Army Lieutenant Files Federal Suit Against Two Virginia Cops for Excessive Force/Rights Violations

Two local police officers from Windsor, Virginia, were caught on tape abusing and assaulting an African-American Army Lieutenant, Caron Nazario. The lieutenant has filed a federal lawsuit for assault and violation of constitutional rights. A step-by-step review of the the video of the incident shows why the officers engaged in excessive and abusive force. This is yet another stark and disturbing example of why America is in desperate need of true police reform.

The Curious Death of Sandra Bland w/Malcolm Gladwell | Joe Rogan

Taken from JRE #1383 w/Malcolm Gladwell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Okg2L…
09:42
communication and he is this attitude
09:45
that he’s a cop and that you have to
09:48
listen to the cops because he’s them and
09:50
you’re you yeah and that that’s like
09:53
when he’s telling her to put the
09:55
cigarette out and she’s saying I don’t
09:57
have to do that and he’s saying get out
09:58
of your vehicle and she’s saying I don’t
10:00
have to do that and then he’s screaming
10:02
at her I mean that’s that’s all right
10:04
there yeah so it seems like to me he
10:05
wants compliance he won’t sir to listen
10:07
he does yeah he does what he gets it’s
10:10
funny the what’s remarkable about that
10:14
tape which I must have seen 50 times and
10:18
which has been viewed on YouTube you
10:20
know even a couple million times is how
10:22
quickly it escalates you know the whole
10:24
thing is it’s insanely short yeah you
10:28
you would think if I was telling you the
10:30
story of this you would think oh this
10:32
unfolds over 10 minutes and it doesn’t
10:35
it unfolds over a minute and a half and
10:39
that what I remember years ago I wrote
10:41
my second book blink and I have in that
10:44
book a chapter about a very famous
10:47
infamous police shooting in New York
10:49
case of amadou diallo I remember that I
10:51
remember that was shot like 40 times by
10:53
cops yeah and one of the big things I
10:55
was interested in talking about in that
10:59
case was how long does it take how long
11:02
did it take for that whole terrible
11:05
sequence to go
11:06
down so from the moment the police
11:08
develop it suspicions about amadou
11:12
diallo to the moment that amadou diallo
11:14
is lying dead on his front porch how
11:17
long how much time elapsed and the
11:19
answer is like two seconds
11:21
it’s boo boo boo it’s like and I had a
11:24
conversation with them actually here in
11:26
the valley with Gavin de Becker
11:30
has he ever been on your show no
11:32
fascinating guy was a security expert on
11:35
a security expert incredibly interesting
11:37
guy’s friends with Sam Harris I know
11:39
that yes yeah yeah and he was talking
11:43
about this question of time that when
11:46
you’re a security guard guarding someone
11:48
you know famous a lot of what you’re
11:50
trying to do is to inject time into the
11:53
scenario instead of you don’t want
11:56
something to unfold in a second and a
11:58
half where you have almost no time to
12:00
react properly and what you want to do
12:01
is to uh knit to unfold in five seconds
12:03
if you can an align this up I can’t
12:06
remember his exact term but basically
12:07
what your job is is to add seconds into
12:10
the the encounter so that you have a
12:13
chance to intelligently respond to
12:16
what’s going on and so he was hit this
12:18
great riff about um how good Israeli
12:23
secrets of Secret Service guys are and
12:26
one of the things they do is they’re
12:28
they’re they’re either not armed or they
12:31
don’t they’re trained not to go for
12:33
their weapons in these situations
12:35
because this point is so say you’re
12:37
guarding the president you’re a body man
12:40
for the president you walk into a crowd
12:42
somebody comes up to you like pulls a
12:45
gun wants to shoot the president
12:46
his point is if you’re the secret
12:48
security guy and your first instinct in
12:51
response to someone pulling a gun is to
