Living In A Jackboot Society – Electra Texas Police Action Against Lawful Citizen…

MUST WATCH VIDEO:    and I do mean watch the whole thing….

Note the Police Officer comment @6:50:   “Now, you had just better get back in your vehicle, and fucking leave“…

Unlike a lot of u-tube videos showing incredibly abusive police power, this one stays directly and concisely on point.   Excellent presentation.

This entry was posted in Dept Of Justice, Police action, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Living In A Jackboot Society – Electra Texas Police Action Against Lawful Citizen…

  1. Pingback: Living In A Jackboot Society – Electra Texas Police Action Against Lawful Citizen… | Those Damn Liars

  2. thehoff71 says:

    What is even more disturbing is that a sitting City Prosecutor is telling a citizen to just “Stand there and accept” the egregious abuse of power displayed by those two thugs with badges. Ridiculous. There’s another case I need to look into where they arrested a jogger..for not having ID.

    Like

  3. Lou says:

    when a cop says “you’re lucky”, you know he’s in the wrong.

    Like

  4. Or, what about the lady who told the cops she was audio recording their conversation when she got pulled over? The cop told her she was committing a felony and she spent a night in jail.

    It’s getting to the point where we’re all going to need to carry a chest mounted Go Pro camera everywhere we go and outfit our vehicles with them as well.

    Like

    • elvischupacabra says:

      In some states, you have to tell the other party they are being recorded. Have you seen any of the videos where someone is recording a cop? Have you read any of the accounts of those? Usually, the person winds up eating pavement.

      It amazes me that the po-lice are suddenly so sensitive to anyone calling into question their judgment, motives or legal standing to do what they do.

      In my opinion, they have become so inured to being lied to and constantly having to explain their actions to angry, pissed off and/or impaired citizens, they have lumped all of us into the same category: GUILTY. We all sound alike so we must all be the same.

      Having been around a fair number of small town cops in my life, most of them are bored and sloppy. A lot of them are half-trained good ol’ boys like the two up in Electra. I mean seriously, you perform an illegal search on camera?

      Like

  5. doodahdaze says:

    This makes the case for all police operations to be on video if possible. All the tickets I have got were justified but ya never know.

    Like

  6. Coast says:

    Can’t help but feel sad for our country. Seems that so many in law enforcement are dishonest, untrustworthy, an oath breaker, just downright corrupt. What can we do?

    Like

  7. czarowniczy says:

    I know that there are cops that push the legal limits of when you can search vehicles and how far you can go in a given search. My favorite scenario is when you are stopped for a traffic violation and, after the cop says you can go, he stops, turns and asks you if it’s OK if he could search your vehicle. Many people are caught off guard and agree but you have no obligation to do so as IF he had any probable/reasonable cause to search he could have done so without your permission. If you say ‘no’ you can frequently expect the 3rd degree for doing so. In my opinion the rural and small town police are the worst as they usually do not get the training or supervision the larger city cops get and aren’t exposed to hungry tort lawyers as much.
    Interesting this should show us as just this morning I bought a small body-worn police camera just for situations as these. I’ll letcha know if I ever need it.

    Like

    • doodahdaze says:

      Just ask if you are free to go. If so go. If not ask for the warrant and a lawyer. Politely.

      Like

      • TrickleUpPolitics says:

        Exactly. Then if the cop says we can get a warrant, tell him you’ll wait. Then he’ll tell you to go.

        Like

        • doodahdaze says:

          The police must give a ticket in a reasonable time limit. If he has no warrant and you are not detained you are free to go. If not you are under arrest. They can not search your car without probable cause to do so. Unless you consent or evidence is in plain view. I would argue against telling them you will wait. Just ask whether or not you are free to go.

          Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        That’s a whole ‘nuther arena. They can ask you any question they want but should be sticking to just questions directly related to the reason(s) they stopped you – and you have a right not to answer any questions that are ‘fishing’. That said, unless you have a video log of what transpired you are in a pickle as if you draw a cop with an ego problem, things are gonna go south real fast. I’m going to a video system in my truck – ain’t it a be-atch that we have gotten to that point – not only to protect myself in case of a stop but also in case of a traffic accident. One small example – we have the guys who quickly jump into the lane ahead of you and slam on their brakes. You end up with the front end of your car in the back of someone else’s while the occupants speed-dialing one of our many lawyers who make a nice living off of traffic accidents. Leaves you with the question of ‘who the hell CAN you trust nowadays?

        Like

        • nameofthepen says:

          Good idea, Czar. They have to have them in Russia for insurance purposes, and often those scams will be tried and recorded by the dash-cams.
          It’s sometimes called “brake checking”. There’s tons of helmet-cam videos from that incident with the motorcycle swarm in New York a few months ago, where the victim bolted from a trap being laid for him, and in trying to get away, accidentally ran over the biker doing the brake-checking. He was pursued, and later caught, dragged from his vehicle, and beaten senseless.
          Several of the people in that assault turned out to be off-duty LE.

          Like

          • czarowniczy says:

            Yep, remember that one. The whole incident seems to have fallen of the face of the earth.
            I’m looking at one of the old police dash cams that are flooding the market as the newer and smaller (and more expensive) units come in. If I can get a flash recorder that goes on about a 1/2-hour loop that should do it. Ever since they’ve allowed the ambulance-chasers to advertise on TV the prospect of suing someone for the jackpot settlement’s been an alternative retirement plan. We actually had lawyers using runners here to give accident parties business cards – if the vic shows up at the lawyer’s and there’s a settlement the runner gets paid a fee. We also had the gypsy car scam where they pull in front of you only to scam on their brakes then everyone jumps out and starts screaming about how badly they’re hurt. Nothing like a camera to save your butt and your $$$$$.

            Like

            • nameofthepen says:

              Hey, Czar – Yeppers, I think a dashcam is “today’s smart car accessory”.

              As far as the NYC biker gang, it’s my understanding that 5 NYC cops have been arrested, and are now hunkered down with their lawyers, preparing for trial. And the wife of the guy who got run over – the one I understand was doing the brakechecking of Mr. Lein in the first place – is whining because Mr. Lein “didn’t even apologise”. 🙄

              Like

              • czarowniczy says:

                Yeah, best thing for all concerned is for those cops to hunker down with lawyers/union reps until the powers sniff enough air to determine what actions to take. NYPD’s too big of a power/political force in its own to be subject to public opinion and law until the power’s decided if the incident requires a human sacrifice.

                Like

                • nameofthepen says:

                  Czar – read this, and actually blurted out, “That’s gorgeous!” I totally agree.

                  Like

                • czarowniczy says:

                  Yeah, one of my NOPD friends just lost a round in Stat court defending his firing over 1st and 5th amendment issues. It’s amazing how the system has become more of a meat grinder than a legal recourse.

                  Like

  8. Daniel says:

    Amazing and almost inspiring. The real kicker here is that officers of the court admit to knowing that cops lie and routinely accept their testimony without question.

    Like

    • doodahdaze says:

      That is why the state hates jurors with cops in they family. They know they lie like a rug at court. The PD does not accept their testiomony.

      Like

  9. dws says:

    Are all these people on power trips? Do they even know the law? Bully tactics, lying, flagrant breaches of rights. What a scary video. It should be used for teaching purposes. Bravo to this man.

    Like

    • auscitizenmom says:

      This is appalling. But, to tell the truth, I have heard stories of being stopped in small towns like this all my life. It never happened to my family, but we always heard about it and about certain towns to avoid.

      Like

      • doodahdaze says:

        Make sure you have all your paperwork up to date. Have it ready to produce. Be nice. I got two warnings instead of tickets by having it ready to hand over.

        Like

  10. Moroni Breitbart says:

    So at what point do we just defend ourselves – and more importantly – our family from the ‘jackboots’? Don’t get out of the car, don’t roll the window down more than a few inches…and have your dominant hand on a .45. No doubt it’s coming to that.

