Rookie Cop Swiftly Fired After This Stop

[Music] welcome to audit the audit where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions this episode covers identification requirements loitering laws and reasonable suspicion and is brought to us by royal muscle founder hellcat infamous channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserve before we dive into the interaction i want to give a big thanks to the sponsor of this episode policy genius there's a lot to be thankful for this holiday season and if someone in your life relies on your financial support whether it's a child aging parent or even a business partner you need life insurance policy genius makes it super easy to compare quotes from over a dozen top insurers all in one place and you can work out how much life insurance coverage you need and compare personalized quotes to find your best price in minutes eligible applicants can get covered in as little as a week thanks to an award-winning policy option that swaps the standard medical exam requirement for a simple phone call this exclusive policy was recently rated number one by forbes higher than options from ladder ethos and bestow you could save 1300 or more per year on life insurance by using policy genius to compare policies and when you're ready to apply the policy genius team will handle all the paperwork and scheduling at no cost to you with unparalleled customer service it's no wonder that policy genius has earned thousands of five star reviews across trustpilot and google getting started is super easy just head on over to policygenius.com audit the audit and let policy geniuses team of licensed experts guide you through every step of the insurance buying process thanks again to policy genius for sponsoring this episode on june 4th 2021 the owner of the royal muscle founder hellcat infamous youtube channel who we will refer to as mr hellcat parked in front of a pump at the quiktrip gas station in locust grove georgia and exited his vehicle to make a phone call after about 20 or 30 minutes officer pitts officer james and officer mosley of the locust grove police department approached mr hellcat and began to question him about his are you hanging activities or are you meeting somebody are you waiting on somebody are you lost i live on you so the reason i'm asking we've been here how long probably 20 minutes 30 minutes 30 minutes he parked at a gas pump and i know i know the tank's not on the side it's on the other side right no i'll never take a step next so what's what do you do i'm just i'm just chilling i want to go home here i can't i can't sit in the parking lot because i'm thinking about this do you have somebody who's your id where is it in the car it's on people what's the problem i know go and get your id and watch while you give your id she can speak with you but you need to identify yourself so go and get your id officer pitts asks mr hellcat to provide his id and implies that she wants to confirm that he actually does live in the neighborhood georgia does not have a stop and identify statute that requires individuals to identify themselves to police officers during terry stops however under georgia's loitering statute which is found in section 16-11-36 of the georgia code officers can request that individuals suspected of loitering identify themselves the law states that quote a person commits the offense of loitering or prowling when he is in a place at a time or in a manner not usual for law-abiding individuals under circumstances that warrant a justifiable and reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity a law enforcement officer shall prior to any arrest afford the person an opportunity to dispel any alarm or immediate concern which would otherwise be warranted by requesting the person to identify himself and explain his presence and conduct the statute also lists an individual's refusal to identify themselves as a factor that may be considered in determining whether alarm is warranted by the individual's behavior however it is unclear whether a court would agree that mr hellcat's behavior warranted quote a justifiable and reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity in the 1995 case of evans versus state the georgia court of appeals concluded that reasonable suspicion existed to stop a group of individuals for loitering after they slowly drove through a shopping center parking lot for 45 minutes without parking or entering a store and slowed down even further to closely examine a type of car that is often stolen when a high number of automobile thefts and break-ins had occurred in the shopping center parking lots but in the 1996 case of state versus banks the court of appeals held that standing on the side of the road for no apparent purpose in a known drug trafficking area was not sufficient to support a reasonable suspicion of loitering despite officer testimony that this was a common method of conducting drug transactions here the officers cite concerns that mr hellcat may be engaged in drug trafficking based on his behavior and patterns of past drug sales in the parking lot as well as their observation of a known drug offender approaching him and speaking to him if a court agreed that this was sufficient to give the officers reasonable suspicion they would be within their authority to request his identification and an explanation under the loitering statutes but mr hellcat would not be obligated to provide it of course it's important to keep in mind that officers would also have the authority to take these actions without detaining mr hellcat regardless of whether reasonable suspicion existed [Applause] we know this area is known for narcotic activity it's known for criminal activity so that's reason another