“It’s Easier If You Cooperate” – I Don’t Answer Questions

 

Here’s the channel link:  https://youtube.com/channel/UC_jjBGgC3diWME0ml49ibVg

Original video:  https://youtu.be/NSlEjndbRx0

 

I have to say…. 10 years ago, she’d have gotten on the radio and had 5 cars and 10 guys and they would have gone hands on to show him and his neighbors the price for their lack of respect and cooperation, and hi-fived each as they booked him in. Thanks to channels like this we are seeing a change.

 

 

My question for the cop who says “It’ll be easier for you if you just comply…” is this: Are you saying you’re going to make it MORE difficult for me if I don’t assist you in your investigation of me?
Of course, we know cops are allowed (and always do) lie in the course of their “investigations”, so we simply can’t believe what they’re saying in the first place.

 

He missed the opportunity to tell her that if she does decide to return or any other officer and they intend to come onto his property that he does not give them permission to do so and if they want to make sure they obtain a search warrant first.

 

Her implied THREAT that “…it’ll be a lot EASIER for him to cooperate…” is as subtle as a concrete block dropped on his foot.
Why do they always say that they need an ID to determine any crime? How does the ID help determine if THAT crime they are there investigate anything, other than just check to see if you are wanted for something different…. the question is rather ridiculous!
Isn’t “it would be a lot easier if you cooperate” just another way of saying “help me to violate you” ?
It cracks me up that cops actually believe that you have to PROVE YOUR NOT GUILTY… When it is on the State to prove you’re guilty… HOW DID THIS GET TWISTED AROUND?
Her whole investigation must’ve depended on this guy solving it for her. Just leaving after he wouldn’t help with it says she didn’t have much of an investigation.

 

“Why wouldn’t you want to help me show that you had nothing to do with that?” This is the presumption of guilt, whereas United States jurisprudence is predicated upon the presumption of innocence… unless you get a bad cop who assumes you are guilty and tries to identify you and put the burden of proof onto you to prove you’re innocent of the allegations she is making.
When a cop ask it will be much easier on you if you show your ID I kind of wonder if that is in some sort of a idle threat?
“It will be easier if you cooperate.” A burglar could make that statement to a homeowner.
This guy knows his smarts. That police officer is trying to find any possible way to charge them and find them guilty. And you know why? Because they profit from it. So never give them any information, always record them and make sure you have a good amount the of surveillance cameras.
The simple fact that cops are allowed to lie to us should mean we should not say a single word to them
Why would she ask him how long it’s parked there? Shouldn’t the owner tell you that? “If ask me the same questions, I’m going in the house.” That was great. LOL
I hate when cops say that “it’ll show me your not involve” how does a piece of plastic show you someone that’s guilty or not guilty, you thugs must have some magical powers that a piece of ID can tell you a person’s guilt
4:07 If someone give ID, they put it into the computer, the person name gets stuck there forever, and maybe any case in the area that they cannot solved, they go to their computer or “Pattern List” to find a Suspect. What I call here a “Pattern List” (my words, just thought of the name) is that for some types of Crimes, a Boyfriend (think Brian Laundries (with Gabby, the Cops with them in Utah case)) where the Boyfriend is automatically the First Suspect (happen to be true in this case), but an example of Cops being focused too much on the Computer’s name or the Pattern List. A Pattern List name kickout is often the Father, for example the Jaycee Lee Dugard kidnapping case, held for about 15 years by a weirdo. The Father was the First and only Suspect it seems, and when they could not prove it was him, they seemed to just about quit looking.
“Easier if you cooperate “, said every rapist everywhere. Violation is violation.
How does someone’s ID determine a hit-and-run case? Cop “logic”?
1:40 he should ask ” how is knowing my name going to tell you if i have broken the law”?

No Qualified Immunity – After Pretextual Traffic Stop (Dash Cam)

Police think they have to search a car because:

  • driver refuses to answer questions about travel plans
  • driver has cameras
  • driver only rolls down windows 1/4 of the way

 

 

It’s crazy to me that they think they have a right to know where people are going!

