Getting Locked Up for Drinking an Arizona Iced Tea - Video

[Kilmer17]

How fictitious is a 4th ammendment right? You lose evidence that isn't found IAW with the 4th ammendment.

If he knew what he was doing, why didn't he identify himself as a police officer from the jump? Why did he go from DIP/implied consent DUI to tresspassing?

It'd be a different story if he went up and said, "Hello, I'm officer Bigteninch (shows badgde), we've received some complaints about loitering and possible drinking. Do you mind if I look at your can to make sure you aren't drinking any alcohol?" If Ice-T shows his ass after this, you might and I mean MIGHT have a touch more to work with in your argument, but he didn't. And BTW, exercising your 4th ammendment right does not establish PC for the cop to then grab his can, either.

We have rules... it's pretty simple. Follow them. That goes for everyone.

---------- Post added May-8th-2013 at 02:54 PM ----------

He may have PC if he witnesses the guy come out of the liquor store with the can and then he drinks it in the parking lot. That's about all I can think of in this situation.

So who determines that? Is it up to the cop? Or is there a book of acceptable PCs? Or does a judge rule on it later?

[rictus58]

What should have happened: Cop comes up, and immediately identifies himself and shows badge, THEN asks to inspect container. I think this all would have played out differently if that had happened.

[mcsluggo]

What should have happened: Cop comes up, and immediately identifies himself and shows badge, THEN asks to inspect container. I think this all would have played out differently if that had happened.

agreed. If the policeman shows initial respect and professionalism, the situation never accelerates. He did himself, and his profession, a disservice by needlessly turning the scenario into a confrontation of egos andf wills.

[rictus58]

I'm not anti-police, but this guy has got to understand not everyone is going to bow down to him and comply simply because he "says" he's a cop and flashes a badge for 1/4 second. I'm not going to comply with a random stranger until they prove to me they are an officer.

[Sweet Sassy Molassy]

Oh yeah, one more thing, why didn't he just hand him the can? Yes, we as American Citizens do have rights, but handing him the can wouldn't have hurt. I don't know, maybe I am just a gump or something. :whoknows:

I disagree, I would have told dude to go to hell. He didn't show his badge, and when he finally did, it was after he told him to leave the property. The guy told him he could have a drink of it if he wanted. I don't find what he said to the cop as unreasonable, personally I think he did the right thing.

[sacase]

So who determines that? Is it up to the cop? Or is there a book of acceptable PCs? Or does a judge rule on it later?

Its not that simple. The cop initially has to make a determination that he has PC. He should have extensive training on what is and is not acceptable PC. After he determines if he has PC or not he acts accordingly.

After the arrest, this is when the real PC determination gets made. The lawyers can argue if the cop had PC to do his search, if the judge agrees with the defense, then the evidence is thrown out. If the evidence was key to the case then the person gets off.

---------- Post added May-8th-2013 at 04:56 PM ----------

I disagree, I would have told dude to go to hell. He didn't show his badge, and when he finally did, it was after he told him to leave the property. The guy told him he could have a drink of it if he wanted. I don't find what he said to the cop as unreasonable, personally I think he did the right thing.

I agree, I would have told him to get the hell on before I call the police on him. LOL don't go grabbing for my drink, I don't know you or who you are especially when you don't identify yourself.

[CrypticVillain]

I disagree, I would have told dude to go to hell. He didn't show his badge, and when he finally did, it was after he told him to leave the property. The guy told him he could have a drink of it if he wanted. I don't find what he said to the cop as unreasonable, personally I think he did the right thing.

Of course he would have had to showed me a badge or something. If someone walks up on me and don't identify themselves, I would probably lay the smackdown. But yeah, the cop was an idiot, I thought we already established this fact...

[JMS]

There is no PC here. PC would have been drunken behavior or the smell of alcohol. The cop was attempting to conduct a search in violation of this guys 4th amendment rights, .

The 4th amendment doesn't apply to what you are drinking in the parking lot of an ABC store. Nor is anything to do with the request to inspect the can of tea related to what Mr. Wrapper is being charged with.

And frankly the cop doesn't need probable cause to tell guys loitering in the parking lot of the ABC store who aren't customers of the store to leave and when they ignore him; to arrest them and put them in jail.

[PleaseBlitz]

The 4th amendment doesn't apply to what you are drinking in the parking lot of an ABC store. Nor is anything to do with the request to inspect the can of tea related to what Mr. Wrapper is being charged with.

Where do you come up with this stuff?

[JMS]

How fictitious is a 4th ammendment right? You lose evidence that isn't found IAW with the 4th ammendment.

Mr. Rapper was charged with trespassing and resisting arrest. The cop doesn't need evidence beyond what is shown on the tape for either charge.