reason why we're speaking to you want to make sure that's not a foot right here people park they'll go over there they'll wait right here they'll wait for somebody they'll they'll do something like that it's brought in under you [Music] the state's definition of loitering is doing something not like the norm hanging out in the gas pump not like you hear what i'm saying so we we have to just kind of get up now if you like take off and run as soon as you see us over here why would i do that well so that's it that would add to it but you didn't so it makes it look a lot better you get what i'm saying officer pitts attempts to explain georgia's loitering law to mr hellcat although she fails to include the requirement that the suspect's unusual behavior cause reasonable alarm or immediate concern for the safety of persons or property anti-loitering laws which make it a crime for an individual to be in a public place for no apparent reason have a long and controversial history in the u.s and they generally have been found to be unconstitutional when they broadly prohibit all types of loitering u.s loitering laws were modeled after england's quote-unquote poor laws which were created in the 1600s during an economic depression to address the issue of large quantities of unemployed workers roaming the streets as briefly discussed in a previous episode of ata the first major challenge to the constitutionality of an anti-loitering law was decided by the supreme court in the 1972 case of papa cristo versus city of jacksonville in finding an anti-loitering statute that prohibited loitering and to find loiterers as quote persons wandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object to be overly broad and quote void for vagueness the court held that because there were no standards governing the exercise of the discretion granted by the ordinance quote the scheme permits and encourages an arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement of the law it furnishes a convenient tool for harsh and discriminatory enforcement by local prosecuting officials against particular groups deemed to merit their displeasure it results in a regime in which the poor and the unpopular are permitted to stand on a public sidewalk only at the whim of any police officer after the papa christo decision the majority of the country's loitering laws were revised to include additional offenses associated with loitering creating what are known as loitering plus ordinances while some of these loitering plus statutes have still been found to be unconstitutional the georgia supreme court upheld the constitutionality of its loitering statute in the 1984 case of bell versus state concluding that the language used in the statute made it clear what conduct must be avoided and prevented the possibility of arbitrary enforcement i literally come here all the time i live i live here that's what i'm trying to do yeah that's fine but you can't just if you don't have if you're not doing any business if you're not getting gas you're not going to actually go in there i just had a phone conversation well that's cool but now that we've had this communication it's what they call dispelling the alarm now that we're able to to figure out okay this guy doesn't have any issues or anything like that then we'll give you by our merry way but we never met you a day in our life i never i've never met you i've never gotten she's never met you he's never met you so we're just doing our jobs what we're going to do in georgia my father's an entire share okay well i know but i've never like said this this air is known for for drug transactions we're gonna make sure none of that's occurring here tonight and i haven't spoken and i know my and like he said earlier the reason we got out with you and asked you and didn't just like immediately throw you in handcuffs it's called dispelling the alarm that's all that happened we sat there for a while we we deserved you we're watching okay let's guys not get it guys he's not going there watching everybody come and go so drew already drew our attention then we saw somebody that we dealt with earlier with a whole bunch of drugs around here coming up to you like okay so and they said hey which makes sense and that's the reason we came over here to introduce ourselves to spell alarm make sure there's nothing to fair is going on now we're gonna be about our way because that now if if we thought something nefarious was going on then we'd be going a whole different direction you understand but we have to dispel arm make sure nothing nefarious is going on you understand that officer pitts says that the only reason that mr hellcat wasn't immediately thrown into handcuffs is that the officers wanted to give him the opportunity to quote dispel the alarm this statement is another reference to the georgia loitering statute which states the quote unless flight by the person or other circumstances make it impracticable a law enforcement officer shall prior to any arrest before the person an opportunity to dispel any alarm or immediate concern which would otherwise be warranted by requesting the person to identify himself and explain his presence and conduct however this does not mean that mr hellcat was under any legal obligation to dispel the alarm that the officers were claiming was present as the georgia supreme court discussed in bell versus state the case in which it found the loitering statute to be constitutional the statute quote does not require a suspect to provide information but rather guarantees him the opportunity to explain his conduct thereby possibly dispelling the officer's concern for the safety of persons or property before any official action is allowed the court also clarified that the statute