12:53
go for your own gun you’ve lost a second
12:55
and a half right your hands got to go
12:58
down to here your whole focus is on
13:00
getting to your own gun and in the
13:01
meantime the other guy whose guns
13:04
already out has already shot you’ve lost
13:06
you need to be someone who forgets about
13:08
your own gun and just focuses on the on
13:12
the man in front of you right and
13:13
protected the president but he was all
13:15
in the context of time is this really
13:18
crucial
13:20
variable in these kind of encounters and
13:22
everything as a police officer you
13:24
should be doing is slowing it down wait
13:28
I you know
13:30
analyze what’s happening and that’s what
13:33
he doesn’t do the cop in this instance
13:35
speeds it up right he goes to DEFCON you
13:39
know she likes a cigarette and within
13:40
seconds he’s screaming at her this is
13:43
like you know a parent shouldn’t do that
13:45
I mean let a little police officer by
13:47
the side of the highway Brett but the
13:48
difference is he knows she’s not a
13:50
criminal
13:50
I mean he must know it’s [ __ ]
13:54
he’s pulling her over because he’s
13:56
trying to write a ticket and the way
13:58
he’s communicating with her when she
13:59
lights a cigarette
14:00
it’s like she’s inferior like he this is
14:04
not someone who’s scared he’s not scared
14:07
of a perpetrator he’s not scared that
14:09
there’s a criminal in the car about to
14:10
shoot him he’s not scared of that at all
14:12
he wants uh Terr total complete
14:15
compliance and he’s talking to her like
14:18
like he’s a drill sergeant but can’t you
14:21
can’t both those things be true how so
14:25
well in this so in the deposition he
14:27
gives which I get to the end of the book
14:29
and I got the tape of the deposition
14:30
it’s bad it’s totally fascinating
14:32
it’s like he’s sitting down with the
14:34
investigating officer in looking into
14:37
the death of Sandra bland and he’s got I
14:39
don’t know how long it is two hours now
14:41
he’s walking them through what he was
14:43
thinking that day and he makes the case
14:46
that he was terrified that he was
14:49
convinced he says he goes back to his
14:52
squad car comes up and there’s submit
14:55
there’s some evidence to support this so
14:57
he pulls her over and he goes to the
14:59
passenger side window and leans and says
15:02
ma’am you realize why I pulled you over
15:04
blah blah and is are you okay because he
15:06
she doesn’t seem right to him she gives
15:09
him her license he goes back to his
15:10
squad car and he says while he’s in the
15:12
squad car he looks ahead and he sees her
15:15
making what he calls furtive movements
15:17
so he’s like furtive movements also he
15:20
thinks she’s being all kind of jumpy and
15:23
you know isn’t he just says I saw her
15:25
moving around in ways it didn’t make me
15:27
happy and then when he returns to the
15:29
car he returns driver’s side which is
15:32
crucial because if
15:33
you’re a cop you go driver’s side only
15:35
if you think that you might be in danger
15:36
right he doesn’t if you go driver’s side
15:39
you’re exposing yourself to the road
15:40
when you reason you do that is it when
15:42
your driver’s side you can see the it’s
15:45
very very difficult if someone has a gun
15:47
to shoot the police officer who’s pulled
15:50
them over if the police officer is on
15:51
the driver’s side right you have an
15:53
angle if they’re on the passenger side
15:55
so why does he go but if he thinks she’s
15:57
harmless there’s no reason to go back
15:58
driver’s side I think this guy I think
16:01
these two things are linked I actually
16:02
believe him he constructs this
16:04
ridiculous fantasy about how she’s
16:08
dangerous but I think that’s just what
16:10
he was trained to do he’s a paranoid cop
16:12
and then why is he’s so insistent that
16:16
she be compliant for the same reason
16:19
because he’s terrified he’s like do
16:21
exactly what I say cuz I don’t know what
16:23
the what’s gonna happen here right and
16:24
she’s I you know I I don’t know I I
