If your definition of "horrendous" includes planting it intentionally to make a case, then it was indeed horrendous. There's absolutely no way that was an accident, or like he was tired of holding it and just wanted to rest it there on the car seat.

Lol at people who didn't even watch the two videos and commented anyway.

I think both of these posts are still in the delete window if you want to go that route.

Baggie was empty, and it did come from the person being detained behind the cop, btw.

Baggie is *mostly* empty and you have no idea where it originated.

Ok, I did watch it, but did not listen. You still don't know where it came from or whether or not the cop changed his mind about what he was doing after he knew he was filmed.

Why does one cop give another cop a little piece of trash?

Because it came out of the pocket of the guy he was searching? You said you watched the video!

You don't know where it originates. One cop gives it to another, right? Why in the world would he do that with an empty bag/trash?

Because they're cops and pulling baggies out of pockets during searches is one of the most standard parts of their day?

I know it's difficult for a bunch of boomer white guys to imagine carrying bags of drugs on them in their busted Impala, but I assure you it's quite common.

Did either of the cops who touched the baggie think it's potentially going to be used as evidence of drugs?

I agree with everything you said above.

What I said and what you said are both true.

No, because again, if you had watched the video you'd know that the baggie was empty.

Officer's options are:

1: Hold on to empty baggie
2: Litter
3: Put it on the trunk where it'll obviously just blow away since again, it's empty
4: Put it in the car out of the wind but still in clear view with whatever else gets collected

Have you ever watched an episode of COPS before? Unloading the contents of pants during a search on some sort of horizontal surface is super standard.

Did you watch the longer video?

The cop spends 40 seconds looking in the backseat in clear view of the guy filming him, sees weed and a lighter on the seat and tells the cop in the back "you're clear to search him" at which point the baggie is immediately pulled out and handed to the one that authorized the search. He starts to walk up to the trunk to do the standard "put stuff on the trunk" technique and apparently realizes immediately that they're 3 feet from the road and it'll probably blow away, so he goes and puts it in the car.

There is absolutely nothing shady about any of this.

You actually don't know if the baggie is empty or not. Those are not his only four options. Thank you for teaching me about the ins and outs of routine policing from your learned experiences watching COPS.

This is possibly naive of me to assume as idk how these things work, but if a stop escalated to the point where the driver was being searched, how often would something like an empty baggie in the drivers possession not be tested?

I have my suspicions but I feel like if I ascribe intention then I'll have to spend twenty posts back and forth on how I can't know for sure. Long and short of it is that one cop confiscates something off of one guy and the other cop chucks it on the backseat of someone else's car.

The cop who did it could have no ill-will whatsoever and it's still awful police work that could have serious implications. Arguably it already has by creating a viral video of what appears to be a cop planting evidence. There's a reason why there are specific protocols for searches and how to handle the things they find.

If a baggy like that is likely to have contained drugs (which isn't too unlikely) and is the type of thing cops look for then that makes it worse that the cop was so utterly careless with it.

You can't say that it's likely to have contained drugs and still defend the carelessness of the cop. He took something you're saying probably contained illegal drugs and threw it in someone else's car.

What world do you people live in where trace amounts of marijuana get you in trouble with the cops?

I get that I'm on an internet forum for degens and by definition am not dealing with average people, but I actually cannot believe how insane you are being on this.

Also, Mr. Doorbread, the cop quite literally says on the video that the baggie is empty.

If we were at a poker table and you kept ranting about this, I'd have given you an, "I don't know man, maybe you're right" by now followed by the exchange of eyebrow raises with other normal people at the table who have thus far been listening in stunned silence.

So anyway, I don't know man, maybe you're right.

I've been busted twice for empty baggies that "smell like weed." One of those times was in California.

He said the baggie was empty when he knew he was being filmed. I’m not saying he was doing anything wrong but you can’t ignore that.

Of course people have gotten in trouble with the cops for less and of course you know that. You follow this thread. Of course in your example of what’s in the empty baggie in your hypothetical is marijuana

It sounds like you want to have it both ways, the bag is not suspicious and it doesn't matter but also it's clearly a sign of drugs. It can't be both.

I don’t know how you gathered that I don’t find it suspicious? I do find it suspicious

It was to Inso. Stuff got posted in between while I was doing other things.

edit: Inso was arguing just a few posts back that it's obvious it contained (or likely contained) drugs, but then also wants to say it's nothing and the driver shouldn't mind it being thrown on his back seat.

Inso0 believes if cop actions are taken (stop, backup, ask person out of car) that in and of itself is proof of some wrong doing of the individuals.

I asked him if he wants some examples and could cite Philando Castile killed by a cop and if he thinks if the cop stopped him, pulled his gun, and shoots him, if that is indicative that Philando Castile must have taken actions or done wrong to cause it but I think it is pointless.

He seems to hold exactly the type of views that lead to the worst type of police abuses which is the 'actions they take, by virtue of taking them, then justify those very actions'.

For him it seems as simple as that but I would be interested in his clarification if he chooses to.

Boom

And yes.

Inso0 might be right, but ???

Did the authorized cop give the authorizing cop everything that was in the guy's pockets? Or was this baggie meant to at least maybe be evidence and not just trash to be secured from blowing away on the backseat next to the open door?

Cop arrested for threatening to shoot suspect. Haven't seen this before

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58005556

Not going to post the video but it's another bad one. The other men run so the officer goes for the guy who's remained seated (who has his hands in the open). It's another one where the cop really needs to understand that while force is often needed for compliance it doesn't always serve the purpose to control someone by immediately escalating to holding a gun to their head.

He never lashes out at the cop, he never raises his hands to them, he never even gets up off the floor, but the officer gets him to lie on his front and then quite literally holds the gun to the back of his head. It's when the "suspect" realises that the gun is at point blank that he then tries to move. Almost as if the police officer is inciting sheer panic and terror in him. Now that the officers have managed to lose control by panicking him and having him roll back over the officer hits him in the head with his gun inflicting a cut on the top of his head. While the "suspect" protests, still holding his hands in plain view, the officer takes the liberty to place one hand on his throat and begin choking him, you can see to very large bruises on the man's face from the gun. Even while being choked all he does is place one hand on the officer's while pleading.

"I didn't even run...I was just fighting for my life, man"

Pre-empting the other side, I don't think police always have to handle suspects with kid gloves, but this is a fine example of how the only tool in the officer's toolbox appears to be "escalate to threat of lethal force". If an officer has to use violence then that's in the remit, but if an officer causes someone to needlessly panic for their life then that is NOT helping compliance. It's putting the suspect's life in serious risk along with the officers' safety. When the lad was clearly trying to comply at the start, the officer put the barrel of a gun at the back of his head and made the situation that was well under control into a potentially deadly one in which someone left needing stitches.

And people wonder why **** like Selma happens.