any crime that was witnessed in his presence. He wasn’t lucky, he was correct. I’ll tell you what, I’ll call the cops in your town and tell them whatever the hell I want about you and cops should be able to demand your ID because I’m making an allegation.
You do not have to ID when police are investigating a crime - only when you’re legally arrested. The guy was legally 100% right - “I’m not going to argue with you” is copspeak for “I know you’re right but my ego won’t let me admit it.”
Everybody has a right to face his accuser. The cop says somebody called. Bring the "somebody" out here and let me face him.
Everyone has a right to face their accuser in court. Would have been best had he stated "I am invoking my 5th Amendment right and will not answer questions."
The caller doesn't want anything done? Then why did they call the police? DUH
I’d like to see some of these auditors start with, ‘we can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way’.
"i likes ya, and I want ya..."
And I’d like to see then say piss off instead of have a good day.
😂
And when cops the auditor what he means by that, they tell the cop "you either respect my rights, or you violate them, falsely arrest me and I sue you for it." Simple as that.
there is tons of them that do.
So anyone can call in a false complaint and the police accept it as fact and try to arrest the person doing nothing wrong.
"This is no different than a traffic stop."
Yes it is. On a traffic stop the officer sees the infraction and makes the stop. He doesn't go off hearsay of what others saw.
Edit: I stand corrected. This sadly is enough to make the stop.
The guy really doesn’t understand the law, but neither do the cops.
@Islayman exactly :) he shouldn't have used the word "convicted". The police doesn't convict a person.
Isn't every witness hearsay by your description?
@@bugmanmech Yes. And traffic infractions aren't issued because of what a witness saw. Traffic infractions have to be observed by the officer. So when he said, "this is no different than a traffic stop", it is because a witness is irrelevant.
@@solusemsu7957 Wrong
I would sue the PD and the bank.
💥 Boy… You Slap The Constitution 🇺🇸 In They’re Face and Things Start Changing💥
If you really need to call me something very very soon you're going to be calling me Plaintiff!!!!
Funny how LONG it takes a cop (due to ego and poor training)....to finally come to a conclusion that a "reasonable" person would have come up with a long time ago.
We need all of them to take psych evals. Sane people don't act this way.
That cop was shaking like a kid caught with a lie 😂
Yep i saw his hand shaking.
Like a leaf.
Yeah I burst out laughing when I saw that. He was so itching to make some kind of an arrest.
His shaking was due to a feeling of 'loss of control by a power-hungry fascist who is not use to being held accountable by a mere citizen, while being recorded.
He admitted he hadn’t talked to the caller. Cop needs better training
Cop so unsure of himself his hands are trembling.
THIS INDICATES THEIR DUI OBSERVATIONS BUT VICTIM TELEGRAPHED TO THE NEXT STAGE OF MAG-DUMMPING VIOLENCE ETC. CAUTION ADVISED, PRE VOLCANIC RETALLIATIONS.
Gestapo hates it when they realize they have no proof
If the cop did not see anything, there is only an allegation. it's interesting how the cops refer to a parking lot altercation, with no physical contact and no property damage as a "CRIME".
I wish he would have stopped saying "convict me of a crime"
Those cops got lucky that nobody wanted to do anything. That saved the city a lawsuit. They would have arrested the man for failing to ID, setting themselves up for a false arrest and expensive payout.
Boycott that bank..
Qualified immunities Must go period
Tell them you refuse to answer questions and to remain silent ,if they persist they are violating your rights
The cop tried to enforce hearsay but figured out real quick it wasn't going to work in this case.
That cop went away because there was no traffic infraction on bank property. Traffic infractions happen on roads paid for and maintained by tax dollars.
I'd have thought the same thing ...but that's actually false...I got a reckless driving ticket as a teenager doing a donut in a mall parking lot....these clown cops didn't do anything because they had no video evidence...and didn't see anything first hand....I got the ticket because I was young and dumb and didn't see the cop sitting nearby.... doh!
