37231
Post by: d-usa
Teen visiting Houston for dance classes taken into CPS custody Edit: Picture added form second news source so that I'm not "omitting" things in case you don't read the link.  HOUSTON — Landry Thompson loves to dance, and the 13-year-old’s dance instructors get a kick out of it too. “It definitely is life to me,” said Emmanuel Hurd. “It means the world. It’s everything to me.” That’s why the trio from Oklahoma traveled to Houston in the first place. To spend the weekend dancing and training with some of the industry’s best. But that dream of a visit took an ugly turn shortly after leaving the studio Saturday night, when the group, exhausted from their work, stopped off at nearby gas station. “We were on the GPS trying to figure out where the hotel was. And we sat there and we dozed off.” They said before they knew it, the police showed up and surrounded the car. “And so I was kind of freaked out and surprised by it,” said Landry. “They just pulled us out of the car and put our hands behind our backs like we were criminals,” added Hurd. “The officer asked me 'who’s the girl?' and I said 'she’s my student,'” said Hurd. “I told him I had a notarized letter from her parents stating that we have full guardianship over her while we’re here.” All three dancers said say they pleaded with the police repeatedly telling them their story, but that in the end, none of that seemed to matter.” “They still put handcuffs on me and it really scared me,” said Landry. “And they put me in the back of a cop car and I was terrified.” Landry was taken to Child Protective Services. Her mom couldn’t believe it when she found out. “I was horrified,” said Destiny Thompson. “She was with the people I wanted her to be with. She was with people I trusted. And now she was taken away from those people and in a shelter with people I didn’t know.” Thompson claimed she was told she’d have to fly to Houston to get her daughter out. But 11 hours later, following repeated phone calls to officials, Landry was released back into the custody of her instructors. “I would love an apology,” said Destiny. Police officials still aren’t commenting about what happened. The group of dancers plans to return to Oklahoma Monday afternoon.
18698
Post by: kronk
People from OK should stay the feth out of Texas anyway. 
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
54708
Post by: TheCustomLime
Good Ol' Murrica. Jumping to the wrong conclusions and usually the ones that presume the people to be guilty of crimes.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 kronk wrote:People from OK should stay the feth out of Texas anyway.
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
Agreed on both counts. We don't tolerate no Okies in Houston, trying to outflat the flattest city in the USA. Plus her parents should be sued by Destiny's child for IP violations. " They sell one of your brands you break two of theirs. Its our way, the GW way." -not Sean Connery.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
kronk wrote:“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
Classic Kronk
722
Post by: Kanluwen
 Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
21499
Post by: Mr. Burning
kronk wrote:People from OK should stay the feth out of Texas anyway.
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 Kanluwen wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
I hate to say it, but I agree with Kanluwen.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kanluwen wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
I didn't click on the link, I read d-usa's text trusting that nothing had been omitted. Regardless of that I'm not certain why you're pointing out the girl's race. It was of no consequence to me, and not mentioned by me
I agree that it should not have taken as long as it did for the story to be confirmed and the three released.
I think that we'd need to know;
- How long it took before the mother was contacted and spoken with
- How long it usually takes to retrieve a child from CPS during the night, having just been given into their custody
- Other factors that may have slowed down the release
58613
Post by: -Shrike-
 Mr. Burning wrote: kronk wrote:People from OK should stay the feth out of Texas anyway.
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
Predictable as always Kronk, but still funny.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Kanluwen wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
There wasn't any grounds for taking anyone in at all. There wasn't grounds for questioning them. It should have taken exactly -1 seconds, as the incident shouldn't have happened. Like, having a different skin color than the people you are around isn't crime and sure as hell shouldn't be considered suspect behavior.
I'm of mixed ancestry but very fair skinned, a lot of people just assume I'm white. My own mother (as in the lady who shoved me out her vagina), has had deal with with this kind of bull when I was kid. This was disgusting and groundless.
Yikes.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Kanluwen wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
I didn't click on the link, I read d-usa's text trusting that nothing had been omitted.
There is a video of the people involved at the link. If it was a simple picture I would have linked it .
Regardless of that I'm not certain why you're pointing out the girl's race. It was of no consequence to me, and not mentioned by me
The race of the people involved is what makes the story news-worthy, it's also why the title of the thread includes a mention of racist.
I agree that it should not have taken as long as it did for the story to be confirmed and the three released.
I think that we'd need to know;
- How long it took before the mother was contacted and spoken with
Why is there a need to contact the mother when the guardians of the girl are standing right in front of them?
Why was the child taken into custody before anybody even spoke with her mother?
- How long it usually takes to retrieve a child from CPS during the night, having just been given into their custody
- Other factors that may have slowed down the release
Irrelevant considering that she should never have been placed to begin with.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Kanluwen wrote: Dreadclaw69 wrote:-So three people fall asleep in their car at a gas station.
-Police arrive to three people sleeping in a car.
-It turns out that one of the three is a minor
-There is a notarized letter (I'm presuming from an out-of-State notary public) saying that the adults have temporary custody.
-The three are taken into custody/ CPS while the story is confirmed.
-Once confirmed they are released.
White girl with two black men are sleeping in a car.
The fact that there is a notarized letter and presumably contact information for the mother means that it should not have taken 11 hours for the girl to be released from CPS back to the instructors and it should not have taken more than three hours for the "story" to be confirmed.
I didn't click on the link, I read d-usa's text trusting that nothing had been omitted. Regardless of that I'm not certain why you're pointing out the girl's race. It was of no consequence to me, and not mentioned by me
I agree that it should not have taken as long as it did for the story to be confirmed and the three released.
I think that we'd need to know;
- How long it took before the mother was contacted and spoken with
- How long it usually takes to retrieve a child from CPS during the night, having just been given into their custody
- Other factors that may have slowed down the release
The reason I point out the girl's race is that you need to understand that in the Southern United States, racism is still very much alive and well.
221
Post by: Frazzled
And everywhere else in the states.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
kronk wrote:People from OK should stay the feth out of Texas anyway.
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
Agreed on first point...
A bit of contention on the second one: It's not QUITE a stripper name.. I mean, it's got the requisite pronunciation, however, it is spelled with a Y, not an I (little known fact, ALL strippers are either named after cars, or they spell their name ending in I, such as Porsche, Mercedes, Candi, etc.)
45527
Post by: reiner
I'm just impressed that three people fell asleep simultaneously in a fueling station parking lot. They must have been... running on empty?
18698
Post by: kronk
 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
A bit of contention on the second one: It's not QUITE a stripper name.. I mean, it's got the requisite pronunciation, however, it is spelled with a Y, not an I (little known fact, ALL strippers are either named after cars, or they spell their name ending in I, such as Porsche, Mercedes, Candi, etc.)
I have been corrected. My bad!
76800
Post by: DogofWar1
From what I understand the main racial element comes from when the police contacted the family, namely they apparently asked about their white daughter being with two black men, and then criticized them about it.
If not for that, the police could have had some cover, saying they were simply investigating a minor being with two adults, but they went too far.
Of course, the police who were involved in this will likely have nothing happen to them. Maybe a one week suspension, and then right back on the job.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Why hate to say it? -- it's just good old fashioned authentic conservatism (suspicion of state power)! I agree with him, too.