16:28
don’t think those two those two strains
16:32
of of interpretation are mutually
16:34
exclusive mmm that’s interesting it
16:37
didn’t sound like he was scared at all
16:40
it sounds like he was pissed that she
16:42
wasn’t listening to him yeah I didn’t I
16:44
didn’t think he sounded even remotely
16:45
scared I felt like he had I mean we’re
16:49
reading into it right right I have no
16:51
idea but from my interpretation was he
16:54
had decided that she wasn’t listening to
16:57
him and he was gonna make her listen him
16:59
yeah that’s what I got out of it I
17:01
didn’t get any fear and I thought that
17:03
version of it that he described just
17:05
sounds like horseshit it sounds like
17:07
what you would say after the fact to
17:09
strengthen your case well they so
17:12
there’s another element in here that I
17:13
get into which is I got his record as a
17:17
police officer he’d been on the on the
17:19
force for I forgot nine ten months and
17:22
we have a record of every traffic stop
17:24
he ever made and when you look at his
17:26
list of traffic stops you reason you
17:28
realized that what happened that day
17:30
with Sandra bland was not an anomaly
17:33
that he’s one of those guys who pulls
17:35
over everyone for [ __ ] reasons mmm
17:38
all day long so I think I’ve forgotten
17:40
exact number but in the hour before he
17:43
pulled over Sandra bland he pulled over
17:45
for people for other people for equally
17:48
ridiculous reasons he’s that cop no and
17:51
he’s that cop because he’s been trained
17:53
that way right that’s a kind of quotas
17:55
strange strain of modern policing which
17:57
says go beyond the ticket pull someone
17:59
over if you if anything looks a little
18:01
bit weird because you might find
18:02
something else now if you look at his
18:04
history as a cop he almost never found
18:06
anything else his history is a cop in
18:09
fact I went through this I forget how
18:11
many hundreds of traffic stops he had in
18:13
nine months if you go through them
18:15
he has like once he found some marijuana
18:17
on a kid and by the way the town in
18:19
which he was working as a college town
18:21
so I mean how hard is that I think he
18:24
found a gun once misdemeanor gun but
18:28
everything else was like pulling over
18:30
people for you know the the light above
18:33
their license plate was out got that’s
18:37
the level of stuff he was using he did
18:39
this all day long every day
18:43
so he’s like to him it’s second nature
18:46
yeah pull her over like who knows what’s
18:49
going on she’s out of state she’s young
18:51
black woman was this comparable to the
18:53
way the rest of the cops on the force
18:54
and his division did it well I looked at
18:57
I didn’t look at the rest of the cops on
18:59
his voice what I looked at were state
19:02
numbers to the wherever they’re several
19:05
American states give us like North
19:07
Carolina for example will give us
19:10
precise complete statistics on the
19:16
number of traffic stops done by their
19:18
police officers and the reasons for
19:20
those stops so when you look at that so
19:22
I have the I look at the North Carolina
19:24
numbers for example in the North
19:25
Carolina Highway Patrol it’s the same
19:27
thing they’re pulling over unbelievable
19:29
numbers of people and finding nothing
19:31
like night you know one percent less
19:34
than one percent hit rates in some cases
19:36
of being hit rate being finding
19:38
something of interest
19:39
so like they’re pulling over ninety nine
19:41
people for no reason in order to find
19:43
one person who’s got you know a bag of
19:46
dope or something in the car
19:48
you cannot conduct policing in in a
19:53
civil society like that and expect to
19:55
have decent relationships between law
19:57
enforcement
19:58
in the civilian population yeah no
20:00
question but doesn’t that sort of
20:02
support the idea that he’s full of [ __ ]
20:03
that he was really concerned that she
20:05
had something he’d never encountered
20:07
anything well or or this was the one the
