Black actress kissing white boyfriend handcuffed/detained

Cops have no business trying to ID folks because they are kissing in a parked car.

Is kissing illegal????

- - - Updated - - -

its their job to respond to LEGITIMATE complaints and question people when there is REASONABLE suspision of criminal activity.

an inter-racial couple making out is not reasonable suspicion of a criminal act.

 

How do you know the people who called the police said they were kissing?

 

The dispatchers characterization of the complaint was that they were "having sex in the vehicle with door open".

 

And it turns out they were not. But that doesn't seem to bother you. What we have here is a phoned-in accusaton without evidence. It's interesting whom you choose to believe.

 

You mean they deny the accusations of the eye witnesses. No big surprise there. The girl cried, played the race card, called her daddy to talk to the policeman, pointed out she has a publicist AND lied to try to avoid being held accountable for her behavior.

????? Sooooooo you think a complete stranger lied to the police about what she saw? Interesting who you chose to believe. Eye witness had nothing to gain by filing false crime report and could face possible criminal prosecution for making it, while the crying actress had everything to gain by lying.

And the evidence would be the eyewitness, testifying under oath in court as to what they saw.

 

Can't disagree about the "War on Drugs". It makes a good example of the maxim about "Good Intentions".

- - - Updated - - -

What about a report of a couple, regardless of race, having sex in the parking lot. Do you support mandatory ID or arrest in that situation? Not the police witnessing the act, just a report.

 

You are being absurd. How could the cops operate other than to show up and investigate. No-one was "beaten up or killed".

Do you suggest banning reporting crime because of the possibility of false reports?

 

You brought up the Tea Party, not me.

 

Every time this thread pops up in my new post list I read, "Black actresses kissing while boyfriend handcuffed/detained."

 

and do what? commit violence?

 

That was just an example that refutes the claim they cannot ask you for an ID nor require your identity. The woman was involved in a reported crime that the police were investigating so they can detain her and run a outstanding warrants on her and if she refuses to produce and ID take her to the station and hold her and take her before a judge who will demand she identify herself.

Yes the police we hire to keep us safe and arrest people who commit crimes have the authority do demand your identification under certain circumstances and detain you if you do not produce and ID or fail to give them your name and birthday to run a check as was the case here. I guess my gripe would be with this criminal state you seem to prefer.

They only have to have a reasonable suspicion like 911 calls about you having public sex in a car. Or that you match the description of someone they are looking for. And yes if they detain you they can frisk you for their own safety. No one has claimed they can do so without cause, reasonable suspicion.

- - - Updated - - -

It is not a right it is an authority we grant them under color of law.

 

And then they can take you down and lock you up until they can determine who you are if they have a reasonable suspicion you were engaged in a crime or are wanted for a crime. 72 hours they can hold you until they can ascertain who you are and then they must take you to a habeas corpus hearing before a judge who will decide if they can continue to hold you.

When all you have to do is tell them who you are and if you are innocent and not the person they are looking for you will be free to continue on your private lawful business. Good reason to carry an ID with you.

 

I do not doubt they have the legal authority in some states to demand your ID or face arrest. My objection is twofold; first, the initial suggestion that police have a right to demand a citizen's ID and, second, that such demands violate the Constitutional rights of citizens. Again, I'm not talking about someone caught red-handed committing a crime. In that case ID is helpful but irrelevant since they are probably going to be arrested anyway.

 

They had the AUTHORITY to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

Not arrested DETAINED, that is why it is a good idea to have one on you and if requested produce it.

 

Again how you paint it is totally fallacious, they didn't arrest her for not having an ID, they did detain her after she refused and walked off DURING A POLICE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. The police have the AUTHORITY that we citizens grant to them to investigate complaints of criminal activity and if they have probable cause you are involved to request you ID and if you refuse to detain you until they can ascertain who you are or either release you or take to a habeas corpus hearing before a judge.

Tell me if the police are investigating a possible crime and they ask you for your identification why would you refuse them?

- - - Updated - - -

So police can never ask people for identification and people are never required to provide it, is that it? Then why have police at all if they cannot investigate crime and arrest criminals?

- - - Updated - - -

Well if they are looking for John Smith and you match his identity and you present you ID and they see you are not John Smith....................

 

How does showing an ID turn us into a police state?

 

They were responding to several call in complaints.

- - - Updated - - -

Really? To whom did they "testify"?

- - - Updated - - -

Says who?

 

I support the police putting a stop to the activity and lecturing the perp's on their public behavior and the law and if the persons get snarky and attempt to walk off then detain them ID them run a outstanding warrant check on them and instruct them that if another such call is made involving them they will be arrested.

Don't you support that?

 

Agreed. Thanks for backing away for your they had a "right" statement. Still I disagree with giving our government that authority without stricter standards.

Nice quibbling on the differences between "detained" and "arrested". Innocent people being held against their will is wrong no matter what kind of words you use. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Unless the police themselves witnessed the crime in action or there was compelling evidence at the scene such as a video or the tissue, then by what basis should a citizen be held against their will? Careful where you go with your support for a police state.

I'm guessing you're neither supportive of the Tea Party nor the Libertarian Party. Is that correct?

- - - Updated - - -

Great. Me too. What activity did the police stop by detaining Watts?

- - - Updated - - -

When an innocent citizen person can be held against will for refusing to show their papers, it's not a free state.

 

Oh really? Where did I make that statement?

What would be "stricter" standards than what we have now.

It's a HUGE difference and not a quibble. Learn the law.

No it's called a lawful detention which we the citizens grant to our police if they have a reasonable suspicion or probable cause. And since police rarely actually witness crimes............

Careful what you call a police state else we will have no police at all.

Which has nothing to do with this or the law.

Having sex in public but the detention was for her attempting to walk away under questioning for a possible violation of the law.

We have habeas corpus here you know. And they can ONLY be held if there is a reasonable suspicion as a report of a crime being committed and you are the suspect. Once it is cleared up you are free to go. In this case it could have ended more quickly and without incident had the suspect cooperated with the request of the police.

Why do you want to create an us against them mentality when it comes to the police?

 

My mistake. You didn't say it, but you've supported it for the last two days have you not?

If you or a loved one were "detained" by the police based merely on the say so of another person without evidence, would you support that action or not?

 

No and I have been quite clear about it.

What do you mean support? If any of my adult kids were in a car in public having sex and the police came and asked them for ID I would urge them to supply it, act respectful and heed the warning the police would give and certainly NOT turn and walk away claiming they did nothing wrong.

What would you do?

 

Nice distortion. Did the police catch Watts having public sex? No, they did not.

 

Still, regardless of Watts' guilt or evidence (let's hope there's a video out there!) the idea people can be arrested or detained for not presenting their papers is disturbing.

I go jogging quite a bit, often in different cities around the country. I don't carry my wallet, just dog tags. If police are looking for an older white male and saw me, do you think I should be arrested/detained because I don't have my papers on me?

 

Over here it's a bit different - you have to give your name and address to police. So, if they ever come knocking, I'll just repeat my name and address until they go away

If police have some sort of justified suspicion and evidence of wrongdoing - they should detain me. Otherwise, what right do they have to know who I am? They can (*)(*)(*)(*) off.

My