25703
Post by: juraigamer
Dammit texas, not again...
221
Post by: Frazzled
Not again? You live in Virginia home of the CSA. You can make a strong argument to interview them (two adult males/minor child, out of state plates, and yes different ethnicity), but once they've done that then the three should have been cleared.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Well, I mean, it's Texas + CPS. I'd be surprised to hear stuff like this doesn't happen more often.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Pfft this is nothing for Houston PD. They don't get punished for shooting of unarmed BGs. This is cake to that...  At least it wasn't Harris County Deputies. They'd still be in jail with the paperwork of the arrest lost... On the positive they have cool horses downtown.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 DogofWar1 wrote:From what I understand the main racial element comes from when the police contacted the family, namely they apparently asked about their white daughter being with two black men, and then criticized them about it.
If not for that, the police could have had some cover, saying they were simply investigating a minor being with two adults, but they went too far.
Absolute agreement with you there.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
That girll looks like a druggie and the boys look like hoodlums.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Please let this be sarcasm
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
O.o
They are making 13yr olds look like 16yr olds now a days jeez...
221
Post by: Frazzled
From that one pic alone she looks like a potential runaway. What did they look like at the time?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 Frazzled wrote:From that one pic alone she looks like a potential runaway. What did they look like at the time?
I'd imagine that sleeping in their car at a gas station may not have helped
19370
Post by: daedalus
Why?
I see guys in shirts (and a hat) with matching insignias, their pants appear to be pulled up, and their clothes aren't overly baggy. Other than the hat with the bill not bent, that's not far from how I'm dressed when I'm not at work, and I'm an old white guy.
Why does she look like a druggie? Because she's thin and glaring out of the corner of her eye at the camera?
Profiling is interesting to me.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Exactly. Hence an investigatory stop is reasonable. Everything else sounds after sounds...kafkaesque.
*letter. OK could be fake or made by the runaway.
*call to parents with discussion and maybe they fax a pic of the CDL to confirm are parents then ok. However that might entail going downtown. I don't know procedures on that and whether or not runaways would use that tactic.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Frazzled wrote:Exactly. Hence an investigatory stop is reasonable. Everything else sounds after sounds...kafkaesque.
*letter. OK could be fake or made by the runaway.
*call to parents with discussion and maybe they fax a pic of the CDL to confirm are parents then ok. However that might entail going downtown. I don't know procedures on that and whether or not runaways would use that tactic.
Given the sensitivities about child welfare, especially when dealing with individuals from out of State who may become a flight risk, I can understand the police exercising caution. But 11 hours seems somewhat excessive, and the point about them asking the parents about leaving their daughter with two black men seems to be overstepping their bounds.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
Never underestimate the buerocratic nightmare this is the police department
221
Post by: Frazzled
Dreadclaw69 wrote: Frazzled wrote:Exactly. Hence an investigatory stop is reasonable. Everything else sounds after sounds...kafkaesque. *letter. OK could be fake or made by the runaway. *call to parents with discussion and maybe they fax a pic of the CDL to confirm are parents then ok. However that might entail going downtown. I don't know procedures on that and whether or not runaways would use that tactic.
Given the sensitivities about child welfare, especially when dealing with individuals from out of State who may become a flight risk, I can understand the police exercising caution. But 11 hours seems somewhat excessive, and the point about them asking the parents about leaving their daughter with two black men seems to be overstepping their bounds.
Agreed on both counts. Now if this were a bus with the two guys and a troop of dancers the stop would be unwarranted, and what occurred after is weird, but the initial stop...no. Automatically Appended Next Post:  daedalus wrote: Why? I see guys in shirts (and a hat) with matching insignias, their pants appear to be pulled up, and their clothes aren't overly baggy. Other than the hat with the bill not bent, that's not far from how I'm dressed when I'm not at work, and I'm an old white guy. Why does she look like a druggie? Because she's thin and glaring out of the corner of her eye at the camera? Profiling is interesting to me.
You see it in daylight. They were asleep, at night, at a gas station. Having carted around band kids and young kids on a caravan to martial arts tournaments-no that immediately looks suspicious. In fact, all of them "falling asleep" sounds suspicious. This sounds more suspicious then I originally thought actually.
76800
Post by: DogofWar1
I will say that they interviewed them at probably not the best time. I understand they probably wanted clips of them dancing, but with them all sweaty and her hair all messed up from dancing, it doesn't present them in the best light in the video.
Not an excuse for anybody's actions, but an interesting interview choice.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Frazzled wrote:
You see it in daylight. They were asleep, at night, at a gas station. Having carted around band kids and young kids on a caravan to martial arts tournaments-no that immediately looks suspicious. In fact, all of them "falling asleep" sounds suspicious. This sounds more suspicious then I originally thought actually.
Only because that many midget ninjas going somewhere together have got to be up to no good.
You do have a point about all of them "falling asleep". That's odd. I wonder if that's real, or just "journalism".
221
Post by: Frazzled
could be journalism. thats a good point.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
daedalus wrote:Only because that many midget ninjas going somewhere together have got to be up to no good.
You do have a point about all of them "falling asleep". That's odd. I wonder if that's real, or just "journalism".
From the article
“It definitely is life to me,” said Emmanuel Hurd. “It means the world. It’s everything to me.”
That’s why the trio from Oklahoma traveled to Houston in the first place. To spend the weekend dancing and training with some of the industry’s best.
But that dream of a visit took an ugly turn shortly after leaving the studio Saturday night, when the group, exhausted from their work, stopped off at nearby gas station.
“We were on the GPS trying to figure out where the hotel was. And we sat there and we dozed off.”
So the minor with them claimed that they all fell asleep
Somehow all three dozed off and were unable to locate the hotel? I wonder were they able to provide hotel details to the police
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
Around here sleeping in a car is highly suspicious.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Dreadclaw69 wrote:
So the minor with them claimed that they all fell asleep
Somehow all three dozed off and were unable to locate the hotel? I wonder were they able to provide hotel details to the police
Yeah, it is odd. Perhaps when he said "dozed off", they meant as in, to operate a bulldozer?
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Sleeping in a car here is deemed sufficient cause to interview the person to see if they are under the influence of drugs or alchool, something you can be charged with. It's also a good thing cops will check you up, because in the winter, if you need to take a nap in your car, there's a much higher risk of choking on emission gases if you leave the car on, or freezing to death if you don't.
So 'sleeping in a car' might be good cause to check up on the person and make sure they're okay, but it's not, at all sufficient cause to justify suspicion of kidnapping. Not taking her word for it and wasting the time to check on the mother is what I'd call overzealous already, but hey, maybe the cop has a daughter and is generally overzealous when it comes to daughters. Taking everyone in custody, then reprimanding the mother once it's in contact... that's stupid. And racist, in this context. Automatically Appended Next Post:
You usually look like crap after sleeping in a car. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why would this be suspicious at all? Being exhausted after physical activity?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 Kovnik Obama wrote:
Why would this be suspicious at all? Being exhausted after physical activity?
Three people dozing off at the same time strikes me as a little suspicious, if not statistically highly unlikely at best. Add in to that an out of State minor and I can see the police wanting to investigate further.
76800
Post by: DogofWar1
Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
34390
Post by: whembly
DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh...