did not allow an individual to be convicted of loitering whenever they fail to explain his conduct and presence to the satisfaction of the arresting officer stating that quote the statute in fact safeguards against this situation section b provides in part no person shall be convicted of an offense under this code section if it appears at trial that the explanation given by the person was true and would have dispelled the alarm or immediate concern therefore if the officers had arrested mr hellcat for loitering a jury could still determine that the explanation he provided for his conduct was reasonable enough that it should have dispelled the officer's alleged concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity i don't have one on me i'm officer james officer pitts that's officer moser i mean and i definitely encourage you go look up the code section ocga lordering l-o-i-t-e-r-i-n-g look it up the officers eventually left without arresting mr hellcat allowing him to continue with his day three days after this encounter officer pitts was terminated from her position at the locust grove police department it is unclear whether mr hellcat filed a complaint or plans to pursue legal action i reached out to the locus grove police chief derrick austin but he would not comment on the incident featured in this episode this could be due to the fact that he's the third locust grove police chief that's been hired in the past four months due to the previous two being fired and jailed for stealing money and evidence from the department and he was not the chief at the time of this encounter overall the locust grove officers get a c-minus because although there is an argument to be made that the officers were lawfully operating under the authority of georgia's loitering code they failed to accurately articulate the statute to mr hellcat maintained an accusatory and condescending demeanor throughout the interactions and based their decision to initiate contact with mr hellcat on questionable grounds at best there's a fine line between criminalizing innocent behavior and investigating unusual conduct and officer pitts's original reason for stopping mr hellcat was because he had been in the parking lot just as long as the officers had by that logic would the officers not be just as guilty of loitering as mr hellcat regardless of their suspicions the officer's description of george's loitering law was incomplete and appeared as though it was vaguely relayed to mr hellcat on purpose in an effort to quell his suspicion of misconduct there is no denying that much of this interaction's questionable conduct could be attributed to the cryptic and ambiguous language of georgia's loitering law in this interaction perfectly demonstrates how loitering laws translate to being practically enforced on the streets and why they are vehemently opposed by many constitutional scholars and legal professionals mr hellcat gets an a-minus because although he failed to invoke his right to remain silent he remained calm and collected throughout the interaction calmly complied with the officer's orders despite a clear sense of reluctance and for respectfully challenging the legitimacy of the officer's conduct being randomly approached and accused of criminal activity by members of law enforcement is an emotionally taxing experience especially when your actions were overtly innocent but mr hellcat remained calm and compliant throughout the encounter nonetheless the locust grove officers were presented with set of facts that they chose to derive the potential for criminal activity from rather than accepting them for their innocent nature at face value which strongly suggests that some degree of confirmation bias may have been at play confirmation bias is often considered when discussing wrongful convictions and is generally referred to as when a person selectively seeks recalls weighs or interprets information in ways that support their existing beliefs expectations or hypotheses there is an argument to be made that officers often experience confirmation bias as a result of their training and the effects of hyper vigilance and it is possible that constantly being exposed to crime and a sense of potential danger would psychologically predispose an individual to a more suspicious and accusatory mindset setting aside psychological theories mr hellcat conducted himself well during this encounter and i suspect that he had some degree of involvement in officer pitt's termination considering that he did manage to acquire the body camera footage from this encounter be sure to give mr hellcat's channel your support you can find a link in the description below let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to check out my second channel for even more police interaction content [Music] you

Channel: Audit the Audit

Views: 4,181,907

Keywords: amagansett press, first amendment audit, 1st amendment audit, auditing america, news now california, sgv news first, high desert community watch, anselmo morales, photography is not a crime, san joaquin valley transparency, first amendment audit fail, walk of shame, news now houston, police fail, 1st amendment audit fail, public photography, auditor arrested, police brutality, highdesert community watch, pinac news, cops triggered, news now patrick, east hampton

Id: UZLLJs-OREU

Length: 16min 35sec (995 seconds)

Published: Mon Nov 08 2021

Reddit Comments

[u/AutoModerator]

Please do not advocate for harm to come to those featured in the story, video or link submitted, or anyone else. By doing so, you are putting this sub at risk and there is a 100% chance that it will result in you being banned from this sub.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/[deleted]]

[removed]