MSU Red Cedar Message Board

If he's sour that he didn't get an offer from Michigan and his backup plan was SVSU that tells you that he didn't really deserve an offer from UM or any other B1G school. What do you know, a scUMmer with entitlement issues.

Giving TR the ticket an hour later is just plain idiotic. But it isn't the most idiotic situation I have heard of. When I was in high school a buddy of mine was seen by an off duty cop on a Sunday afternoon allegedly accelerating to fast out of a parking lot onto the main road. The following Thursday the cop went to his house at 6 p.m. and gave him a speeding ticket. He went to court to get the ticket dismissed and the visiting judge not only upheld the ticket, he doubled the fine because my friend had the gall contest it. When my friend said he didn't have enough money to pay the doubled fine, the judge gave him fifteen minutes to go across the street to the bank and get the money or he would go to jail for 3 days. I was in the courtroom when it happened and I swear this is true. He also upheld my bogus speeding ticket I was there for because "police officers don't lie, but teenagers always do." The next case was an adult who ran over a handicapped kid on a bike and he dismissed it because he said the kid shouldn't have been riding a bike on the street. Turned out this judge never dismissed against teenagers. but usually did for anyone over 30.

Anything new here?

Police don't have laws that they have to follow

Complaint is nothing more than a charge, which can be filed anytime within the statute of limitations (statute of limitations in NH for similar charge would be 90 days).

So, in short, yes, it's legal to issue a ticket after the fact. At bare minimum, the cop's conduct raises questions about the actual gravity of the offense, given that the officer (1) decided to let it go at the time, and (2) decided to punish TRob after TRob posted stuff critical about the law enforcement in the area on a public website.

And, if the officer's conduct raises questions, it's something that should be directed to his superior officer. Today, TRob, tomorrow, what? a murder investigation blown apart due to the officer's conduct?

Bottom line: good for you, TRob. May your city be better protected because of your action.

So, a cop pulls you over one day, gives you a warning, and then two months later when he sees you gassing up at the local Shell, he can pull in and write a ticket for something within 90 days prior?

Oh, my. The officer pulled him over "for suspicion of having needles in his vehicle," then ticketed him later for failing to signal.

Shouldn't have paid, TRob. Some attorney out there would have killed it, and made you money.

Seamstresses are running scared.

Just a few questions:

How do you become suspicious of one having needles in a car? That is far different than actually seeing needles in a car.

Since when are needles even illegal and warranting of a traffic stop?

What a complete piece of shit. I hate cops like that. Power tripping DICK.

I do not understand why he paid up instead of challenging it. I mean, I do, but I don't. He did what he felt he needed to to put things behind him legally and challenge the guy as someone not worthy of a badge and a gun.

Still. It would have killed me to pay that ticket. Almost literally.

My guess is that TRob either failed to signal or that the cop didn't see it and decided to pull him over to see what he could develop. (Some cities have ordinances banning hypodermic needles without a prescription.) Cops routinely go on fishing expeditions for drugs ("Do you have anything in your car that you shouldn't have, like a gun, or drugs?" and yes, some people do answer in the affirmative ). Asking about needles is probably the cop's way of trying to develop probable cause for a search warrant for the driver, the car, and the people in the car.

In other words, he had jack, but was suspicious because TRob was black, and figured that nobody would ever know about it. Because, y'know, he was just dealing with some random black guy.

Happy Black History Month, motherfucker.

Oh, son, you left out the best parts:

"The Bay City Police Department sent Robinson a letter Feb. 2, stating that Bartynski admitted to probably using vulgar language during the stop. The other two allegations of Robinson’s complaint — racial profiling and use of unnecessary force — were deemed unfounded."

And TRob's complaint says that the officer who gave him the ticket arrived 5 minutes after TRob was stopped by other cops.

So:

1) Officers effect a stop
2) Officer Friendly arrives 5 minutes later, notifies driver that reason for the stop is suspicion of having needles in the car
3) Officer Friendly searches driver in a physical manner that leaves the driver -- who plays Big Ten football -- uncomfortable, while telling the driver he doesn't care who the fuck the driver is in front of witnesses
4) Officer Friendly tells the driver he's good to go after all documentation provided proves valid
5) Driver posts to public website his dissatisfaction for an illegal stop and search in his hometown
6) Officer Friendly tracks him down an hour later and issues him a ticket for something never mentioned as a reason for the traffic stop, specifically calling the driver "role model" and saying he liked the driver's post on the public website, in front of witnesses
7) After an investigation where Officer Friendly denies claims by the driver of racial profiling or use of unnecessary force, but admits to the allegation of profanity, the investigation concludes that...Officer Friendly used profanity.

No need to explain. We get it.