How do you validate the notarized letter?
How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents?
Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Three people dozing off at the same time strikes me as a little suspicious, if not statistically highly unlikely at best. Add in to that an out of State minor and I can see the police wanting to investigate further.
Huh, must not have made many road trips in your youth then. These people rode from out of State, spent the day training and dancing, and you find suspicious that they dozed off?
16689
Post by: notprop
I know this is an ironically titled thread but Americans should be commended for coming round from their prejudicial past and no longer judging each other based purely upon purely cosmetic and assumed behavioural differences.
Oh er..... how er....... scrub that, as you were.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
DogofWar1 wrote:Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Once the notarized letter was introduced, and authenticated, they should have been sent on their way with directions on how to get to the hotel.
Kovnik Obama wrote:Huh, must not have made many road trips in your youth then. These people rode from out of State, spent the day training and dancing, and you find suspicious that they dozed off?
Plenty thank you. And not a single one can I recall that ended with three people falling asleep at the same moment in time. Much less the driver not having the wherewithal to leave an event early so that (s)he was capable of driving and not being impaired by needing sleep. We also managed it less than a year ago driving for 10+ hours a day between Northern Indiana and Miami. No mass nap time in the car then either.
Yes they rode from out of State, and with the duty of care to take care of the minor who had been given into their care. Sleeping in a car, at a gas station, in a city you are not familiar with, seems to fall a little short of that duty of care.
76800
Post by: DogofWar1
 whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh... How do you validate the notarized letter? How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents? Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Well, getting a letter notarized requires it to be witnessed and usually gets a fancy seal and everything, and if we start questioning the validity of a notarized letter then pretty much every document that has ever been notarized suddenly comes under scrutiny, which raises a whole ton of legal issues that courts probably don't want to go into and shouldn't have to go into because the notary system has worked pretty well for the most part. All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough. The potential results get crazy. If you're driving your daughter, the police could pull you over and detain you, saying your drivers license is probably fake, she's not really your daughter, and the wife you called could just be a co-conspirator. It's crazy, and yet in that case you probably don't even have a notarized letter on you, and many kids don't have picture ID cards on them at all times.
45527
Post by: reiner
DogofWar1 wrote:
All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough.
The potential results get crazy. If you're driving your daughter, the police could pull you over and detain you, saying your drivers license is probably fake, she's not really your daughter, and the wife you called could just be a co-conspirator. It's crazy, and yet in that case you probably don't even have a notarized letter on you, and many kids don't have picture ID cards on them at all times.
This is obvious justification for subdermal completely safe and hack proof RFID implants. You may feel a pinch...
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
DogofWar1 wrote:All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough.
Once the notarized letter was authenticated then that should have satisfied the police. Until it is authenticated it could be a forgery, with all contact details leading to co-conspirators. The police had to exercise due diligence, especially when dealing with a minor and others from out of state who pose a clear flight risk.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Once the notarized letter was introduced, and authenticated, they should have been sent on their way with directions on how to get to the hotel.
No. Once the letter has been shown, you give them direction to the hotel. There is no reason whatsoever to detain them for any lenght of time.
And not a single one can I recall that ended with three people falling asleep at the same moment in time.
Lucky you. It happened to me 3 years ago, and almost killed us all. Not stopping and sleeping it off at a gas station was the dangerous behaviour then.
Much less the driver not having the wherewithal to leave an event early so that (s)he was capable of driving and not being impaired by needing sleep. [...] Yes they rode from out of State, and with the duty of care to take care of the minor who had been given into their care. Sleeping in a car, at a gas station, in a city you are not familiar with, seems to fall a little short of that duty of care.
That's ridiculous, You want to lay blame on the driver for having the presence of mind to realize he's just too tired to drive? Both guardians were with her, from what we know, at all time. Nothing here suggests, at all, a failure in their responsibilities. Otherwise, you'd call Social Services everytime you catch parents with their children sleeping it off during a long trip. You realize your not much safer in a hotel room than in a parked car, in most situations, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Dreadclaw69 wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough.
Once the notarized letter was authenticated then that should have satisfied the police. Until it is authenticated it could be a forgery, with all contact details leading to co-conspirators. The police had to exercise due diligence, especially when dealing with a minor and others from out of state who pose a clear flight risk.
That pretty much defeats the purpose of having a document notarized, just like checking the identity of a Liberty bond bearer defeats the purpose of Liberty bonds.
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
 reiner wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:
All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough.
The potential results get crazy. If you're driving your daughter, the police could pull you over and detain you, saying your drivers license is probably fake, she's not really your daughter, and the wife you called could just be a co-conspirator. It's crazy, and yet in that case you probably don't even have a notarized letter on you, and many kids don't have picture ID cards on them at all times.
This is obvious justification for subdermal completely safe and hack proof RFID implants. You may feel a pinch...
It better come in a suppository if the government is gonna bend my right to privacy over like that 
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote:No. Once the letter has been shown, you give them direction to the hotel. There is no reason whatsoever to detain them for any lenght of time.
It is not Monopoly. It is not a get out of jail free card. I have a car licensed and registered to me but that still gets verified at a traffic stop. This was an out of state minor asleep in a car with two guardians who should have had her safely in a hotel.
Kovnik Obama wrote:Lucky you. It happened to me 3 years ago, and almost killed us all. Not stopping and sleeping it off at a gas station was the dangerous behaviour then.
So because you pushed yourself beyond your limits you advocate doing the same instead of giving yourself enough time to get to your location?
Kovnik Obama wrote:That's ridiculous, You want to lay blame on the driver for having the presence of mind to realize he's just too tired to drive? Both guardians were with her, from what we know, at all time. Nothing here suggests, at all, a failure in their responsibilities. Otherwise, you'd call Social Services everytime you catch parents with their children sleeping it off during a long trip. You realize your not much safer in a hotel room than in a parked car, in most situations, right?
I'll let you actually go back and read what I posted, and not just what you want to take offense to.
221
Post by: Frazzled
whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh... How do you validate the notarized letter? How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents? Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Putting the timeline issue aside. Vallidate by calling and having them fax a family picture and picture of DIL of parent would be one way. Automatically Appended Next Post: DogofWar1 wrote: whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh... How do you validate the notarized letter? How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents? Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Well, getting a letter notarized requires it to be witnessed and usually gets a fancy seal and everything, and if we start questioning the validity of a notarized letter then pretty much every document that has ever been notarized suddenly comes under scrutiny, which raises a whole ton of legal issues that courts probably don't want to go into and shouldn't have to go into because the notary system has worked pretty well for the most part. All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough. The potential results get crazy. If you're driving your daughter, the police could pull you over and detain you, saying your drivers license is probably fake, she's not really your daughter, and the wife you called could just be a co-conspirator. It's crazy, and yet in that case you probably don't even have a notarized letter on you, and many kids don't have picture ID cards on them at all times.
ok, I give you a letter. Its been "notarized." How do you know its authentic, on a Saturday night? please explain this one to me. Also who gets something notarized? Thats weird too. A letter with contact information from the parents would be usually whats done. And why only one student? I am not saying anything is amiss, just that these are weird things to do. I think there's more to this story.
34390
Post by: whembly
Frazzled wrote: whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh...