If he knew what he was doing, why didn't he identify himself as a police officer from the jump? Why did he go from DIP/implied consent DUI to tresspassing?

The second sentence out Mr. Wrappers mouth was "who are you"... to which the officer responds "pOlice"... That's all the identification the officer has to give unless Mr. Wrapper asks to see his badge he doesn't have to show a badge. and Mr. Rapper then goes on to play keep away with the can... just a stupid move.

Why did the officer change the charge from drinking in public to trespassing? Trespassing was simpler to prove once he told the guy to leave and he didn't; Mr. Wrapper was trespassing.

It'd be a different story if he went up and said, "Hello, I'm officer Bigteninch (shows badgde), we've received some complaints about loitering and possible drinking. Do you mind if I look at your can to make sure you aren't drinking any alcohol?" If Ice-T shows his ass after this, you might and I mean MIGHT have a touch more to work with in your argument, but he didn't. And BTW, exercising your 4th ammendment right does not establish PC for the cop to then grab his can, either.

Perhaps, but the officer clearly did identify himself as police and he didn't get any cooperation from Mr. X after that.. and that's really all the police officer has to do to expect somebodies cooperation.

We have rules... it's pretty simple. Follow them. That goes for everyone.

I think we do have rules.... and the cop obviously knew them better than Mr. X.

He may have PC if he witnesses the guy come out of the liquor store with the can and then he drinks it in the parking lot. That's about all I can think of in this situation.

He's a state cop, stationed in the parking lot of an ABC store to keep order and specifically to stop folks from drinking or making a scene. He had every right to challenge Mr. X. He had every right to tell him to leave.. He subsequently had every right to arrest him for trespassing. Was the cop being aggressive.. He was aggressively doing his job, which clearly was to clean up the premises of that location.

[Dan T.]

... But yeah, the cop was an idiot, I thought we already established this fact...

Well we've established that in the minds of 95% of those posting.

[JMS]

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Which? That when a State ABC Cop comes up and asks you what you are drinking in the parking lot of an ABC store you can't claim a 4th amendment protection against his request?

Reality. Your constitutional rights aren't blankets which you get to choose or carry with you everywhere you walk. You don't have freedom of speech in a courtroom when a judge says to shut the hell up. Or in a crowded theater to yell fire. you don't have the right to bare arms in a church or school zone. You don't have the right to freedom of religion if your religion violates drug laws, or endangered species protection acts. And you don't have the right ignore a cop asking you to hand over your beverage in the parking lot of an ABC store nor do you have the first amendment right to peacefully assemble in that parking lot after the policeman has asked you to leave.

Or... that the wrapper is being charged with trespassing and not drinking in public.

[Dan T.]

What you are missing - or fail to acknowledge - JMS, is he never adequately established himself as a law enforcement officer. Plainclothes officers have an extra responsibility to establish their identity, and he did a piss poor job of it. Answering "poh-lease" to a question from a citizen is inadequate, not to mention downright unprofessional. Lifting your biker vest for a half-second glimpse of a badge is inadequate, too., especially when you throw a citizen to the ground only seconds later. So every law enforcement action that officer took is tainted.

[DC9]

Mr. Rapper was charged with trespassing and resisting arrest. The cop doesn't need evidence beyond what is shown on the tape for either charge

No he wasn't... unless the cop was also the town judge Ice-t wasn't charged with anything.

The second sentence out Mr. Wrappers mouth was "who are you"... to which the officer responds "pOlice"... That's all the identification the officer has to give unless Mr. Wrapper asks to see his badge he doesn't have to show a badge. and Mr. Rapper then goes on to play keep away with the can... just a stupid move.

Why did the officer change the charge from drinking in public to trespassing? Trespassing was simpler to prove once he told the guy to leave and he didn't; Mr. Wrapper was trespassing.

The officer didn't identify himself as an officer until after he had already stirred **** up.

His initial focus was on the can.... then he cared less about it.

Perhaps, but the officer clearly did identify himself as police and he didn't get any cooperation from Mr. X after that.. and that's really all the police officer has to do to expect somebodies cooperation.

Given his personality, I'm sure he wouldn't have said "I'm the police," he would've said "you know who I am" or something like that. But we're both assuming aren't we?

I think we do have rules.... and the cop obviously knew them better than Mr. X

He obviously didn't and you haven't shown that he has anywhere

He's a state cop, stationed in the parking lot of an ABC store to keep order and specifically to stop folks from drinking or making a scene. He had every right to challenge Mr. X. He had every right to tell him to leave.. He subsequently had every right to arrest him for trespassing. Was the cop being aggressive.. He was aggressively doing his job, which clearly was to clean up the premises of that location.

