NOTE: All timestamps are in the future because WE are in the future. The care takers of Midnight Ridazz.com reserves the right to remove, edit, move or delete anything for any reason. None of the opinions expressed on these boards represent the Midnight Ridazz nor can anyone purport to speak on behalf of Midnight Ridazz.
Thread started by Dedicated818 at 08.18.11 - 11:55 pm
I was pulled over for questioning on my Bicycle in Van Nuys. On Sepulveda blvd.
near the Orange line. My ID was ran along with an interigation of what I was doing
riding down the street. I was riding with traffic in the far right lane. They said they could not see me and that I needed wheel reflectors. I did have functioning ft and rear lights along with wearing a bright red T shirt, the street is fully lit.
So I know i need a haircut but really do I look like I'm up to no good ?
Maybe it was because I was wearing a red T shirt ?
Riding my BMX King Sting ?
White guy in a Hispanic neighborhood ?
watching to many Ron Paul videos on you tube ?
Officer, my name is [name here].
Am I free to go?
If I am not free to go, please explain to me your probable cause for
stopping me.
I politely refuse to give you any further information.
I do not consent to any search of me or my belongings.
That all works in theory, Answering question with questions, but in reality
the Officer will take offense and escilate the hassle they are giving you.
It's easer to cooperate give them my ID and be on my way than to get tazed and
locked up for being combative. The cops can write there report out to make you
into the bad guy. It's all how they write the arrest report.
My error was to stand next to the crusier instead of being in front of it so I would be
on camera. At least that lowers your chances of being assaulted by the Police.
Surveys show that BMX bikes are bicycle of choice for tweekers.
That may account for something.
Obviously this is bullshit profiling.
The only thing slightly noteworthy about this is that D818 is a guero.
I had a friend that got rolled 2 times in 10 minutes in B.Hills for BWB.
I like having tires with reflective side walls to give bored cops one less excuse to make a stop.
trickmilla responding to a comment by Dedicated818
08.19.11 - 11:45 am
BTW according to the CVC you need reflectors on your wheels. I put reflective tape (Home depot) on a spoke card, problem solved.
With bikes getting so much press (and not all good) don't give the cops a reason to pull you over, not that you did, and not that they even need a reason, but you know what I'm say'n.
BTW according to the CVC you don't need reflectors on your wheels. 21201 (4) states, A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with reflectorized tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped with these side reflectors.
http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21201.htm
For those that may need to brush up on their codes...........
http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/tocd11c1a4.htm
hmmm that's strange cause I'm rereading what you say, and that's not what it comes off as what you are saying. It looks like you're stating what CVC requires of riders.
In reality if you were to quiz 100 beat cops, the chances of you finding one that knows the code would be pretty dang slim. And just having something that reflects on both sides and front and back will cover you. For me that happens to be gloves and a seat bag. Nothing near the wheels.
I was not cited for no reflectors. My responce when the Officer (who was half my
age)stated the issue of no wheel reflectors as a reason for my being stoped was;
This bike is 30 years old before wheel reflectors were required. He then had the look
of a dear in the headlights and proceded to interigate me as to what I was doing riding
down the street.
It's obvious the reflectors were an excuse to detain me and run my ID.
Dark energyvand Dedicated818 are right about a few things that perhaps I should elaborate on.
The vehicle code is often used as a pretext to initiate a contact where the officer desires to do a little digging, develop reasonable suspicion or probable cause to initiate a search, check for warrants, or affect an arrest. The initial violation only opens a door. Officers are not experts on every section of the vehicle code and typically only know the bullet points sufficient to initiate a contact. On occasions we make errors.
Pretext stops are Constitutional and have been upheld in the courts....but there must be a technical violation for which the officers has a right to detain you. If there is no underlying violation than an officer needs reasonable suspicion or probable cause to detain or arrest you.
Reasonable suspicion is defined as facts that would lead a reasonable officer (based on training and experiance) to have an honest belief that a crime has or is about to occur and the person detained is involved. A hunch is not enough.