How do you validate the notarized letter?
How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents?
Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Putting the timeline issue aside.
Vallidate by calling and having them fax a family picture and picture of DIL of parent would be one way.
Yeah... cool.
I'm just not too sure to label this as "racist" or anything.
Incompetence... maybe.
But, you know... human trafficking is thing. Maybe that's why this is a concern.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Dreadclaw69 wrote:It is not Monopoly. It is not a get out of jail free card. I have a car licensed and registered to me but that still gets verified at a traffic stop. This was an out of state minor asleep in a car with two guardians who should have had her safely in a hotel.
No crime was commited. No duty to care were omitted. You're grasping at straws.
So because you pushed yourself beyond your limits you advocate doing the same instead of giving yourself enough time to get to your location?
Really? You've never ever evar been taken by surprise by fatigue after a day of driving and intense physical activity? Never evar? Misgauging how much energy you have left isn't a crime, and it sure as hell isn't failure to care about those under your responsibility. The failure would've been to disregard your fatigue and continue driving despite being in no condition to, endangering the minor, the other passenger, and everyone else using the same roads. But please, keep on defending cops that clearly acted out of racism.
Kovnik Obama wrote:I'll let you actually go back and read what I posted, and not just what you want to take offense to.
And I'll let you work on your reading comprehension skills. Automatically Appended Next Post: whembly wrote:I'm just not too sure to label this as "racist" or anything.
The comment about the parent being irresponsible for leaving her daughter with two black men makes this a clear cut case of racism. Two white adults, one man and a women, would've been in the car, and I'm ready to bet you anything that it wouldn't have devolved this way.
But, you know... human trafficking is thing. Maybe that's why this is a concern.
And what exactly about two men and a girl sleeping in a parked car suggest anything about human trafficking? Nothing. But two black men with a white girl? Suddenly alarms buzzes off, and what would be perfectly acceptable proof of guardianship (and, according to the U.S. Passport guide, not even a required document) is suspicious.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:
DogofWar1 wrote: whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh...
How do you validate the notarized letter?
By looking at the seal and signature placed by the notary public?
How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents?
Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Well, getting a letter notarized requires it to be witnessed and usually gets a fancy seal and everything, and if we start questioning the validity of a notarized letter then pretty much every document that has ever been notarized suddenly comes under scrutiny, which raises a whole ton of legal issues that courts probably don't want to go into and shouldn't have to go into because the notary system has worked pretty well for the most part.
All three people were corroborating the story, they had a notarized letter corroborating their story, and the parents they called on the contact number corroborated their story. If that's not enough, then nothing will be enough.
The potential results get crazy. If you're driving your daughter, the police could pull you over and detain you, saying your drivers license is probably fake, she's not really your daughter, and the wife you called could just be a co-conspirator. It's crazy, and yet in that case you probably don't even have a notarized letter on you, and many kids don't have picture ID cards on them at all times.
ok, I give you a letter. Its been "notarized." How do you know its authentic, on a Saturday night?
please explain this one to me.
The fancy seal placed on there by the notary? Together with their license number?
Also who gets something notarized? Thats weird too. A letter with contact information from the parents would be usually whats done.
And why only one student?
Well, if you are giving legal guardianship to another person that is usually the kind of document that you would get notarized and getting it notarized is probably a requirement for it to be valid in many states.
They didn't just give them a letter saying "hey guys, it's cool that our white daughter is with these two black guys, totally legit, no problem!" Heck, trying to prevent their daughter from having to go into the custody of child protective services was probably the last thing on their mind when they gave guardianship to these guys.
I'm just guessing, but based on my background I am guessing that the parents knew that their daughter is going to a very high impact event with her instructors and an event like that includes a likely risk of injury. If her daughter was injured and required treatment then nobody would be able to consent to that treatment since she is a minor unless these guys had temporary guardianship of her. The guardianship also allows these guys to sign any consents and release of liability papers for the actual event itself.
I am not saying anything is amiss, just that these are weird things to do.
Not weird at all and it is actually a sign that the girls parents and these two guys are very responsible and very well prepared for what they did.
I think there's more to this story.
I really don't think that there is more to "young white girl in car with black guys", I wish I was wrong though.
25990
Post by: Chongara
I'm so glad everyone here is so widely in support of the right of the police to randomly pull you out of your car, demand you identify yourself and your passengers as well as why you're with your passengers, and take you in if they don't like your story or feel your paperwork is inadequate with no cause except for the fact the police decided it was something they thought they should do.
Some people might see that as government overreach or a violation of their rights, but not this crowd I guess.
You know I think from now on when cops see people in hunting gear, they should pull them over. If they have any guns in transport they should take their guns and put them in holding while the do an investigation to prove they aren't bank robbers. After all that hunter thing is probably just a cover and a total red flag. The licenses are fake or whatever too, until proven otherwise.
75444
Post by: Allod
kronk wrote:
“I would love an apology,” said Destiny.
Yes. Your parents should apologize for giving you a stripper name.
Reading this while drunk and exalting it immediately.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Chongara wrote:ISome people might see that as government overreach or a violation of their rights, but not this crowd I guess.
Yeah this whole thread has been a little mind boggling, with the exertions some people are going through to try and provide an alternate explanation other than the most obvious one.
221
Post by: Frazzled
whembly wrote: Frazzled wrote: whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh...
How do you validate the notarized letter?
How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents?
Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Putting the timeline issue aside.
Vallidate by calling and having them fax a family picture and picture of DIL of parent would be one way.
Yeah... cool.
I'm just not too sure to label this as "racist" or anything.
Incompetence... maybe.
But, you know... human trafficking is thing. Maybe that's why this is a concern.
Not disagreeing in any way.
Moral of the story. Don't "fall asleep" in a gas station.
On a side, where are her parents? Why were they ok with this in the first place?
76800
Post by: DogofWar1
Police are allowed to approach you and talk to you in terms of consensual encounters. If they have some suspicion that something might be amiss, they are allowed to do some further questioning, as per a Terry stop. I think they had enough info to at least knock on the door and see what was up, what with three people sleeping in a car at a gas station, one of whom appeared to, and was, a minor.
They aren't supposed to go beyond that though. Police have set limitations on how far they are supposed to go, and they didn't have probable cause at any point, and the introduction of the notarized letter should have ended it there.
And notarized letters are different from normal letters in that they must be witnessed and signed by a third party official. Usually there's a seal involved. Handing someone a letter with some random signatures isn't notarized, there's more to it, usually involving a fee.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote: whembly wrote: Frazzled wrote: whembly wrote: DogofWar1 wrote:Yeah, I'd be willing to praise the police for checking on them, and even for making sure she was with guardians. That's good police work considering they were dozing off and she was a minor. Once the notarized letter was introduced though, they should have wished them a nice night and let them be on their way.
Eh...
How do you validate the notarized letter?
How do you validate that the person on the phone is that minor's parents?
Now I'm wondering that the 11 hour figure, in the middle of the night, isn't excessive.
Putting the timeline issue aside.
Vallidate by calling and having them fax a family picture and picture of DIL of parent would be one way.
Yeah... cool.
I'm just not too sure to label this as "racist" or anything.
Incompetence... maybe.
But, you know... human trafficking is thing. Maybe that's why this is a concern.