Bank property isn't "private property" like you're thinking. It's open to the public, so there are different rules. Now, if you're on your own farm driving like a maniac with an unregistered car and no license, then they can't do anything.
@@darrennew8211 100% correct!
even if there was, the pig can not cite based on hearsay alone.
BUT WHY MUST CITIZENS "MAINTAIN" LEOS WHO REPEATEDLY VICTIMIZE CITIZENS?
O Myyyyyyyyyy God ! I cannot believe that such a petty petty road violation can be turned into a mountain from a mole hill !
Katzman is shaking because he knows he ILLEGALLY detained you, now he's copsplaining his way out of his illegal detainment.
So with eye witnesses and public complain against him, do you think he had nothing to do with anything? Do you think he was innocent or guilty and is that relevant in your mind?
The fact that their are still comments on here supporting these cops behavior is reprehensible. Proving that greed and ignorance run our country.
This was great, he should have said though "I'm not required to participate in your investigation"
The title say's it all... 'One of the best ID refusals'. Nice work auditor!
MR BRAINDEAD: WE LIKE YOUR INPUT
Nice to see someone not help the police incriminate themselves. Not our duty to do their job.
"I have nothing to say, I'd like to see a lawyer, I do not consent to searches.
Am I being detained or am I free to go?"
These are the only words that come out of my mouth when I encounter police.
I say nothing else.
THE BEST WAY TO HONOR THOSE WHO DIED FOR OUR RIGHTS, IS TO EXERCISE YOUR RIGHTS!
Mr. Alan, you are correct. That is exactly how you should react. I was a cop for 30 years and individuals who responded like that actually made my job easier since I didn't have to note down their statements or try to corroborate them or break down any false statements. However, a person is still required to cooperate (Section 148 of the CA Penal Code) whether they believe the stop is justified or not. If it isn't, that is what court and/or Internal Affairs complaints are for. An officer's response to your response should be: "Sir, yes, you are being detained. (Unless it's a consensual contact, which is a whole other subject). I understand you, and those are absolutely your rights and I applaud your exercising them and giving me an opportunity to protect them. You can now do the same by following the law and cooperating with the stop so that I can do the job you pay me to do. Will you cooperate? If you do, this matter can probably be cleared up and will be concluded shortly. If you do not intend to cooperate then you are under arrest under Penal Code section 148 until I either determine whether there is or is not reason to cite you or to book you into jail. Now, I will ask you one last time, Will you cooperate, Yes or No?
(The little Pooh-butt in this video would have gone to jail, he probably would have resisted arrest, physical force would have been necessary to overcome his resistance and effect the arrest, the amount of force used would have been dependent entirely on the amount of resistance HE DECIDED to use and which would then prompted the officers to overcome that resistance with counter force. The whole video would have been edited and posted out of context, gone viral, potentially caused outrage, incendiary media coverage leading to riots in the street, buildings and businesses burned to the ground, probably some loss of life, and all because some little snot-nose wouldn't follow the law and simply cooperate when contacted by law enforcement. This is what people posting here want???
@@frederichheisel6248
Well, first and foremost, thank you for your service for our communities.
Second ,you live in California obviously , I live in a different state. State laws very.
After I exercise my rights ,I cooperate 100% with the police.
If they say they're going to detain me or arrest me, I don't say a word I let them arrest me, I make no sudden moves, I make no sudden jerks, I keep my face neutral, my body language neutral ,and, I always cooperate with them. Once I get to the jail, I only give the information they need to book me in . I am a cold war veteran, a two-time veteran, a one-time war veteran, and I come from a proud military family.
My daughter is a fallen soldier in Afghanistan, after 16 years of being a military police officer. My two older brothers fell in Vietnam killing Communists.
My father fought in World War II and in Korea, carried shrapnel in his body, three purple hearts and two metals of Honor .
I served twice .
Once in a war .
A person's rights are no good if they do not cooperate with the police .
Once again, thank you for your service and thank you for your opinion and exercising your First Amendment rights.
