I wrote earlier a blog post about a rather egregious case of a police officer just stopping a random person on the street (because the officer mistook her for 10-year-old child from behind, but turned out that she was just a small adult woman), and demanding her ID for absolutely no reason whatsoever, even though there was literally no suspicion of anything at all, and when she refused the officer proceeded to just handcuff her. Again, even though absolutely nothing suspicious was going on. Nothing. The officer couldn't even name what the suspicious thing was, yet still demanded ID and got butthurt when she was denied her ID fetish.
This isn't a unique case either. Here's a more famous case (that even got news coverage and a lawsuit). In this case there at least was some suspicion of a possible infraction, but other than that, the situation was extremely similar to the one above.
A legally blind veteran (not completely blind, but having vision impaired to such extent that he's considered blind from a legal perspective) is walking down the street, with a foldable cane in is back pocket.
A police officer stops him because it's unclear to her if it's actually a firearm. The man shows her that it's not a firearm but a walking cane, a medical device.
What should have happened at this point is that the mistake had been clarified, the police officer got confirmation that it was not a firearm, and she should have just told the man to excuse her for the trouble and to have a good day. After all, at this point it's extremely clear and unambiguous that absolutely nothing illegal is going on, without even a shadow of a doubt.
But, just like with the woman in that other case, the officer's ID fetish had not been satiated, so she detained the man and demanded ID. She literally could not say why she was detaining him or wanted ID. The only reason why she had stopped him in the first place was because she made a mistake and confused a folded cane with a possible firearm. It was the officer's mistake, and the man had done absolutely nothing wrong, and the officer couldn't even say what he had done wrong. Yet, she still detained him, and demanded ID.
A bit later a second officer appears to the scene, and the man asks him why he's being detained and why he has to show ID. He reminds the officer that in Florida they need a reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed. The officer's response?
"Her suspicion was that you were armed."
Absolutely incredible. She made a mistake, she was wrong, but the man still needs to ID because she was originally "suspicious", even though it had been made absolutely clear that she was wrong and there was no suspicion anymore. The officer's argument seemed to be that if a police officer at any point, for any reason, had a suspicion, that was enough to demand ID, even if the suspicion had been dispelled already.
So, quite literally, the man was being punished because of a mistake that a police officer made. Incredible.
The man still refused to ID, as he legally could refuse because he hadn't done anything wrong nor was being even accused of any crime whatsoever, so they proceeded to handcuff him (obviously), and then proceeded to go through his pockets in an extremely clear case of 4th Amendment violation. And then they proceeded to arrest him in a very clearly retaliatory manner when he threatened to make a complaint. (This is not just my interpretation. You can watch the video and see how clearly the arrest was retaliation for his threat to make a complaint.)
At least in this case there were some consequences for the officers, although it was more of a slap on the wrist. But the man did plan on suing them.
It just goes to show that the American police have an irredeemable ID fetish. It's their drug of choice. No matter what the situation, even when it's their own mistake and the person has done absolutely nothing wrong, and it's extremely clear that's the case, they still need a fix of their drug of choice: ID.
You can watch a video about this case here.
Comments
Post a Comment