Not disagreeing in any way.
Moral of the story. Don't "fall asleep" in a gas station.
At least if you are black with a white woman in your car.
On a side, where are her parents?
In Oklahoma.
Why were they ok with this in the first place?
Why shouldn't they be okay with her going on a trip with her instructors?
221
Post by: Frazzled
DogofWar1 wrote:Police are allowed to approach you and talk to you in terms of consensual encounters. If they have some suspicion that something might be amiss, they are allowed to do some further questioning, as per a Terry stop. I think they had enough info to at least knock on the door and see what was up, what with three people sleeping in a car at a gas station, one of whom appeared to, and was, a minor. They aren't supposed to go beyond that though. Police have set limitations on how far they are supposed to go, and they didn't have probable cause at any point, and the introduction of the notarized letter should have ended it there. And notarized letters are different from normal letters in that they must be witnessed and signed by a third party official. Usually there's a seal involved. Handing someone a letter with some random signatures isn't notarized, there's more to it, usually involving a fee.
Everyone on the planet knows what a notarized letter is. That doesn't mean gak frankly, to prove its veracity. As we were there we don't know what else was going on. Having a minor asleep in a gas station alone is sufficient to give pause. Automatically Appended Next Post:
At least if you are black with a white woman in your car.
How about a minor with two adult males in a city known for human trafficking? Alternatively you could switch the ethnicities and have the same issues On a side, where are her parents?
In Oklahoma.
Exactly. This isn't a school sanctioned function. She's supposedly the only student going. Thats..weird. Also, did I mention Oklahoma is really flat yet? Why were they ok with this in the first place?
Why shouldn't they be okay with her going on a trip with her instructors?
Because , as an actual parent of a daughter not too different of an age, that screams danger. Something like that one of the family should be there. I'll note on our mission trips we had at least two adults, multiple kids and specified sleeping locations. There were forms, contact information, the works. Band same thing (plus an 18 wheeler with the school band logo and about 20 parents). Martial arts, thats closer but again we were carting around more than one kid in a tournament and we weren't eight shades of stupid as to end up sleeping in a truck stop.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Ouze wrote:Chongara wrote:ISome people might see that as government overreach or a violation of their rights, but not this crowd I guess.
Yeah this whole thread has been a little mind boggling, with the exertions some people are going through to try and provide an alternate explanation other than the most obvious one.
What do you mean? Automatically Appended Next Post: Frazzled wrote: Why shouldn't they be okay with her going on a trip with her instructors?
Because , as an actual parent of a daughter not too different of an age, that screams danger. Something like that one of the family should be there.
gak... even if the minor was a boy... it's still weird.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
whembly wrote: Why shouldn't they be okay with her going on a trip with her instructors?
Frazzled wrote:Because , as an actual parent of a daughter not too different of an age, that screams danger. Something like that one of the family should be there.
Jesus Christ. And to say my parents have left my 12 years old sister go around the world on a skiing trip with only a male instructor. Truly, I have horrible parents that should never have had our custody in the first place. Circle harder, helicopter.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Actually yea, thats pretty damn stupid.
By safety policy we wouldn't be able to do that on a church or school trip. So yea, pretty dumb.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Yes, letting your daughter travel the world, visiting a half-dozen of the greatest mountains there is, doing what she loves the most, with an olympic gold-medal owner, is pretty damn stupid.
Especially since she's become chief ski instructor since then.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Glad it worked out for her. Others have not been so lucky.
79398
Post by: jamesk1973
Actually the "seals" are gak and easily reproduced.
The real information if the notary's registry number next to their signature. Even that is not enough the information on the document must match the log entry in the notary's, well, logbook.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
jamesk1973 wrote:Actually the "seals" are gak and easily reproduced.
The real information if the notary's registry number next to their signature. Even that is not enough the information on the document must match the log entry in the notary's, well, logbook.
The point is, having the paper notarized isn't required.
Non-notarized travel consent papers in Texas are sufficient in order to have the guardian take decisions pertaining to a child's medical care. A notarized version wouldn't be enough to do the most essential thing a letter of consent is supposed to do, i.e. designate the guardian?
5470
Post by: sebster
Having had to sit there while my wife watches So You Think You Can Dance or any of those other dancing shows I'm in favour of arresting each and every dance instructor.
In other news, police will come and look at what's going on when something is slightly different. Most times they'll ask a couple of questions and move on, but if your personal circumstances differ in anyway from the norm then they'll start digging in much greater detail. And a basic reality is that inter-racial groups differ slightly from the norm.
Years ago I was moving out of a house in the late hours of the night, having finished one contract and being set to start another one the next day I was pressed for time to get my crap from one country town to another. As you might expect when there's someone taking start out of a house and putting it in his car at about 11.30 at night, the police came by. I explained the situation to them, and after a few minutes they left.
Thing is, I'm the whitest guy you've ever seen, and couldn't look more middle class. But if I was black there's no doubt they would have taken a much closer look.
And that's the reality that a lot of people live with every day - they come under more suspicion for things they have no control over, like to colour of their skin.
18698
Post by: kronk
Hi! Remember me?
221
Post by: Frazzled
The tie was a dead giveaway. Never trust anyone in a tie.
Or lederhosen.
Or wearing a clownsuit.
Or driving a Prius.
Its said Hitler liked to wear ties in a clownsuit while driving a prius. He always wore lederhosen under his clownsuit.
1206
Post by: Easy E
I have slept many times in my car on long road trips. I have frequently been awakened by the Police with my wife and daughter in the car.
I have never been arrested, detained, asked to step out of the car, or anything. Just a few questions about what is going on and occassionally asked to move along.
This case seems a bit wierd to me.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 Easy E wrote:I have slept many times in my car on long road trips. I have frequently been awakened by the Police with my wife and daughter in the car.
I have never been arrested, detained, asked to step out of the car, or anything. Just a few questions about what is going on and occassionally asked to move along.
This case seems a bit wierd to me.
Were you with another adult male with a minor child?
1206
Post by: Easy E
No, an adult female with a minor child.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Thats a major difference.
25990
Post by: Chongara
This line of thinking goes very ugly places.
33125
Post by: Seaward
Easy E wrote:I have slept many times in my car on long road trips. I have frequently been awakened by the Police with my wife and daughter in the car.
I have never been arrested, detained, asked to step out of the car, or anything. Just a few questions about what is going on and occassionally asked to move along.
This case seems a bit wierd to me.
Where do you park? I've slept a lot of weird places, but a parked car has not been one of them. Perhaps I'm too paranoid that I'll wake up to some homeless guy washing my window with his dong.
221
Post by: Frazzled
It does and thats why they were interrogated.
34439
Post by: Formosa
Wait.. America isn't racist anymore?
35006
Post by: Medium of Death
Post segregated America would have been a better title.
25990
Post by: Chongara
The fact you so grossly misinterpreted what I mean by "ugly places" only serves to reinforce the point I was making.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Chongara wrote:
The fact you so grossly misinterpreted what I mean by "ugly places" only serves to reinforce the point I was making.