THAT'S one of many reasons why I served my country, so people have the right to free speech.
That probably works in the white gated community but you probably never lived in the hood where cops would probably beat you and then take your camera after saying that. Sounds good in theory though.
He should FOIA the body cams see what conversation actually took place in the bank.
So when do police have the right to enforce traffic violations in a privately owned parking lot?
Without a formal written agreement between the property owner and the police, etc. including 'public notification of same' ..... They do not have any basis.
It is unreal that they do not understand the right to remain silent. And they cannot enforce anything to do with driving on private property.
Yes, and more than that they took an oath to uphold that right and constantly trample all over it.
Bank parking isn't private property, because it's open to the public. For example, if someone trips on a pothole in the bank's parking lot, the bank can be liable. If someone trips on a hole in your driveway (when you didn't invite them) then you're not liable.
Again celebrating jerks. He selfishly drove the wrong way down a one way, they rather than apologizing when confronted, he escalated to the point where a responsible individual felt the need to ask for law enforcement intervention. Great exposition of how our Constitution in its pursuit of protecting the innocent also lets the guilty get away with bad behavior, congrats. He may not have been breaking a law, but he was clearly breaking the peace, and these officers respectfully came to the scene looking to see if there was danger of further escalation, as they should.
@@JeffreyGoddin yes, we have rights. Don't like it then move to North Korea where they will just shoot you and throw you in the ditch. I joined the army to protect our rights, along with many others in our history and many died. Don't spit in their graves.
@@darrennew8211 Bank parking is private property that is open to the public. No, you don't have to pay for a trespassers injury. Although I do remember a case where a guy broke into a house to rob it and hurt himself and sued, I think he won.
Cop logic: Show your ID then and only then you will be accused of committing a crime, but first, you have to show ID so we don't charge you with failing to produce ID. Then we will talk ourselves into releasing you from detainment. How much drool did those officers get on their admission exam? Ultimately, who gives guns and badges to these goofs? Bigger goofs!
I am in England and i can tell you that you are quite right to stand your ground. Give these jokers a uniform and they think they are God.
An investigation over petty sh*t is what makes it all worse.
BUT, CITIZENS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEE ANY LEO-PUBLIC INTERACTION, AS THEIR SAFETY PROTECTIONS IN ACTION.
"Cant we just have a conversation?"
1 min later:
"Im not gonna sit here and argue with you..."
You can never ID a person off of the word of another person claiming you committed a crime. That's a clear-cut case of unlawful detainment/arrest.
How so? Case law?
I don't believe that's true. In Stop-and-ID states (which is about half of them), all police need to get your ID is Reasonable Articulable Suspicion. I'm pretty sure a person claiming you committed a crime could be sufficient for RAS. Sucks, but there it is. That's why I'm glad I don't live in a Stop-and-ID state.
@@billpeet1976 4th Amendment
@@leowhite8461 What about it? Stop-and-ID laws are real, and the 4th Amendment doesn't prevent them.
Nonsense. The word of a witness can be enough to convict. It's certainly enough to detain.
Another cop bites the dust
"Where did you come from?"
"My mother's womb, Officer."
Plus it’s a private bank parking lot. I would think a cop cannot give you a ticket for driving the wrong way on private property, if that even happened.
Best encounter I have seen period hands down. Low IQ vs High IQ and to top it off he caught the cop in a lie about the one way.
There is no law in any state that requires you to ID unless there is reasonable suspicion that you have committed, are about to commit, or are planning to commit a A CRIME. NOT ONE.
I wonder how many miles he got down the road before they pulled him over for something else?
then he probably would have recorded again, and he could sued for retaliation
"We are investigating a crime." So driving the wrong way on a one-way street is a crime that has to be investigated by law enforcement, by two cops? What the hell have we come to?
Meanwhile drug dealers and rapists run free.
@@harrisbaker4723 That's a different class of criminal than someone who accidentally drives the wrong way on a one-way street, imo. Dealing with drug dealers and rapists is much harder work for LE.
