Lady Cop Gets Shown Who’s Boss (ID Refusal)



Channel https://youtube.com/@josefmartinez4554

Original video https://youtu.be/fMLi6BmhxUw

#cops
#knowyourrights
#1stamendment

FAIR USE NOTICE This video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, review and news reporting which constitute the fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.

Disclaimer: NONE of our videos should be considered a “call to action.” We are not attorneys. Our videos should not be construed as legal advice. You should seek legal counsel if you believe that you are a victim of police misconduct. The facts presented in our videos are not indicative of our personal opinions. Laws, case law, ordinances, policies, legal doctrine, and all other jurisprudence is subject to the interpretation of the court. The videos shown are designed to be educational, and informative based on the information available at the time the video was published. All claims made are alleged.

source

21 thoughts on “Lady Cop Gets Shown Who’s Boss (ID Refusal)”

  1. Listen up officers, if you're not a Cop in the following states, pay attention. Four states' laws (Arizona, Indiana, Louisiana, and Nevada) explicitly impose an obligation to provide identifying information. Easy enough, right ? Once again for all Cops, Arizona, Indiana, Louisiana, and Nevada are the only states where you can act like a Dutch-bag and get away with it.. The rest of you Dutch-bag cops are lying pieces of crap.

    Reply
  2. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires warrants to be supported by probable cause. In Terry v. Ohio (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court established that it is constitutional for police to temporarily detain a person based on "specific and articulable facts" that establish reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or will be committed.

    Reply
  3. I wish y'all would stop callin these uneducated man-babies, "tyrants." Most of 'em are so dumb they take that as a positive description of their assumed strength & perceived authority. 😎

    Reply
  4. Amen, brotha @ 1:56….'concern for our safety' is bullshite! If that were the case, there wouldn't be HUNDREDS of 'em huddled safely outside while 1 measly punk murders 19 children & teachers inside!! Their only true concern is the chicken-shite 'officer safety' which is funny when it's ALL OF THEM who carry pistols, rifles, tasers, pepper spray, handcuffs, billy clubs, bullet-proof vests, etc on their GI Joe costume 😎

    Reply
  5. Investigation should start with the person or people making the report. Once they get the video or a very detailed description of the person then they can stop and talk to people.
    They don't have RAS, they are going on a fishing expedition.

    Reply

Leave a Comment