Well in the spirit of your post I'd have to say the thinking of your posts is going to very ugly places.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
How so?? While many of us are "normal" people who don't necessarily think down those roads, depending on your region of the US, many LEOs still think that way. Occasionally they may think that way for a reason based in reality (such as prior cases, etc), but certainly many people would see white girl with 2 dark skinned dudes... must be crime, it all ultimately comes down to area, time of day, region, etc.
Although... why anyone would go to a "Dance Class" in Houston (or anywhere for that matter) is beyond ridiculous.
34390
Post by: whembly
Have we heard the accounts from the police side?
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
That's not true either as their still is segregation in the US (ghettos, Indian reserves, etc) but then again the original title is meant to be sarcastic so I guess your example would work too. 
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
I want the polices side aswell TBH
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Well, it is in the minds of bigots and prejudiced people everywhere.
''If we let the government search every single house and personal computer, we're bound to catch all child porn peddlers. You wouldn't want to defend child porn peddlers, now would you? So you won't have a problem with this major violation of your rights!'' = everyone ITT defending the cops.
37231
Post by: d-usa
The title is tongue-in-cheek and based on a recent RNC tweet...
18698
Post by: kronk
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Although... why anyone would go to a "Dance Class" in Houston (or anywhere for that matter) is beyond ridiculous.
Houston is was the coolest place on Earth.
But I moved away 4 months ago... 
221
Post by: Frazzled
Kovnik Obama wrote:
Well, it is in the minds of bigots and prejudiced people everywhere.
''If we let the government search every single house and personal computer, we're bound to catch all child porn peddlers. You wouldn't want to defend child porn peddlers, now would you? So you won't have a problem with this major violation of your rights!'' = everyone ITT defending the cops.
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you. Automatically Appended Next Post: kronk wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Although... why anyone would go to a "Dance Class" in Houston (or anywhere for that matter) is beyond ridiculous.
Houston is was the coolest place on Earth.
But I moved away 4 months ago...
Hey we're still the second flatest though! 
18698
Post by: kronk
Flattest or fattest? Because I dated some girls that collectively would have kept Houston out of the first one...
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
Frazzled wrote:Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Hey! They call it 'agave' down there
221
Post by: Frazzled
 Alfndrate wrote: Frazzled wrote:Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Hey! They call it 'agave' down there
Yes the sacred agave plant, almost as sacred as the plant that brings us the sacred chocolate and the sacred sugar. mmmm
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Frazzled wrote:
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation.
And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation.
And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
Reported again.
two adults with an obvious minor
asleep at night in a gas station
out of state plates
Seriously?
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote: Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation.
And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
Reported again.
two adults with an obvious minor
asleep at night in a gas station
out of state plates
Seriously?
Which is fine for the initial knock on the window and the "what's going on" questions.
After documents are produced and everybody is on the same page it's nothing but police overreach.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote: Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote: Reported for the nice attack. If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation. And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
Reported again. two adults with an obvious minor asleep at night in a gas station out of state plates Seriously?
Which is fine for the initial knock on the window and the "what's going on" questions. After documents are produced and everybody is on the same page it's nothing but police overreach.
I'm not disagreeing. Its the "everybody is on the same page" timeline part thats the difficulty. When is everybody on the same page? We don't have the police siude of this. They may have been trying to reach the parents (it was at night) and didn't get a ahold of the parents and sent the kid to somewhere else until then, then it reached byzantine cps levels. 11 hours sounds bad until you think about when the initial incident occurred. That could be next morning. I'm back on the "is it reasonable to stop them in the first place" point, and trying not to be called a bigot by someone who clearly doesn't understand why New Mexican maple syrup is superior, Canada inferior.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Frazzled wrote: Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation.
And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
Reported again.
two adults with an obvious minor
asleep at night in a gas station
out of state plates
Seriously?
So. Suppose it was a married couple & their daughter in a car. What sort of documentation should they be carrying with them to prove it's their kid?
221
Post by: Frazzled
A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Frazzled wrote:A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
To clarify. The married couple is two adult males.
34390
Post by: whembly
Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote: Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Reported for the nice attack.
If you don't think there's a difference between a man/woman and child ina vehicle and two adult males in a vehicle with a minor child I have some New Mexico maple syrup to sell you.
Yes, the difference being that in one case, two of the adults are male. That's the difference in its entirety. 25% of stereotypical kidnappings (strangers and non-family acquaintances) are committed and planned by females, so the presence of a woman does not provide any good indication toward the situation.
And I'm not going to apologize for noticing and mentionning your flaws of character. If you think that there being two men with a minor is probable cause for detaining them, when they have all the proper documentation, when the kid corroborates the story, when there's always the possibility of calling the hotel to check if they had reservations and under which names, and how many rooms were booked, etc... then yes, you are a bigot and prejudiced.
Reported again.
two adults with an obvious minor
asleep at night in a gas station
out of state plates
Seriously?
So. Suppose it was a married couple & their daughter in a car. What sort of documentation should they be carrying with them to prove it's their kid?
Look... I'm a single dad with two boyz...
When I picked up my boarding pass at the airport, I had to show the birth certificates for both boyz. Even then, the attendents/TSA security folks went out of their way to talk to the boys to gadge their reactions. To ensure that they are indeed my spawn.
Having said that... I'd still like to hear/read the police side of the story.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
To clarify. The married couple is two adult males.
Not in Texas they aren't.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Frazzled wrote:Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
To clarify. The married couple is two adult males.
Not in Texas they aren't.
Out of state plates, remember? Let's say... Massachusetts or Delaware, or Minnesota or... take your pick I guess.
So anyway, let's not dodge the line of inquiry. Married couple their daughter, both Men. How do you advocate proceeding Frazzled?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
To clarify. The married couple is two adult males.
Not in Texas they aren't.
Out of state plates, remember? Let's say... Massachusetts or Delaware, or Minnesota or... take your pick I guess.
So anyway, let's not dodge the line of inquiry. Married couple their daughter. How do you advocate proceeding Frazzled?
Still illegal. Further, no homosexual couple has been married for 13 years. You're stretching like a stretchman action figure. Time to come back to reality.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Frazzled wrote:Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote:A married couple and their daughter are not out of the ordinary.
TWO ADULT MALES AND A MINOR WHO IS NOT RELATED TO THEM is out the ordinary. Combined with the location, time, and out of state plate, its more than sufficient for an investigatory stop.
To clarify. The married couple is two adult males.
Not in Texas they aren't.
Out of state plates, remember? Let's say... Massachusetts or Delaware, or Minnesota or... take your pick I guess.
So anyway, let's not dodge the line of inquiry. Married couple their daughter. How do you advocate proceeding Frazzled?
Still illegal. Further, no homosexual couple has been married for 13 years. You're stretching like a stretchman action figure. Time to come back to reality.
Time to answer the question Frazzled. Let's say they miraculously found somebody to be a surrogate before they got married. Or let's just say the kid's nine, if that really makes you feel better.
How do you advocate the police go forward?
221
Post by: Frazzled
Stop them and investigate. Once the investigation is complete move on.
Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:
Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know?
Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
221
Post by: Frazzled
d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know?
Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go.
in the original issue its more difficult because she could be a runaway type situation, hence the need to contact the parents first. If you're really paranoid you get them to fax a pic of their id and a pic of the kid to verify. Everything beyond that is a different deal.
Now if the minor was old enough to have an ID herself that also would have greatly helped matters.