    Like

    • Jay Jenkins says:

      Don’t be an idiot. Never resist arrest!!!! They’ll kill you and go home and sleep like a baby never being questioned.

      Like

  11. Pigsarei says:

    Posted your nice write up on the city’s facebook page.

    https://www.facebook.com/pages/City-of-Electra/592230964143041

    Like

  12. Rachelle says:

    I probably have a somewhat different take on this and you aren’t going to like it.

    First, I think the prosecutor, Greenwood, is probably a pretty good guy and it would be wise to listen to his advice. I heard Greenwood mention his clients so I think it likely that he is in private practice and has a contract with the city/county to do prosecution some of the time. I have seen this arrangement before.

    What this tells me is that the prosecutor is not some professional scalp hunter out to convict as many people as possible, but probably doing his job as well as he can given the circumstances. From time to time he deals with amateur swho want to perform as lawyers and know enough law to simply annoy everyone and delay the proceedings. HOWEVER, he does not want to convict someone who is truly innocent and that shows in how he handled the case once he got a chance to look at the video.

    When Greenwood takes the time to give this upset citizen advice for the future, he is trying to tell him what he would likely do if he were in the same situation, not in a courtroom but in the wild and facing someone who may be less educated than you and less intelligent than you but, for the moment, has much more power than you have. Letting the police get riled is unwise and showing them that you may know more than they is simply foolish. They will instinctively search for something to charge you with to justify their own actions.

    Yes, you have rights, but it is smarter to control the situation socially rather than going through the expense and misery of having to exercise your rights and prove your case.

    As for the police in this video, yes, they acted like not-excessively bright, jack-booted thugs. But on a dark night, along a lonely highway, how smart is it to let not-too-bright, jack-booted thugs know that you are smarter than they are? It’s like throwing rocks at a wild gorilla. It’s time to be Diane Fossey rather than Clarence Darrow. Later you can be Darrow if the Fossey bit doesn’t work.

    Like

    • doodahdaze says:

      +1 I do not get why the guy went to these lengths over a ticket. I just try to be nice and hope for a warning. If not pay it and move on. It is a traffic ticket. Good Grief. The cops can make up a reason to stop anytime they want. Thats the way it is. I go about 4 to 9 0ver the speed limit and hope for the best. Usually they let that skate. But now the cops have plate readers hooked to a computer. It checks every car they pass so be sure to be up to date.

      Like

    • doodahdaze says:

      PS that guy is prolly a sovereign citizen type. They drive the courts nutz.

      Like

    • Glen says:

      Good advice from Rachel. I’ll add some more that folks here won’t like: The strongest party to any contract controls that contract, simply because they have access to more resources. The “jackboots” (Why are these increasingly portrayed as Nazis instead of communists, hmmm?) are merely enforcing the “interpretation” of the contract as rendered by the plutocracy, which is the top 1% controlling the media, finance and government, and their local commercial, religious, and political functionaries down in Electra, Texas. A “jackboot” is nothing more than an easily replaced sheep dog. Jackboots are expendable and will probably outnumber you at the traffic stop. They might also include your best friend’s son. So, keeping your dominant hand on the .45 during a traffic stop will ultimately get you/your family much bad publicity, horrific social consequences, or probably dead for no purpose at all. Nobody outside of family will care about what happened to you except, maybe, a few bloggers. Meanwhile, the top 1% and their local functionaries will merely chuckle. You want to prepare for something? Start thinking about how to wipe the grins from their faces.

      Like

    • sundance says:

      Ahh,… the survival principle. You and Howie seemingly advocate for holding the fence post and squealing as requested…..

      ……after all you’ll live another day that way.

      Like

      • Rachelle says:

        I don’t think the ‘holding the fence post and squealing as requested’ was addressed to me, but I would like to respond.

        If you are going to be in a fight with authority don’t attack their ground at the strongest point . . . in this case that would be on the side of the road at night when only your family is a witness. As the prosecutor tried to get through to this guy . . . . you will lose.