 

It’s still wild to me that police get to claim qualified immunity, while citizens are told ignorance of the law is not a defense. Police should be held to a higher standard if they are the enforcers of the law.

Cop Retaliates by Asking Veteran to Step out of Vehicle

Mt. juliet police department

  • The reason that police officer asked you to get out of your car was a power trip and it made his ego feel bigger.

 

  • This gentleman just exposed what the public is up against and certainly is NOT the treatment we pay for. The fact that this supervisor can NOT be honest just further highlights the problem with cops.

 

  • As soon as a cop says, this isn’t a courtroom. You’ve proved they have no case.

[bg_collapse view=”button-orange” color=”#4a4949″ expand_text=”Show More” collapse_text=”Show Less” ]

  • Really good way he went about doing this, instead of arguing with the supervisor he told him to talk to the cop who didn’t explain to him what he did wrong. This is a perfect interrogation question.
  • There was no reason for this man to get out of his car for a simple traffic stop. This supervisor is covering for this cop
  • The cop was angry because you used your rights to not talk and to record. So he had to do a power play and pull you out of the car. The cops can’t explain it any other way. Because we can….FTP
  • You decided to exercise your right and that’s suspicious to us
  • I LOVE how you turned their “officer safety” around on them!!
  • When an officer is vain enough to say I don’t care, they should automatically be liable to pay out of their pay for any lawsuits that come of the situation. They’re use to citizens paying for their mistakes
  • He was pulled out because this vet didn’t lick the cop’s boots. It’s their way of bullying and exerting power over citizens that don’t kiss their asses.
  • Like you said this is why there is a disconnect with the public and the police. Their ego over the law.
  • EXERCISING OUR RIGHTS IS NOT SUSPICIOUS!
  • Why is he so clearly annoyed by a member of the public exercising his 1st amendment right to free press while he interacts with the officer. Honestly it’s infuriating to see a Public Servant annoyed at a citizen using rights. How unprofessional. Clear conduct unbecoming of an officer. Very rude and unprofessional.
  • You’re a very smart individual the way you manipulated that. You wanted to know so you don’t do that again was a genius move.👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
  • Absolutely it was harassment there was no reason to pull him out of the car. That cop knows it anyone who watched this video knows it.
  • We can all clearly see he was butt hurt and wanted to some how gain back power.
  • He asked him to get out of the vehicle because he was hoping the man would refuse so then he could tase him, drag him out, and arrest him. All because he didn’t like the man invoking his 5th amendment rights!
  • Nice job with maintaining your composure while our public servants did not! This is a good example of egotistical tyranny in our cities. They earn the respect the get.
  • This gentleman is lucid, coherent, and makes good points. The officers should be embarrassed by their behavior and their ‘copsplaining’…
  • Isn’t it interesting how they always say “I don’t mind you recording its already being recorded by myself, that officer over there and this officer” what they DON’T tell you, is that you will have to PAY for THEIR recordings and that they will redact anything that shows them acting unlawfully.
  • “You can do what you want to but you are gonna stand over there if I tell you to stand over there” ahhh, the double think and speak of a tyrant
  • It’s weird how some cops freak the f*** out if you get out of your vehicle on your own during a traffic stop because of “officer safety” … yet when they want to really assert their authority, they will demand you get out of your vehicle. Cops always tell you they are recording via their body cams, yet they get very defensive and confrontational when you (we) record them, because they only want ONE recorded version of the incident. They can mute their body cams on the spot, lose (delete) the footage when it’s requested. Any cop worth his weight would never, ever mind being recorded during any interaction with a member of the public. Ego should never play a part in how a cop performs his duties.