20:11
fantasy in his head is so what so the
20:13
questions why does he keep doing it if
20:14
this is a guy who day in day out pulls
20:16
over people for no reason and finds
20:18
nothing and continues to do it
20:20
now there’s two explanations one is he’s
20:22
totally cynical and thinks this is the
20:24
way to be an effective police officer X
20:26
mission number two is this is a guy who
20:28
has a powerful fantasy in his head that
20:30
one day I’m gonna hit the jackpot and
20:33
I’m gonna open the trunk and is going to
20:34
be 15 pounds of heroin and I’m gonna be
20:37
the biggest star who ever lived I think
20:39
there’s also a rush of just being able
20:41
to get people to pull over this the the
20:44
compliance thing which is another reason
20:46
why he was so furious that what she
20:47
wasn’t listening to him yeah and she
20:48
kept a cigarette lit yeah or she was
20:51
listening but not complying yes yeah um
20:53
what are the laws I mean are you allowed
20:56
to smoke a cigarette in your car when a
20:57
cop pulls you over how does it work like
21:00
that
21:00
yeah I mean of course yeah they can’t
21:03
stop you from engaging they can’t tell
21:05
you to put out your cigarette there’s no
21:07
law no he could have said I mean no
21:10
there’s no law I mean the car though two
21:13
things the courts historically give
21:16
enormous leeway to the police officers
21:19
in a traffic stop as opposed to a
21:21
person-to-person stop but uh but no I I
21:24
mean right this is about what he should
21:26
have said is he could have said ma’am do
21:31
you mind I would prefer if you put out
21:35
the cigarette while we’re talking or I’m
21:37
allergic to smoke or whatever I mean
21:39
he’s a million ways to him to do it
21:40
nicely
21:40
yeah but he’s he’s a jackass about yeah
21:42
but I mean he’s basically doing the job
21:46
like a jackass he’s doing a jackass
21:48
version of being a cop well so this is
21:50
so this is one of a really really
21:53
crucial point in the argument of the
21:54
book which is I think the real lesson of
21:58
that case is not that he’s a bad cop
22:00
he’s in fact doing precisely as he is
22:02
was in trained and instructed to do he’s
22:05
a he’s the ideal cop and the problem is
22:10
with the particular philosophy of
22:12
law enforcement that has emerged over
22:14
the last ten years in this country which
22:16
has incentivized and encouraged police
22:20
officers to engage in these incredibly
22:23
low reward activities like pulling over
22:26
a hundred people or defying one person
22:28
who’s done something wrong that has
22:29
become enshrined in the strategy of many
22:32
police forces around the country they
22:34
tell them to do this I have a whole
22:37
section of book right go through in
22:38
detail one of the most important police
22:41
training manuals which is you know
22:45
required reading for somebody coming up
22:47
and which they just walk you through
22:48
this like it is your job to pull over
22:51
lots and lots and lots and lots of
22:53
people even if you only find something
22:55
in a small percentage of cases why
22:57
that’s what being a proactive police
22:58
officer is all about right so they are
23:01
trained that that phrase go beyond the
23:03
ticket is a is a term of art in police
23:07
training like you got to be thinking you
23:09
sure you pulled him over for having a
23:11
taillight that’s out
23:12
but you’re look you’re thinking beyond
23:14
that is there something else in the car
23:16
that’s problematic that’s to try to find
23:18
so there he was being a dutiful police
23:22
officer and the the answer is to
23:24
re-examine our philosophies of law
23:27
enforcement not know I mean you can’t
23:30
dismiss this thing by saying oh that’s
23:32
just a particularly bad cop not great
23:34
but I don’t know if he’s any worse than
23:36
you know he’s just doing what he was
23:38
trained to do that’s the issue
23:40
he should be trained to do something
23:41
different right that is the issue right
23:42
the issue is there this is standard