Did that come out later or was that an assumption? If he's a cop, he has to follow the constitution of the United States if he doesn't want his evidence dismissed. America.

[da#1skinsfan]

I can't believe this discussion is still going.

If you watch that video and truly believe that the officer acted 100% within his ethical and occupational expectations....don't know what to tell you. Either blind, clueless, or contrary.

[sacase]

Mr. Rapper was charged with trespassing and resisting arrest. The cop doesn't need evidence beyond what is shown on the tape for either charge.

The second sentence out Mr. Wrappers mouth was "who are you"... to which the officer responds "pOlice"... That's all the identification the officer has to give unless Mr. Wrapper asks to see his badge he doesn't have to show a badge. and Mr. Rapper then goes on to play keep away with the can... just a stupid move.

Why did the officer change the charge from drinking in public to trespassing? Trespassing was simpler to prove once he told the guy to leave and he didn't; Mr. Wrapper was trespassing.

Perhaps, but the officer clearly did identify himself as police and he didn't get any cooperation from Mr. X after that.. and that's really all the police officer has to do to expect somebodies cooperation.

I think we do have rules.... and the cop obviously knew them better than Mr. X.

He's a state cop, stationed in the parking lot of an ABC store to keep order and specifically to stop folks from drinking or making a scene. He had every right to challenge Mr. X. He had every right to tell him to leave.. He subsequently had every right to arrest him for trespassing. Was the cop being aggressive.. He was aggressively doing his job, which clearly was to clean up the premises of that location.

JMS where do you get this stuff from, you are just making things up as you go along. So first off, the job is not there to stop folks from making a scene as you put it. According to the NC ABC commission.....

http://abc.nc.gov/legal/law_enforcement.aspx

The primary mission of ALE is the enforcement of the State Alcoholic Beverage Control laws and the Controlled Substances Act. Special attention is directed towards the possession and use of alcohol by underage persons and the prevention of violent crime due to alcohol and drug abuse. In addition, they enforce the tobacco laws prohibiting the sale and distribution of tobacco products to persons under the age of 18.

Further more, he didn't even show a badge, he showed handcuffs!!!!

http://www.wjbf.com/story/22146284/caught-on-tape-man-arrested-while-drinking-tea-in-nc-liquor-store-parking-lot

[PleaseBlitz]

Which? That when a State ABC Cop comes up and asks you what you are drinking in the parking lot of an ABC store you can't claim a 4th amendment protection against his request?

Reality. Your constitutional rights aren't blankets which you get to choose or carry with you everywhere you walk. You don't have freedom of speech in a courtroom when a judge says to shut the hell up. Or in a crowded theater to yell fire. you don't have the right to bare arms in a church or school zone. You don't have the right to freedom of religion if your religion violates drug laws, or endangered species protection acts. And you don't have the right ignore a cop asking you to hand over your beverage in the parking lot of an ABC store nor do you have the first amendment right to peacefully assemble in that parking lot after the policeman has asked you to leave.

Or... that the wrapper is being charged with trespassing and not drinking in public.

This is great stuff.

[DC9]

So who determines that? Is it up to the cop? Or is there a book of acceptable PCs? Or does a judge rule on it later?

PC? I'm not 100% sure how it works in the civilian sector... I'm basing everything I say off of Federal Law that I'm sure of. I know in the military it's different than it is on the civilian side, but I bet that a Police Officer can determine PC on the scene, but a Judge will here about how he/she came to that decision eventually.

[NoCalMike]

The cop assumed he was drinking alcohol for what reason I am not sure, because he never stated in the video that he smelled alcohol on the guy or from the can or in the area.

Then the cop tells him he is trespassing and tells him to leave, also for what reason I am not sure. The guy clearly stated he was going to go into the store to shop once he finished his iced tea.

The cop also never shows a badge at any time which is troublesome, because if someone approached me saying they were a cop, I'd be highly suspect unless I saw some sort of identification.

A lot of cops seem like they are looking for trouble and won't let up on people until they think they can get over on you.

I was pulled over once because my front license plate was missing, (it was in the trunk, I had bought the car barely two weeks before and forgot to put it in) so fine, I understand getting pulled over, but once that issue is resolved, we then get into "do you have alcohol, do you have marijuana" etc etc....based on no reasoning. I tell them "No" and they keep asking me over and over as if they are determined I am lying. I tell them they can search the car if they would feel better, but then they just keep asking me to "lift up your bag" or "can you open center console" etc etc.....

We do this song and dance for about 45 minutes before they finally let me go, but it is just this attitude I got from them like "since we wasted our time pulling this guy over, we better make it worth our while"