        Fight to win, not to go down in ‘glory’. If you have knowledge of the law, rather than throw it in their faces and give them an incentive to create a crime and lie about it, better to use that knowledge to try to maneuver them into a position where they will be vulnerable when you truly attack later. The video mentioned a section 1983 suit, which is a statutory federal cause of action for violation of rights under color of law. The scene in this video probably qualifies as a violation but it weakens the case to appear in any way to be encouraging a confrontation. If he had managed to be a little more mellow and the rather stupid police continued to bully him and actually searched his car and upset his wife, etc., he might have conjured up a case that would cost the town some money. As it is . . . . I was a bit astonished when he objected to the dismissal of his case. That seems a bit pig headed. If he takes the same approach in other towns and away from cameras he may get the living crap beaten out of him. I, of course, don’t approve that, but common sense tells one to mitigate the risk when you are in a potentially explosive situation.

        I might add that I suspect that few attorneys in this same situation would have revealed they were lawyers. Instead they would probably be more subtly aggressive and actually controled the situation rather than just piss the cops off.

        Like

        • Coast says:

          So basically we all need to “beg” for our rights to be upheld, that our rights are all subject to be abused by LE/government and that’s “ok”, and when they are abused we can’t complain too loud or else we have an ugly attitude and we become a bad citizen. Cops have the God-given right to control us citizens, and we should all be grateful that they just don’t shoot when they somehow get pissed, due of course because of us crappy citizens that don’t enjoy getting roughed-up late at night. Thanks…but I think I’ll pass on those rules.

          Like

      • Glen says:

        “Ahh,… the survival principle. You and Howie seemingly advocate for holding the fence post and squealing as requested…..
        “……after all you’ll live another day that way.”

        Ahh, the cowardice accusation. Rather than die for nothing I advocate dying for something.

        Target the s.o.b.s whom the “jackboots” work for – the 1% and their local functionaries (Democrat or Republican – it doesn’t matter which, for both work for the 1%. The Demonrats are about devolution. The Repukes are about controlling opposition to the former).

        Don’t worry, you’ll get your chance at the “jackboots,” too, when the frightened 1%’ers and their local functinaries send them after you.

        The takeaway point is: never stop hitting the 1% and their functionaries.

        Like

      • Glen says:

        I have a thought for you to consider, Sundance. Looking at your avatar of the minuteman, it occurs to me that the opposition to tyranny you envision is taken straight from the pages of the American Revolution. In that war the minuteman’s primary target was the British soldier. The British soldier’s string-pullers – King George, parliament, and the colonial business interests – were located across the Atlantic, or at the very least located aboard ships offshore.

        A few things have changed since that time. The string-pullers of the present day reside, mostly, in CONUS. Of course many of them can flee and leave appointed functionaries behind. Thus the strategy I advocate: Chop the local (in CONUS) head off and keep it chopped off. As for the “jackboots,” send the signal that we know they are tools. We shall deal with them as they deal with us: Harm our families and we shall harm you likewise. Join us and your families are safe.

        Food for thought, anyway.

        Like

    • phil cicero says:

      You write words of wisdom. You have no rights unless you stand up for them but there are times when it is very dangerous and pointless to do so.

      Like

    • Abagail says:

      I get, it’s called strategy vs stupidity.

      I cannot reveal details, but I was, unfortunately, stopped by a mentally unstable LEO for the heinous crime of speeding roughly 6-7 mph over the limit. Had you been an observer in the parking lot into which I was followed, you’d have drawn the conclusion the LEO was apprehending a dangerous criminal.

      Recognizing the LEO’s over reaction and diffusing what could have turned deadly by remaining calm, (this was a stupid traffic ticket and nothing more) I was able to address it legally through an attorney. I’m almost certain my surviving relatives would have collected a tidy sum had the situation turned deadly, but I made the intelligent choice to pick my battles at a time and place where I had a chance to break even as a worst case scenario.

      I’ll choose to make my “last stand” something I, not an armchair hero, deem worthwhile.

      Rachelle, your post was the voice of reason.

      Like

  13. John Galt says:

    I thought that cops machine gunning newspaper ladies cleared up any lingering doubt about the nature of our jackboot society.