25990
Post by: Chongara
Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know?
Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go.
in the original issue its more difficult because she could be a runaway type situation, hence the need to contact the parents first. If you're really paranoid you get them to fax a pic of their id and a pic of the kid to verify. Everything beyond that is a different deal.
Now if the minor was old enough to have an ID herself that also would have greatly helped matters.
Would you advocate these same steps as the default course of action in the case of heterosexual couple?
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote:
Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know?
Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go.
So you are relying 100% on what the people say, and you will believe them if they fit your standard of what a family should look like.
Because you can have three people giving the exact same story and provide a legal document that states that she is with her guardians but that doesn't mean anything according to you.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote: Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know? Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go. in the original issue its more difficult because she could be a runaway type situation, hence the need to contact the parents first. If you're really paranoid you get them to fax a pic of their id and a pic of the kid to verify. Everything beyond that is a different deal. Now if the minor was old enough to have an ID herself that also would have greatly helped matters.
Would you advocate these same steps as the default course of action in the case of heterosexual couple?
Why not? If they have suspicion to stop the vehicle based on that then cool. Hell I've been pulled over on the pretense that they said they thought I was passing a beer to a child when I was passing a water bottle back. Did the IG check handed them the bottle to check and boom out in five. It doesn't have to be a major deal. Its the fact it was in this case that is troublesome. Automatically Appended Next Post: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote: Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know? Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go.
So you are relying 100% on what the people say, and you will believe them if they fit your standard of what a family should look like.
no, you've stepped over that. I'm relying on them querying the child separately. In the original instance they can't say they are her parents, therefor there is a potential issue of her being a runaway. You can separately quiz the parents and the child for common items and confirm the munchkin is their child. Come on people seriously? Here's some questions for those tryig to bait me that they could separately ask the parents and the kids: *whats your parent's birthdays? Whats the rugrat's birthday? *where do you live at? *what is your phone number (to all three)? *what school does the rugrat go to? If these match, well you're on your way. if not then further investigation is needed, and it takes that long. The problem with the OP is that it sounds like the no one called the parents initially and everything went coockoo.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote:No crime was commited. No duty to care were omitted. You're grasping at straws.
And you're talking out your hat.
Duty of care can also be a civil standard (commonly used in tort law). Saying that the adults who had temporary custody of the minor, and therefore had a duty of care towards her is not inaccurate. Also does sleeping rough in a car at a petrol station constitute vagrancy, or a related criminal offence?
Kovnik Obama wrote:Really? You've never ever evar been taken by surprise by fatigue after a day of driving and intense physical activity? Never evar? Misgauging how much energy you have left isn't a crime, and it sure as hell isn't failure to care about those under your responsibility. The failure would've been to disregard your fatigue and continue driving despite being in no condition to, endangering the minor, the other passenger, and everyone else using the same roads. But please, keep on defending cops that clearly acted out of racism.
Have I been sleepy before? Yes. If I have to get someone from Point A to Point B do I ensure that I am in a fit state to do so? Yes. Do I believe that three people suddenly fall asleep at the same time in a car, with no warning, as they try to find a hotel on GPS? Absolutely not.
Again, not budgeting enough time to get from the event to the hotel and thus having a minor sleep in car, at a gas station, in a city that they are not familiar with is leaving them open to all sorts of potential problems with endangering the welfare of the child.
The reason given for their sleeping in the car was not that they felt sleepy and decided to pull over, or find alternate accommodation. Their excuse was, in their own words, that they spontaneously and simultaneously fell asleep while getting directions.
And I am not defending anyone acting out of racism, as much as you may want to sling mud. What I have said, and consistently said, is that the police had reason to investigate further. That is it. The delays and the alleged conversation with the parents is not something that I have defended. So trying to say that I am defending racists is nothing but an unwarranted act of bad faith.
I have read and responded to each of your points, you have managed to misinterpret my posts and distorted them to suit your own ends.
- Their reason for being found sleeping in a car was that they just all fell asleep at the same time while looking for directions. Not once did they say that they were too tired to continue the journey, nor did they attempt to find alternate accommodation - which is what a reasonable adult would have done when being given charge of a minor, and travelling to another state that they are not familiar with
- "[C]all Social Services everytime you catch parents with their children sleeping it off during a long trip". Do you mean if they child is sleeping in the back as the parent drives, or have the parents decided that they are best served sleeping it off with the child in the parking lot of a gas station they have probably never been to before
- "You realize your not much safer in a hotel room than in a parked car, in most situations, right?". I really want to see a source for this outlandish claim
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:Chongara wrote: Frazzled wrote: d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote: Your example is actually easier as they are the legal parents.
How do you know? Don't you have to verify the birth certificate that they should be carrying?
I was thinking more they check ids, listen to story, take kid aside and ask kid if they are the parents. Kid says yes they're free to go. in the original issue its more difficult because she could be a runaway type situation, hence the need to contact the parents first. If you're really paranoid you get them to fax a pic of their id and a pic of the kid to verify. Everything beyond that is a different deal. Now if the minor was old enough to have an ID herself that also would have greatly helped matters.
Would you advocate these same steps as the default course of action in the case of heterosexual couple?
Why not? If they have suspicion to stop the vehicle based on that then cool. Hell I've been pulled over on the pretense that they said they thought I was passing a beer to a child when I was passing a water bottle back. Did the IG check handed them the bottle to check and boom out in five. It doesn't have to be a major deal. Its the fact it was in this case that is troublesome.
Nobody disagrees that the initial stop was not troublesome. It's the actions after, which you appear to justify. Even more so if you are okay with a scenario where a man & woman don't warrant further questioning if all three give the same story, but two men and a child giving the same story while in the presence of a legal document justifying her being with these two adults should require further questioning and police work simply because to you "it's not normal". Edit: The problem with the OP is that it sounds like the no one called the parents initially and everything went coockoo.
Her guardians were standing right there, right next to her, the cops were already talking to her legal guardians. There was zero reason to call her parents because her guardians were already there.
221
Post by: Frazzled
It's the actions after, which you appear to justify.
Thats not correct. I am not. I noted some scenarios where that could be the case. That however is trumped if the report that when they got in touch with the parent they berated her.
Even more so if you are okay with a scenario where a man & woman don't warrant further questioning if all three give the same story, but two men and a child giving the same story while in the presence of a legal document justifying her being with these two adults should require further questioning and police work simply because to you "it's not normal".
No again you completely missed it. IN the one instance they are parents. In the second instance they are not.
Do I trust a notarized instrument? Nah, because I wouldn;'t know what an Okie notarized one looks like. Would you? As a cop going CYA I wouldn't rely on it solely.
I'm just saying a call to the parents would have taken care of it. COmplications with that could have presented a problem but if no complications then everything else after the quick stop are suspect. Jeez
47598
Post by: motyak
*whats your parent's birthdays? Whats the rugrat's birthday?
Good thing I was never asked that as a kid to prove my parents hadn't kidnapped me, I relied on one parent telling me when it was the other's birthday...still do. Ditto the phone number, in high school I once gave a girl my neighbours phone number instead of my own...that was awkward.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote:Well, it is in the minds of bigots and prejudiced people everywhere.
