I'm confused about this situation. Any driver in the US is required to provide driver's license, registration and insurance paperwork to police. Any cop is going to be suspect of anybody who can't. The first trooper gave the guy a break, the second was going to give a warning about speed, the dog alerted to something. A bad sequence of events for sure. But if all the required information about the vehicle and driver were provided at request, I believe this would have turned out differently and the man would be bitcoin convention bound.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
wrong, that officer fully intended to search that vehicle before he pulled it over. If he ran the tags and it was not reported stolen, that's all he need's to know. The driver had proper ID and no report of stolen. Why didn't the first officer detain him and request K-9. They tell you you are getting a warning right before the magic question. Its a psychological trick, they get you to drop your guard then hit you with, can I search. If you say no, they call K-9 and the dog always alerts. I have never seen one video where they say, well the dog din't alert so you are free to go. No the dog alerts 100% of the time.
If the charges are a result of the search, I am going with Darwin award winner.
Who speeds, no tag, no title, in texas, with drugs on them.
At the very least you don't speed, that is why they invented cruise control.
I hope he @marcstevens'd while he had the chance.
Completely agree. It isn't always because he's "Adam Kokesh" and they're out to get him personally. Could have easily happened with anyone else driving under those conditions....
you are correct they will do this to anyone, because we let them. There is no reason to hold someone on the side of the road for that long, if you get pulled over for speeding, write him a ticket and send him on his way. You don's have to prove something is NOT stolen. If it wasn't reported stolen, then it wasn't.
Where was the presumption of innocence?