I was forcibly pulled off my bike (standing over the top tube, bike between the legs, not riding, approached from behind, arms grabbed, etc.) and was put in the back of a polce cruiser while they ran my ID and searched my bag for drugs, twice. Their reason for doing this? They had just seen a few riders going the wrong way on the wrong side of the street pissing them off and unable to find them, I was the next closest cyclist. "We can't get all of you, but we can get some of you." "I can write you tickets all night and take you to jail." "Search his bag again, there's gotta be something, I want to nail this guy." were just a few of the nice things Officer Battez had to say to me. "If we see you around here again we're going to arrest you." Awesome, maybe they didn't notice I live just around the corner on my ID. So now I feel like I've got a gang hit on my person from the LAPD and a court date to deal with a bogus "Parked on the Sidewalk" ticket, the only thing they could think to give me.
You were guilty as I was of just being a cyclist, there's your reasonable suspicion.
I'd like to know how I can give a formal complaint against an officer after threats like that. Do I have to go to whatever specific Sheriff's Office that said officer works from and how do I find that out? I'd love more than anything to have the cruiser video so I can share with everyone the amount of threats and generally hateful crap I had yelled at me.
Would evidence even be necessary for an arrest manufactured or not if an Officer decided that the Suspect was resisting or being combative by refusing to show ID and questioning the Officer about their reason for being detained ?
Dedicated818 responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.20.11 - 10:31 pm
I observe a cyclist with a backpack riding in an area that has recently experianced a rash of burglaries from motor vehicles. Earlier in the day the detectives in roll call revealed that in two of the cases a person on a bike was observed leaving the scene.
I stop the cyclist and order him to turn around and put his hands behind his back. As far as I know the person is potentially a burglar with access to tools that may be used as a weapon against me. I am not going to engage this person in a conversation until after the cuffs are on and my investigation is complete. Every second that person is unsecure is time that they may be devising a plan to escape or to fight. This is not the time for conversation and you do not have the option of hearing my rationale or deciding whether you think it is sufficient before you comply.
If the person stopped happened to be innocent (wrong suspect) but he resisted me in the discharge of my duties, he can still be arrested. You are free to ask why you were stopped, handcuffed, questioned....AFTER the investigation is complete NOT while it is still occurring.
Similerly if I stop a person and his friend comes up and starts asking me questions, the friend may be charged with interferring if he does not comply with the officers order to stay back (at a reasonable distance). Asking the officers questions while they are engaged in the investigation is not the right time...again you can ask AFTERWARD. As far as the officer knows you are a possible threat. Also, the friend has no right to know why the person is being detained anyway.
Why doesn't the friend have the right to know? Privacy rules. 99% of the time its no big deal because it may be for a ticket but what about the 1% of the time it is for a warrant for a crime that the suspect is embarassed about and did not want anyone to know. If the person wants his friend to know they can tell them them later.
My advise....PLEASE comply with an officers orders and reserve the questions for AFTERWARDS.
That's the inherent problem between officers and the rest of the population: You guys are trained to see EVERYONE as a possible threat. It's kind of ironic how the population now see every cop as a possible threat.
July responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.21.11 - 4:36 pm
Please keep in mind that I am just explaining what we have the right to do and what is reasonable suspicion as viewed by the courts...Clearly you disagree.
By the way it's not because you ride a bike and have a backpack...it's because it's an area that has had several recent break ins, at a time when those break ins have been occurring, with a suspect description indicating the suspect is on a bike.
Does anyone else share mickeywally's opinion that under these circumstances that it is outside the realm of reason for an officer to temporarily detain a cyclist? As a supervisor I would expect officers under my command to stop a person given these facts. Your thoughts?
This might be going off track of your inquiry but when I was stoped, I was not wearing
a backpack. I was wearing street clothes and did not have a helmet on. The one item
of cycling atire I was wearing was gloves.
Now I doubt that I would have been stoped by these officers for no wheel reflectors if
I was fully decked out in my roadie kit with my high end carbon fiber road bike.
So does riding a BMX bike profile me as a criminal element that needs to be stoped ?
