The officer could have said something like “our procedure is for you to ask the driver those questions” or something like that. The error was responding to her tone and demands with the words he chose.
The port authority thinks it is illegal, certainly in violation of their rules flashing the commissioner badge for personal gain.
Based on my experience, you can insure an unregistered car. In my case, if the insurance refused the coverage, I would have found out sooner that I forgot to renew the registration.
The officers must know it’s illegal to try to use her position to gain anything (information, leniency, whatever). She wasn’t there in an official capacity yet she approached them as if she was. I think that’s why she got the reaction that she did. She was using her position inappropriately to try to obtain information, and the correct response to that IS you don’t need to know. The Port Authority seems to think her behavior was illegal and punishable by jail time. I think they’re conducting an investigation.
@jym626 Except this is not a child, and there’s no reason why the officers can’t respond to her as a reasonable adult. If she can’t accept that, it’s on her. I respect their assumption that she should understand reason–that’s how I WANT law enforcement officers to act.
While I would agree the police officer shouldn’t have, and gained nothing, by saying things like “you don’t need to know”, if this went on for an hour, I can imagine it could have been hard to keep towing the line. I agree with others that he should have just said, “The driver has all the information. He is the one legally entitled to the information. You are welcome to ask him.” (or something like that) and continued to repeat that until the tow truck arrived and the group dispersed.
But, the more compelling thing to me is trying to imagine different groups of people in this scenario…if some or all of the passengers had all been African American, for example. And, even if there were and the first part of the scene played out in the same way, what if the parent who arrived had been an African American mom or dad and copped an attitude? I’d like to think these specific officers would have reacted the same way but who knows? And what about other police officers? I just see a whole lot of white privilege and it makes me cringe.
Don’t kid yourself those police officers knew exactly what they were doing. They knew the squad car dash cam was rolling and they were going to keep that dialogue going for as long as possible. She was just digging herself deeper with each passing minute. In the end she did herself in when she lost it by hurling profanity at officers simply doing their job.
Good for them. And hopefully she is doing some soul searching as a result of this unfortunate confrontation that she was foolish enough to initiate.
@collage1 - It looks like from the full video (there’s an hour of my life I can never get back) that the commissioner showed up at the tail end of this hour video. Most of it was the initial pulling over of the car and the officers talking to the driver, explaining the procedure to get the car out of impound, etc. It was all very civil. Until the mom/bulldozer lady showed up. Then it went to hell in a hand basket. But, and @garland, the issue of her not being a kid isn’t really relevant, as the person responding to the “childish” behavior, whether it be from a child or not, would do best by not taking the bait and engaging. That was my point with that analogy. The officer did later admit he didn’t like her tone and he responded the way he did because of her tone. That was his mistake, IMO. Which he recognized, and admitted.
No clue if anything they did/said could have made much of a difference in her behavior, which was horrid. She should be mortified by her behavior and her condescending, abrasive, confrontational tone with them is inexcusable. But, the officer would have served himself better if he had been able to not engage with her initially the way he did. He seemed to realize it, and apologized and tried to, literally, back off (apparently she kept getting in his face) but, and for the umpteenth time this is all I am speaking to, IMO he made an error in the way he responded that “no, she didn’t need to know “. Whether she did or did not, or had the right to the info or not is NOT the issue I am addressing. The issue is what he said and how he said it in response to her clearly problematic behavior and tone.
"But, the officer would have served himself better if he had been able to not engage with her initially the way he did. "
No he would not have served himself better. He served himself and all reasonable people well with the exact response he gave. He told her to ask the driver MANY TIMES. Plus, she knew exactly what was going on because her daughter called her.
Answering her question would have started an entire conversation on the sticker and the registration etc. None of her business! Ask the driver!
" I agree with others that he should have just said, “The driver has all the information. He is the one legally entitled to the information. You are welcome to ask him.” "
He pretty much said that verbatim.
"But, the officer would have served himself better if he had been able to not engage with her initially the way he did. He seemed to realize it, and apologized and tried to, literally, back off (apparently she kept getting in his face) "
Interesting. I watched the video and that wasn’t my interpretation of how things went down at all.
Listen again.On the hour video.
"But, the officer would have served himself better if he had been able to not engage with her initially the way he did. He seemed to realize it, and apologized and tried to, literally, back off (apparently she kept getting in his face) "
“Listen again.On the hour video.”
Oh, I’ve certainly listened to the video and heard no apology. Please point to a time on the counter where either officer apologizes to her. Matt definitely mentions her approach in two different spots but it wasn’t an apology just an explanation that he found her demeanor and the use of her credentials off-putting.
This feels like the “no you can’t have candy before dinner” —-round and round.
I don’t think a police officer can legally disclose the details of a traffic stop to an uninvolved third party. Not sure why he didn’t inform her of that.
What legal right does she have to demand information about a traffic stop that she was not a party to? Could I interject myself into the same situation and demand information? I think not.
She started out with flashing her commissioner’s badge. You have to keep that in mind when talking about officers’ attitude. Go back to the beginning of their encounter. You can hear officers mumbling something like, we don’t need it. That set the tone. I don’t see how they could have acted differently. In other circumstances, they may have explained to her. That would be doing a favor. After the badge, it would be kow-towing.
It’s just befuddling to me that with the serious instances of police abuse that have become apparent in recent years, that the standard for these officers in this instance has become so dizzyingly high. No one got arrested, abused, shot, or even vaguely insulted here. Professional and courteous behavior was displayed. Yet we are going to nitpick in THIS instance that it could be better? It just seems super picky, and a misuse of attention. I was about to write that I sure hope I get that kind of courtesy should I be pulled over for something, but I don’t have to hope. Middle class, middle-aged white woman. It’s fairly certain I will.
Which reminds me of a story I head in college about a student/professor interaction, where the professor was very strict about enforcing time limits on " blue book" essays. As the story goes, the prof announced a five minute warning, then a one minute warning, and then said “times up”. All of the students had placed their blue books on a stack on the professor’s desk and had left, except for one student who continued writing his essay for another ten minutes while the professor patiently sat at his desk. When he finally finished and was told that his late essay wouldn’t be accepted, the student asked “Do you know who I am?”, and was told “I don’t know and I don’t care”. The student then said “great”, as he slipped his blue book into the middle of the stack and quickly exited the room.
You couldn’t pay me enough to be a police officer. More than the possibility of violence, I wouldn’t be able to stand the constant criticism and backtalk. Even as a moderator, I can’t believe some of the abuse that’s hurled my way for merely warning someone for an obvious TOS violation. It’s really challenging to “hold my tongue” and not send a scathing response sometimes! So I admire these officers greatly for keeping their cool.
^^ ML, which are worse – the adults here or the kids? :-@
@patsmom, I’d say 60/40 the adults are worse.
I watched much of the uncut video, and I wonder if this is the case. The policeman tells the driver, alone, what is going to happen, and why, after he gets the information that the car has been unregistered for two years. The first communication, many minutes earlier, was that the stop related to window tint and license plate holder.
It’s not at all clear to me what the driver re-communicated to the passengers. Nor is it clear what the girl told her mother about why the car was being taken. I think its quite possible that the mother believes the car is being taken for a non-standard window tint and license frame. That would put you in a contentious mood to begin with.
I’m also wondering some about the decision to release the video. What video is releasable by police (the government) under what circumstances? Its an interesting question to consider. I’m not sure what the “rules” are or should be, or whether there are any at all. Maybe the reality is that the police can release any video that they possess of anyone at any time, depending on their sole discretion and evaluation of the effect it has on the police. It seems that must be the case.