23:45
practice a treat citizens that are doing
23:48
nothing wrong as if they’re criminals
23:50
yeah and pull them over and give them
23:52
extreme paranoia and freak them out yeah
23:55
I hope you find something I was home I’m
23:58
Canadian and I was home in Canada
24:00
small-town Canada couple weeks ago and I
24:04
saw in the pack you know how these cars
24:06
always have there’s often that our
24:08
slogan on the side of the car the back
24:09
of the commune so in my little hometown
24:11
in southwestern Ontario sleepy you know
24:14
farm country the slogan on the back of
24:17
the police cars is people helping people
24:20
so Canadian like the X know understand
24:25
this
24:26
country with very low levels of gun
24:29
ownership which means that a police
24:30
officer does not enter into an encounter
24:32
with a civilian with the same degree of
24:34
fear or paranoia that the civilian has a
24:37
handgun right which is a big part of
24:39
this regardless of how one feels about
24:42
gun laws in this country the fact that
24:44
there are lots of guns mean makes the
24:46
job of a police officer a lot harder and
24:48
every police officer will tell you that
24:49
in Canada they don’t have that fear but
24:51
it’s also Canada and its small town
24:53
Canada and so when you encounter a
24:55
police officer in my little town he’s
24:57
like he’s people helping people he’s
24:59
like he’s like driving like a Camry and
25:02
he’s you know he’s like this genial
25:04
person who was a really camera amis I
25:06
forgotten exactly what the driver was
25:08
not like they’re not driving scars yeah
25:11
explorers painted black with like big
25:14
bull bars at the front right and then
25:17
you go you know I was you go I mean even
25:20
in LA I hate you know I like that
25:22
cars are painted black and white so they
25:25
look ferocious I mean the whole thing
25:27
that was it is still look ferocious do I
25:30
just look they identify as police to
25:32
connait to a Canadian looks to me it
25:35
looks a little why do they have to paint
25:37
them black forgets nothing Oakland
25:39
Raiders I mean it’s like what do you
25:41
think they should paint them something
25:43
mild and like bright yellow something
25:45
lovely something lovely like a nice can
25:48
you imagine a like a teal or a
25:50
lime-green well that would be yeah
25:52
because there’s a lot of black cars a
25:54
lot of white cars a lot of teal cars
25:55
it’s good so it would yeah it would
25:57
stand out like oh it’s cop this paint
26:00
car but you know this kind of symbolism
26:03
right matters right right you wanna see
26:06
an image sheriff joe arpaio who makes
26:08
all those prisoners wear pink yeah yeah
26:11
that’s kind of thing but I mean to
26:14
against his point though how many women
26:16
shoot cops
26:18
isn’t that an insanely low number yeah I
26:21
mean insanely low I mean what are the
26:24
numbers I mean it’s probably almost
26:26
non-existent
26:27
yeah well guys pull over women I don’t
26:29
think they’re worried about being shot I
26:30
really don’t I think it’s horseshit I
26:33
think it’s all after the fact yeah he
26:35
was trying to concoct some sort of an
26:36
excuse I was gonna excuse for
26:38
is he still in the force I know he was
26:41
either he’s kicked off for I forgotten
26:46
the precise language they used but for
26:48
basically being impolite to a civilian
26:52
but um yeah I don’t think there’s a lot
26:54
of but I don’t know whether I mean I I
26:57
still think we’re saying the same thing
26:59
which is the thing that’s driving him
27:02
his motivation is not rational right and
27:05
if you were a rational actor you would
27:07
never engage in an activity where 99.9%
27:10
of your police stops resulted in nothing
27:13
right
27:14
yeah he’s he is off in some weird kind
27:17
of fantasy land for a reason which is
27:20
that’s what in certain jurisdictions in
27:23
this country that’s what law enforcement
27:24
has come to look at Brooke like yeah
27:26
that’s that’s problematic it’s a huge
27:28
problem
27:34
[Applause]