Dedicated818 responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.21.11 - 8:50 pm
To the average officer the type of bike would not make a bit of difference. BMX does not increase your chance of getting stopped...your actions and equipment will be more a factor.
They stopped you for what they think was a valid vehicle code violation (if they are wrong you can challenge the citation)...probably using it as an excuse to ask you some questions and run you for warrants. Same as they would do if they saw a motorist with a minor equipment violation. As a supervisor I did not care how many tickets were written so much as how many field contacts the officers made.
No citation was issued, this was simply a stop to see what I was doing.
Why interigate me and run my ID then ? Is this part of the new training and public
relations the Dept is promoting ? Interigate and check IDs of all civilians that are made
contact with ? The officer seemed to imply that it was manditory to run me for warrents since he had stoped me. This went along with the usual questions of are you on parol ? have you ever been arrested ? Do you have any drugs on you ?"
They even asked me were I was born ?
I love that one as I get to say; East L.A.
Dedicated818 responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.21.11 - 10:12 pm
ok there's a guy riding a around/walking/driving a certain car and he fits a suspects profile you have the right to detain him and cuff him.
That's understandable. Where it breaks down for me is, why don't you cops tell the guy once you have discovered he's an ordinary guy going about his business(no idea he fits a profile mind you) and have the niceness to tell him whats going on and maybe you all would calm your nerves in a high stress scenario, false alarm type deal, not let him go with him thinking about how much a cop gives him a hard time for nothing.
?
BATMAN! responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.21.11 - 10:14 pm
Hi batman...officers are in fact instructed to explain themselves afterward...it's unfortunate that some do not rise to the expectations of the Department or the community.
I personally think this whole thread has been very educational. I like to consider myself up on the law and I've learned quite a bit from this thread. Study up folks. Know the tools. Ride on.
Theres only two reasons to be on sepulveda at night one is a job you work in the area.The other HOOKERS don't try and tell me your on a bike because that doesn't make a different I get the 40 dollars blows jobs on my bike every now and then.
I am glad that this discussion has been informative....if you have any questions about police procedure or standards please feel free to ask on this thread or start a new one titled "??? for Sgt. Krumer"
I'll get in touch with Commissioner Gordon personally and see if we can't make some of these beat cops go above and beyond the expectations of the Department AND community.
BATMAN! responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.23.11 - 12:42 am
By the way it's not because you ride a bike and have a backpack...it's because it's an area that has had several recent break ins, at a time when those break ins have been occurring, with a suspect description indicating the suspect is on a bike.
Does anyone else share mickeywally's opinion that under these circumstances that it is outside the realm of reason for an officer to temporarily detain a cyclist? As a supervisor I would expect officers under my command to stop a person given these facts. Your thoughts?
"On a bike"? That's all you've got? Nothing about what kind of bike, what kind of suspect? And the citizen you detained had nothing visible on his bike or on his person, such as a bag or a backpack, that might suggest to a reasonable person that he could be engaged in burglary? I would say that if that's not "outside the realm of reason," it's sure hanging around near the border.
PC responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
08.23.11 - 8:36 pm
Since I'm apparently talking to myself now, let me just talk a little more.
As a supervisor, at the very least you should expect officers under your command to have the experience, intuition, discretion, and common sense to make certain distinctions when dealing with extremely vague suspect descriptions (e.g., "he was on a bike"), because that's going to govern just how many citizens they inconvenience (at best) or give the full felon treatment to (at worst) while trying to find out who is doing the break-ins. So, does *everybody* on a bike need to be jacked up, or should they be looking for signs that the person isn't just using the bike to get from point A to point B--furtive behavior, peering into cars, no lights, head swiveling as if acting as a lookout, etc.? Obviously it doesn't have to be one or the other, but I'll bet most reasonable people would lean a lot closer to the latter, whereas you are explicitly endorsing the former. Do you really not see how this is a problem?
Of those four traits, only the first depends on how long an officer has been on the street; the officers should be expected to bring the last three to the job with them from the first
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
I was pulled over for questioning on my Bicycle in Van Nuys. On Sepulveda blvd.