    Like

  14. juandos says:

    Sadly this just reaffirms something my dad told back in the early sixties (I don’t relly mean to use a broad brush here but…) about why people become cops…
    1) to lazy
    2) to stupid
    3) to dishonest to hold a real job

    Again I want to emphasize that I know not all police personnel fall into one or more of the categories I listed but considering the number of police abuse stories over the last few years it sometimes makes me wonder…

    Like

  15. lepanto says:

    The strangest remark in the video was,
    “I am not familiar with that.” (03:15)

    The man was not familiar with World War Two?

    Like

  16. mcguffin says:

    He was about to drive, there’s no reason he didn’t just show ’em his drivers license.
    I think the “citizen” has too much free time on his hands and is just a pr*&k who wants to stir up trouble and get his 15 minutes of fame on youtube. I don’t know who he is but I betcha he’s posted many other videos on youtube where he’s just stirring up s#*t. Betcha money!

    Like

    • sundance says:

      Gee, let me guess – you’re a policeman.

      Only a policeman would think enforcement of “PRE-CRIMES” is appropriate.

      We know you’re gonna commit a crime, so we’ll cite you in advance.

      Like

      • mcguffin says:

        No I’m not a policeman but flattered that you thought so.
        *The proper term is Patrol Officer. PoliceMAN is sexist, so they say.

        —Making a donation to TCT because pu$$y dude who made his exhausted wife drive after the traffic stop DID NOT POST ANY OTHER ‘STIRRING UP SH$T” videos like I had bet money that he had. —

        Like

    • Chip Bennett says:

      I prefer to fight for a society in which law-enforcement officers are constitutionally constrained to having evidence of probable cause of wrong-doing in order to interfere with the actions of free, law-abiding citizens. Once the police officers observed the situation and, based on the evidence, realized that they had no probable cause of any crime being committed, the only appropriate interaction between the police officers and the law-abiding citizens would have been, “Thank you for driving safely tonight; you are free to go.”

      Anyone who argues otherwise is a useful idiot, whose ignorance is a dangerous part of the problem.

      Does that sound uncivil? Sorry, not sorry. I don’t know what pissed me off more: watching the video of the badge-wearing tyrants, or hearing the “advice” of the prosecutor.

      Like

      • elvischupacabra says:

        You nailed it perfectly.

        This whole thing should’ve ended just after the motorist said, “Everything is okay. We’re just changing drivers.”

        Like

      • Rachelle says:

        I think the prosecutor was basically telling the guy how he would handle it if he were stopped in strange territory. The advice was based on practical experience rather than ‘law;.

        I once had lunch with a county judge who heard a lot of traffic cases. He said one night he was pulled over by a new highway trooper who didn’t know him. He was polite and gave no clue who he was. When it came time to sign the ticket the trooper began explaining it to him and he said, “That’s okay, I know what it says” and signed it, accepting he would pay the fine. Of course, he saw tickets every day he was in court, but it made the trooper suspicious so he told the judge to wait while he checked on something. The judge heard the trooper call his name and license in and noted a pause before the response was shouted over the radio. “You dumb son-of-a-bitch! You just arrested the judge!”

        Of course, the judge just paid the ticket. He couldn’t really contest it in his own district and, in any event, he knew he was exceeding the speed limit.

        The side of a highway is not a courtroom and you protect your rights differently there than you would in court. I think that was what the prosecutor was trying to get across to this guy.

        Like

        • Chip Bennett says:

          The side of a highway is not a courtroom and you protect your rights differently there than you would in court. I think that was what the prosecutor was trying to get across to this guy.

          How do you protect rights that have already been violated? In very specific ways, TweedleDee and TweedleDum twice violated a law-abiding citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights:

          1) Detention of a law-abiding citizen without reasonable suspicion/probable cause of any unlawful activity
          2) Unreasonable search of a law-abiding citizen’s personal vehicle/property without probable cause of any unlawful activity

          Further, I take great issue with the badge-wearing bullies’ overt reaction to perceived Contempt of Cop. Must we now extend the Safari Principle to interactions between law-abiding citizens and power-abusing law-enforcement officers? Law-abiding citizens are under no legal or ethical compulsion to treat law enforcement officers with any particular deference during consensual interactions, much less during unconstitutional detentions.