‘Banking While Black’: How Cashing a Check Can Be a Minefield

Black customers risk being racially profiled on everyday visits to bank branches. Under federal laws, there is little recourse as long as the banks ultimately complete their transactions.

Clarice Middleton shook with fear as she stood on the sidewalk outside a Wells Fargo branch in Atlanta one December morning in 2018. Moments earlier, she had tried to cash a $200 check, only to be accused of fraud by three branch employees, who then called 911.

Ms. Middleton, who is black, remembers thinking: “I don’t want to die.”

For many black Americans, going to the bank can be a fraught experience. Something as simple as trying to cash a check or open a bank account can lead to suspicious employees summoning the police, causing anxiety and fear — and sometimes even physical danger — for the accused customers.

There is no data on how frequently the police are called on customers who are making legitimate everyday transactions. The phenomenon has its own social media hashtag: #BankingWhileBlack.

Most people who experience an episode of racial profiling don’t report it, lawyers say. Some find it easier to engage in private settlement negotiations. The few who sue — as Ms. Middleton did — are unlikely to win in court because of loopholes in the law. Now, the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, which set off nationwide protests against systemic racism, is prompting more people to speak up.

Ms. Middleton had gone to the Wells Fargo branch in Druid Hills, a wealthy, mostly white neighborhood in Atlanta, to cash a refund for a security deposit from a real estate company that had an account with the bank. Three bank employees examined the check and her identification, but refused to look at the additional proof Ms. Middleton offered. They declared the check fraudulent, and one employee called the police, according to her lawsuit.

When an officer arrived, Ms. Middleton showed him her identification and the check stub. As a former bank teller, she knew that would be proof enough that her check was authentic. The officer left without taking action. The Wells Fargo employees asked Ms. Middleton whether she still wanted to cash the check.

“I said yes, because they had written all over the back of the check,” said Ms. Middleton, who sued Wells Fargo last year for racial discrimination and defamation and sought an unspecified amount of damages.

Mary Eshet, a Wells Fargo spokeswoman, said Ms. Middleton had begun yelling “abusive and profane language” at the employees when she saw her ID being scanned.

“Employees tried to address Ms. Middleton’s concerns by explaining our policies, but Ms. Middleton continued to yell profane language,” Ms Eshet said. “She was asked to leave the branch multiple times and refused, so our employees followed their processes to engage law enforcement.” She added that the bank “appreciates the sensitivities of engaging law enforcement and the importance of continually reviewing our training, policies and procedures.”

Ms. Middleton’s lawyer, Yechezkel Rodal, said her client had not used profanity. “Wells Fargo is in possession of the video surveillance showing exactly what happened in the branch that morning,” he said. “The video will not support Wells Fargo’s lies.”

Some incidents play out without the involvement of police or courts.

In March 2019, Jabari Bennett wanted to withdraw $6,400 in cash to buy a used Toyota Camry from a dealership in Wilmington, Del. He had just sold his house in Atlanta and moved to Wilmington to live with his mother. Having been a Wells Fargo customer for four years — he had around $70,000 in his account from the sale of his house — Mr. Bennett walked into a nearby branch expecting to be back at the dealership and in his Camry within minutes.

He came away empty-handed and reeling.

First, a teller refused to accept that he was the account holder, questioning his out-of-state driver’s license, he said — even though Mr. Bennett had informed the bank of his new address just two weeks earlier. Then, a branch manager told Mr. Bennett to leave. He left in disbelief, then returned to try to complete the transaction. This time, the manager threatened to call the police. Mr. Bennett left again.

The experience “made me feel like I was nothing,” Mr. Bennett said.

He abandoned the deal on the car. A week later, he moved all his money out of Wells Fargo and then hired Mr. Rodal, who had gained a reputation for representing black customers against the bank after the story of one of his clients went viral in 2018. Mr. Rodal sent Wells Fargo a letter, but negotiations stalled.

Mr. Bennett decided to share his story publicly in light of the recent protests: “I don’t want anybody else to go through what I went through.”

Ms. Eshet, the Wells Fargo spokeswoman, said that branch employees were trained to spot potential fraud, and that the bank had increased security protocols to thwart internet scams involving large transfers of money.

“In this instance, there were enough markers for our team to conduct extra diligence in order to protect the customer and the bank,” she said.

The protests also pushed Benndrick Watson into action.

Last spring, Mr. Watson was driven out of a Wells Fargo branch in Westchase, a wealthy neighborhood near Tampa, Fla., by what the branch manager described as a “slip of the tongue.”

Mr. Watson, who was already a bank customer with a personal checking account, went to the branch to open a business account for his law firm.