We are a Police State. We think we are free. Just like citizens of Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.
As a retired FTO, this officer needs to go through the academy again. This time pay attention.
If the police officer knows that he has no right to ask for ID unless a crime is being committed why do they still demand ID
They want to intimidate you in complying with their unlawful commands.
The officer had nothing but Hearsay. The citizen was illegally detained.
You Americans are soooooo lucky to enjoy such a Constitution. I say this Constitution is by far the most sacred document that ever existed in human history. In no other countries the Constitution ( if they have one) have such a level of power over TPTB. You should all pray every night thanking God for being born in USA with this powerful paper.
It's unfortunate that petty situations exist in our country that could be resolved informally !
This was such a 'horrific' crime that the accuser didn't want to do anything to the accused.
🤣😂😝😆 Convict you of a crime! They don’t have to convict you of a crime before they identify you! A jury convicts you of a crime goober! If you’re going to be a drama Queen make sure you get it right!
They tried to incriminate him on a '' call '' without any proof or even any evidence, and he's not required to help the cops in any way with their '' investigation ''. Good job !
I really love this how citizens are now stopping cops in their tracks by knowing their rights.
For two long cops have been used to walking up to citizens demanding things and citizens just rolling over. They call that " complying " and somehow convinced themselves that the law and the way things are going to work.
Very happy to see citizens starting to put a stop to that.
Yes, it's about time !
They were investigating an infraction (not a crime) based on another citizens "word", without proof. Just shows they will use anything they can to try and identify someone in order to run for warrants.
This is so common, one of the cops' favorite ways to abuse citizens. Half the time their "we received a call" is a lie, and even if they did get a call it isn't grounds for demanding ID. Innocent until proven guilty still means what it says.
If a cop says, "I'm being polite", they are far more likely 'feigning' a right to police this man.
"Your words sound polite but your actions speak louder than your words."
I like watching cops prove how stupid they are.
Hear-say for a traffic infraction... not a crime.... a traffic infraction. COP: "Can I see your ID?" ME: "I'm assuming you can because your vision doesn't appear to be impaired."
They just HAVE to make themselves feel like they won. Egos on these🤡🤡 is ginormous
I hate these people who say "This is not a 'Stop and ID' state" because it makes it seem like there are states in which the police can demand ID for absolutely no reason and that's simply NOT the case. Even in a "stop and ID" state, the police still NEED reasonable, articuable suspicion that a crime has been, is being, or will be committed in order to demand ID. There is ABSOLUTELY NO STATE IN THIS COUNTRY where the cops can randomly select someone and demand ID for absolutely no reason
I am not answering any question simply because "I have the Right To Remain Silent"!!!
The Right of People to be Secure and Their Person's Houses Papers and Effects against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures Shall Not be Violated !!!!!!
The fact that this occurred on bank property makes it a private situation which means the cops can’t enforce traffic laws
Until it starts costing the department directly, and more importantly the officers who have discretion, this will never end.
I'm of the opinion that all persons, on American soil, must present ID when requested by any law enforcement official. Period!
Well done to you for refusing to be intimidated. Cop had no case.
Start identifying these departments that violate rights so they can be called out on it.
There isn't one that at lest doesn't try
1rst- If he was "LEGALLY REQUIRED"TO SHOW HIS ID IN AN INVESTIGATION FIRST I WANT TO SEE WHERE THAT'S ACTUALLY WRITTEN proof.
2nd- if he actually was required to by law they have already arrested him on "failure to ID"
It’s crazy they think we should talk and trust them when we know that they can lie to anyone all the time anytime.
Yes, it has been documented that the police can lie to you for anything. That is a sad case of affairs, leads to much mistrust
That's right we did cheer!No place for government!States rights
Not convicted. Suspected of a crime! Reasonable articulable suspicion!
Almost perfect, but he kept saying that he doesn't have to ID unless he's been convicted of a crime
?