 

  • Cop got butt hurt do he had to show you who’s in charge. By pulling you out of the vehicle. BTW, never let a public servants to speak to you with an attitude. Especially being a veteran. 12:08 cop “you’re going to stand over there if that’s what I tell you to do”. That should’ve set you off. Law enforcement has no authority over you!
  • So I guess exercising your constitutional rights in the presence of a law enforcement officer is now a form of Defiance , or their absolute favorite saying , Uncooperative….
  • We all know that the driver was pulled out of the vehicle in order for the officer to passively control what the driver’s camera was able to witness.
  • LT has zero authority to tell this free citizen where to freaking stand if he’s not being detained. Absolutely ridiculous behavior.
  • What’s amazing to me is the cop showed Zero respect for the Veteran and treated him like an enemy
  • You go boy all I got to say is BOOOOM . He turned it all around when he asked that supervisor what he did wrong to make the officer feel unsafe.
  • “you’re gonna stand right there if that’s what I tell you to do” who do these people think they are? Bloody low lives
  • Just imagine if we could treat cops the way they treat us.
  • “If you wanna go to court on it” That’s the truth right there, they KNOW the justice system is broken and KNOW they have zero accountability. “We do what we want, don’t like it, take it to court where the system will chew you up” “You’ve already filed your complaint” lol, yeah sure he was going to file paperwork on that and start an investigation.
  • 15:22 This is where the “supervisor” misquotes and thus misunderstands the SCOTUS ruling. Police have a wide range of description in where they conduct a traffic stop based on “officer and detained individual safety”. The auditor points out the officer has abused his entrusted authority to use this description as a bully tactic which is not related to officer (or detained individual) safety. It’s a far too common practice which needs to be eliminated in order to regain public trust in law enforcement.
  • Pennsylvania v Mimms says an officer can ask u to step out for “officer safety”. Not just because a cop “feels like it” or “wants u to”.
  • And still none of those Sovereign Citizens with Badges and Guns has given a REASON for why a Docile Law Abiding Citizen made that Supposedly trained and qualified Officer “feel unsafe”, and yet STILL failed to ensure his safety with a pat down. Because it obviously WAS a tactic to instill fear and blind obedience to his Tyranny. It’s also extremely disappointing to see the other two completely ignore their own oaths to the Law and Constitution. Bully with a Badge, afraid the camera is going to document his distain for the Citizens who pay his salary.
  • 15:20 the Corporal said is doesnt matter what he calls it! Oh! I very much DOESNT matter because when that deprivation of rights lawsuit comes and the other cops qualified immunity is on the line the jury will have to decide what a OTHER reasonable officers would have done in that same situation!
  • “Cause I wanted to” isn’t a lawful reason to require someone to exit their vehicle. That’s something that is lawful for officer safety but “cause I wanted to” isn’t an officer safety thing.
  • The only reason he was asked to get out was to intimidate him for saying he wasn’t going to answer questions, as his right. That was the only reason.
  • Mimms v PA says they can pull you from the car if they fear for their safety. That’s it. Not because they “feel like it”

[/bg_collapse]

 

Ex-Cop Forces Officers to Give Up and Leave

So this is crazy how this guy could have been a stalker and could just talk his way out of this and still keep doing what he’s doing. There needs to be a way of cleaning up where if there is suspicion then they have to show there ID

They ran his plates and instantly knew he was a PI. It is absolutely attached to either his vehicle registration or his drivers license.. so at that point all the questions were for the females information as to who is trying to investigate her…that’s my opinion anyway

Why is it that ex-cops seem to know citizens’ rights, but active cops rarely do? 🤔

As a former private detective and having been in a similar situation, the PI could have simply identified himself as a private investigator and dissolved the situation. I was approached by a county officer on a particularly difficult surveillance and I immediately identified myself and he left right away. The PI asked for professional courtesy but showed non on his end.

He didn’t want to admit that he was a P.I. because the deputies would have told the subject of his investigation. I would have definitely called the cops about some shmuck following me around for three days.

“Exercising my legal rights does not make me uncooperative.” While this it true, I don’t believe the rank and file cop is capable of comprehending this.