A banker did a corporate records search and found Mr. Watson’s other business, a record label. Mr. Watson tried to direct the employee to the records for his law firm instead.

Eventually, the branch manager got involved. He sat down across from Mr. Watson and watched him enter information, including his Social Security number, into a keypad.

Then, the man uttered the N-word.

”He just said it — clear as day, no mistake,” Mr. Watson said. “My jaw just dropped, I dropped the pen, there was silence, he kind of looked at me, I said: ‘Did you really just say that?’”

Mr. Watson said the man had immediately begun to protest, saying that he had not meant to use the word, and that he was deeply sorry. Mr. Watson did not buy it. He got up and left. The manager followed him to his car, apologizing profusely, and resigned from the bank shortly afterward.

“I felt like I had a knife in my gut,” Mr. Watson said. “It’s a sickening word.”

Mr. Watson turned to Mr. Rodal, who wrote to Wells Fargo seeking an apology. The bank’s regional president, Steve Schultz, responded. “It seems that the utterance of the offensive term was unintentional,” Mr. Schultz wrote, but said the bank had taken “corrective action” against the branch manager anyway, without providing details. Ms. Eshet of Wells Fargo said the manager was deemed ineligible for any job with the bank.

Mr. Watson sued Wells Fargo in federal court in Florida on June 4.

In a statement, Ms. Eshet said: “We deeply apologize to Mr. Watson. There’s no excuse for it, and while we took action to address the matter, it cannot undo what happened and how he felt. We are very sorry.”

The problem is hardly confined to Wells Fargo. Last June, Robyn Murphy, a public relations consultant in Maryland, took her 18-year-old son, Jason, to a Bank of America branch in Owings Mills, Md., to open a joint savings account. Ms. Murphy, a 20-year customer of the bank, said she was shocked when an employee refused to proceed after a computer program flagged her son’s Social Security number as fraudulent.

Ms. Murphy protested: Her son had his own checking account at the bank. His Social Security number had already been used there without issue. The Murphys are black. Mr. Murphy, his mother said, is 6-foot-9.

“For all I know, it’s fraud,” the employee told them. Ms. Murphy said he had asked them to come back with Mr. Murphy’s Social Security card. When Mr. Murphy stood up, the employee yelled: “Don’t get up!”

After Ms. Murphy contacted a senior vice president she knew at the bank, other officials apologized and offered to open the branch whenever it was convenient for the Murphys to return and complete the transaction — which they did.

“It weighed on us very heavily for a long time,” Ms. Murphy said.

“We understand the client did not feel she and her son were treated properly in this interaction with our team, and we regret that,” Bill Halldin, a Bank of America spokesman, said in an emailed statement. “These alerts are designed to protect our clients from fraud and misuse of their personal information.” He declined to comment on what, if any, action the bank had taken against the employee.

Banks say they reject racism of any sort. The country’s four largest banks by asset size, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Citigroup, all require branch employees to complete annual diversity training, according to the banks’ representatives.

Still, banks have not managed to weed out discrimination. The New York Times reported in December that a JPMorgan Chase employee had described a customer as being “from Section 8” and therefore undeserving of service. The bank has since said it would seek to increase its sensitivity to issues surrounding race.

But little is mandated by law. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 lists specific businesses that may not treat black customers differently: movie theaters, hotels, restaurants, and performance and sports venues. Federal courts have held that because the law identifies the kinds of businesses to which it applies, those not on the list, such as banks, cannot be held to it. That loophole makes it hard for victims of racial profiling to win in court.

There is an additional limitation. In 1866, Congress created new laws to establish rights for black Americans, including one giving them the right to enter into agreements to buy goods or services and have those contracts enforced. Courts have since ruled that the law requires only that service be granted eventually.

In 2012, for instance, a federal appeals court ruled that a Hispanic man who had been turned away by a white cashier at a Target store in Florida did not have a case against Target because he was able to complete his purchases with a different cashier.

That could stymie Ms. Middleton’s case. Wells Fargo is arguing that because she was eventually able to cash her check, a judge should dismiss it.