          I may choose to handle such an encounter differently, but I will vehemently defend this person’s right to treat abusive cops with an attitude somewhat short of awed deference. The jackboot wannabes in the video are paid by and work for the taxpayers they abused, not the other way around.

          Like

          • doodahdaze says:

            Good thing they had video.

            Like

          • sundance says:

            I am thankful for Chip Bennett.

            … and all the other Chip Bennetts’ of the world.

            Like

          • texan59 says:

            I agree with everything this guy did in the video. The problem is that most people are not willing to do their homework. When you go into something like this, or a checkpoint half-assed, you are going to get your hat handed to you. If you are not willing to pay the price and go to jail, at least overnight, do not attempt this. Last time I took a math class, two idiots do not make it right. I do not agree with the tactics of the prosecuting attorney either, regardless of whether he is full-time or part-time. IMO, his message is on point though. I take it as saying that you better be prepared. If you don’t have a video or audio, you are gonna get screwed. Do not expect the system to work for you. This is tight-rope walking 100′ feet off the ground, no matter how much we don’t think it should be. If you can push-back, do so, but only if you know what you are doing. Just like we bitch and moan about how the left wants ‘fairness” in the rest of the world, so do we, in the legal field. Don’t count on it. Don’t bet on it, unless you know what you’re doing.

            Like

    • texan59 says:

      I grew up the son of a state police officer. He was in before and after Miranda. At almost 79 years of age, he will tell you to your face that you my friend are full of sh*t. While there have always been good cops, there have always been cops who were power hungry and wanting to get even with all those bullies who stole their lunch money when they were kids. The problem we have today is that there are a whole bunch more cops who want to take out their perceived slights against anyone they can. Please feel free to explain to me why a police force in a town of 25K people needs an MRAP and 30 M-4’s, along with their SWAT/SOU unit of 20 guys. I was there when the crazy guy came to our house and told my dad that he was going to kill me, my sisters and my mother. My dad didn’t have to call in 30 guys. There are way too many cops today who are scared of their own shadow, and that’w why we have situations like in DC and CA where people who didn’t deserve to get shot or die, did.

      Like

      • Rachelle says:

        I have to agree with your observation that the police are getting far to extreme in their dealings with people. I think some of that comes down to the storm-trooper tactics that were adopted in the war on drugs. Now this administration is feeding militaristic fantasies of police departments by handing them used military equipment. No town in America should need a tank or armored personnel carrier. Instead of being our police department hired to protect us they begin to see themselves as a hostile, occupying army. Of course, the situation is not approved when standards are lowered for recruits. I was shocked by the stupidity and ignorance of the police in this video.

        Like

  17. doodahdaze says:

    The people are fed up with government at all levels. All the rules, regulations, permits, fee’s agencies, and little jerks like this on your back when ya want to cross the street. It is gonna boil over. There is too many Frog’s in the pot.

    Like

  18. Rachelle says:

    Consider the posts above. Nobody supports the police in this video. However, the comments on the citizen range from full support through, not handled well, to he seems like a jerk.

    That is about the range of opinion that he will get in a jury if he sues these idiot cops and their town. You don’t want even a few people on the jury thinking you acted like a jerk.

    If he had handled it differently he could have possibly cooled the confrontation, preserved his rights in court (including the right to sue), and avoided having some percentage of the jury thinking he is a jerk who isn’t entitled to anything. Prepare the battlespace. The side of the road is where it begins, not where it ends. As it is, I think judging by the comments that he has already alienated some percentage of any jurors he may have if he sues. Is that really wise?

    Like

  19. someoneinnorthms says:

    Rachelle, I don’t wear a badge to work. Had I encountered you and treated you like the police officers treated this civilian, would you have tried to cool the confrontation? Would you have been nice to me to preserve your rights in court? Why would you treat me as a private citizen ANY differently than the civilian treated these two clowns with a badge? I and the two clowns have exactly the same authority in that situation on the side of the road. It was a consensual interaction.

    I mean no disrespect to you, but I am sickened by the idea that I need to beg for my rights. God gave me the freedoms I enjoy; the Constitution merely recognizes them. And gives me mechanisms to help me enjoy them. I OWN those freedoms. I will not, by damn, let some ignorant badge-wearer convince me to abandon them because he managed to pass the physical to get his uniform. There may not be enough individuals like me remaining to keep our country from becoming another totalitarian nation;however, I won’t give up my view simply to avoid conflict. THEY work for ME. Not the other way around. I’m sorry (but not really) that some people may see me as recalcitrant or narrow-minded. Too many people have died for my right to enjoy these freedoms for me to cower on the side of a road when I need those freedoms the most.

    Like

  20. Rachelle says:

    ” Had I encountered you and treated you like the police officers treated this civilian, would you have tried to cool the confrontation? ”

    You bet I would.

    And I wouldn’t argue ‘rights’ if I met an angry grizzly while hiking a forest trail. I would get out with as little harm as possible and then come back with a rifle and kill the bear. In the case of the cops it is not necessary to ‘beg’, but to control the situation as much as possible and then come back to teach the cops a lesson in court where I will have the upper hand.

    Like

    • Cetera says:

      You have part of the analogy correct. I think the part you are mistaken in is that you will have an upper hand in a courtroom. Going up against law enforcement in court is like going to Vegas on a loan from the mafia. It is usually only going to end one way. You’re better off with the rifle against a bear.

      Actually, on second thought, I don’t think you have the analogy right after all. Once you’ve escaped the bear, don’t go back with a rifle. Shooting a bear after you’ve escaped is likely to get you prosecuted as well.

      William Wallace: Every man dies, not every man really lives.

      William Wallace: And if this is your army, why does it go?
      Veteran: We didn’t come here to fight for them!
      Young Soldier: Home! The English are too many!
      William Wallace: Sons of Scotland! I am William Wallace.
      Young Soldier: William Wallace is seven feet tall!
      William Wallace: Yes, I’ve heard. Kills men by the hundreds. And if HE were here, he’d consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse.
      [Scottish army laughs]
      William Wallace: I *am* William Wallace! And I see a whole army of my countrymen, here in defiance of tyranny. You’ve come to fight as free men… and free men you are. What will you do with that freedom? Will you fight?
      Veteran: Fight? Against that? No! We will run. And we will live.
      William Wallace: Aye, fight and you may die. Run, and you’ll live… at least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willin’ to trade ALL the days, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take… OUR FREEDOM!
      [Scottish army cheers]
      William Wallace: Alba gu bràth!
      [“Scotland forever!”]
      Army: ALBA GU BRÀTH! ALBA GU BRÀTH! ALBA GU BRÀTH!

      Like

      • Rachelle says:

        ” I think the part you are mistaken in is that you will have an upper hand in a courtroom. Going up against law enforcement in court is like going to Vegas on a loan from the mafia.”

        Without getting into details, I know more about this than you do from personal experience.

        However, what I was trying to get across here was that you should handle yourself so that you will not be a defendant in a criminal action while preserving your legal position so that you can be a plaintiff (against the police, etc.) in a civil action. That turns the tables on them and when you are the plaintiff the police are the defendants and they do not have the upper hand and they don’t like it one bit. In fact, a fair number of documented abuse cases are settled. The local government doesn’t like to see embarrassments like this drag on in public. The individual police will not pay the judgment/settlement, but nobody in the department is going to be happy that their stupidity cost the community its reputation and some money. One of things Durham citizens were complaining about when the Duke Lacrosse students finally turned the tables and sued them was that it was going to cost the taxpayers money and they didn’t think that was fair. It was fair.

        Like

  21. nameofthepen says:

    A major tip of the hat for awesome video-finding, Sundance! This one was fabulous.
    I shared it widely to all my peeps on YouTube. 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s