''If we let the government search every single house and personal computer, we're bound to catch all child porn peddlers. You wouldn't want to defend child porn peddlers, now would you? So you won't have a problem with this major violation of your rights!'' = everyone ITT defending the cops.
Beautiful..... agree with me or you're a bigot? And before I was an apologist for racists? Are you trying to have an actual discussion here, or are you just happy to throw personal abuse at others in this thread?
And police investigating people asleep in a car at a gas station, with a minor child who they have temporary custody of =/= allowing the government unfettered access to your personal records. To say that the two things are a little different is grossly understating the fact.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Lets flip this. Suppose she was a runaway. Supposed they did only a cursory stop and let them go. Now suppose she ends up dead shortly after?
Think that doesn't happen? It did with Jeffrey Dahmer.
A little more investigation can reduce this risk without unue burden. What actually occurred appears to have gone beyond that.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Frazzled wrote:Lets flip this. Suppose she was a runaway. Supposed they did only a cursory stop and let them go. Now suppose she ends up dead shortly after?
Think that doesn't happen? It did with Jeffrey Dahmer.
A little more investigation can reduce this risk without unue burden. What actually occurred appears to have gone beyond that.
I think that the stop was fine, and that once the notarized letter was validated, and/or contact made with the parents that the three should have been sent on their merry way.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:Lets flip this. Suppose she was a runaway. Supposed they did only a cursory stop and let them go. Now suppose she ends up dead shortly after?
Think that doesn't happen? It did with Jeffrey Dahmer.
Did Jeffrey Dahmer have notarized legal documents granting him temporary legal guardianship of the girl and produced said documents to the police?
Did the boy that was with Dahmer collaborate his story?
Where there witnesses at the gas station that tried to give the police a different story than the two guys and the girl?
221
Post by: Frazzled
I think that the stop was fine, and that once the notarized letter was validated, and/or contact made with the parents that the three should have been sent on their merry way.
Exactly. I'm not arguing for anything more then that. I could see how they could have fallen into the bureaucracy which caused a lot the delay, but it all appears troubling after the initial stop. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Did Jeffrey Dahmer have notarized legal documents granting him temporary legal guardianship of the girl and produced said documents to the police?
***They said they were couple. A "document" doesn't mean anything if she's a runaway as she could have faked it, hence the need to call the parents if there are still suspsicions. Once thats checked out it shouldn't have been an issue. Again that could have been handled right there with a phone call and asking those Qs UI submitted earlier.
Did the boy that was with Dahmer collaborate his story?
***he was drunk
Where there witnesses at the gas station that tried to give the police a different story than the two guys and the girl?
***Facts not in evidence.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:I think that the stop was fine, and that once the notarized letter was validated, and/or contact made with the parents that the three should have been sent on their merry way.
Exactly. I'm not arguing for anything more then that. I could see how they could have fallen into the bureaucracy which caused a lot the delay, but it all appears troubling after the initial stop.
And how would you validate the exact same scenario if the people involved were a woman and a man, with a child without an ID?
Because your average family will have less legal documentation in their possession verifying that the child is with them legally than these guys had.
Maybe they have their Oklahoma birth certificate with them. But the cops won't know what an Oklahoma birth certificate looks like, so better take the child away and place her in protective custody until some Oklahoma offices open in the morning...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Frazzled wrote:
Did Jeffrey Dahmer have notarized legal documents granting him temporary legal guardianship of the girl and produced said documents to the police?
***They said they were couple. A "document" doesn't mean anything if she's a runaway as she could have faked it, hence the need to call the parents if there are still suspsicions. Once thats checked out it shouldn't have been an issue. Again that could have been handled right there with a phone call and asking those Qs UI submitted earlier.
Did the boy that was with Dahmer collaborate his story?
***he was drunk
Where there witnesses at the gas station that tried to give the police a different story than the two guys and the girl?
***Facts not in evidence.
So it's nothing like what happened here? Glad we got that straightened out.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Frazzled wrote:Exactly. I'm not arguing for anything more then that. I could see how they could have fallen into the bureaucracy which caused a lot the delay, but it all appears troubling after the initial stop.
Likewise. The bureaucracy thing is why I asked back on Page 1 how long it takes to get a minor back from CPS. Anything social services wise always seems to take an absurd amount of time, and whether other factors may have slowed down the process (more urgent matters needing the police's attention for example). Is 11 hours overnight atypical to retrieve a child from CPS?
221
Post by: Frazzled
And how would you validate the exact same scenario if the people involved were a woman and a man, with a child without an ID?
We just went through this. I'll quote. “You can separately quiz the parents and the child for common items and confirm the munchkin is their child. Come on people seriously? Here's some questions for those tryig to bait me that they could separately ask the parents and the kids: *whats your parent's birthdays? Whats the rugrat's birthday? *where do you live at? *what is your phone number (to all three)? *what school does the rugrat go to? If these match, well you're on your way. if not then further investigation is needed, and it takes that long.” Its like you people have never been pulled over before speeding, gun running, or anything fun...
Is 11 hours overnight atypical to retrieve a child from CPS?
On a weekend, with the clock starting at night, I'd bet thats not unusual. Maybe even quick. I know if arrested for something, you're likely not out intil the next day or even that Monday.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:
And how would you validate the exact same scenario if the people involved were a woman and a man, with a child without an ID?
We just went through this. I'll quote.
“You can separately quiz the parents and the child for common items and confirm the munchkin is their child. Come on people seriously?
Here's some questions for those tryig to bait me that they could separately ask the parents and the kids:
*whats your parent's birthdays? Whats the rugrat's birthday?
*where do you live at?
*what is your phone number (to all three)?
*what school does the rugrat go to?
If these match, well you're on your way. if not then further investigation is needed, and it takes that long.”
Its like you people have never been pulled over before speeding, gun running, or anything fun...
And they asked lots of questions to these three people. Questions that all three of them were able to answer the same.
But they are not "normal" to you.
So normal people get away by giving the same answers and are not even required to provide any kind of legal proof that they have a legal relationship to the child.
But not-normal people giving the same answer and having a legal document are not good enough for you.
I mean, it's not like a runaway with a man and a woman couldn't rehearse these questions and answers...
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Frazzled wrote:On a weekend, with the clock starting at night, I'd bet thats not unusual. Maybe even quick.
I know if arrested for something, you're likely not out intil the next day or even that Monday.
That's what I'd thought myself, most posts like that have on call staff. But the resources can very easily be stretched thin which may have been the case on the night in question. I wasn't sure if anyone who works in the field (or has experience in similar situations) could also shed some light on it.
221
Post by: Frazzled
You're right. You're some completely correct no person should ever be stopped for any reason. In fact the cops should be executed in the public square for their evil.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote:You're right. You're some completely correct no person should ever be stopped for any reason. In fact the cops should be executed in the public square for their evil.
If you want to pretend that this is what I am saying, then go ahead and play with T-Bone and crown yourself as the king of winning internet debates.
Or you can admit to your double standard:
It's okay for the police to not detain a minor child with two adults as long as they can answer a magical set of questions even if they don't have any legal paperwork in their possession proving that they have custody or guardianship of that child as long as the two adults fit your preconceived notion of "normal".
And
It's okay for the police to detain a minor child with two adult even after they answered a magical set of questions and they have legal paperwork in their possession proving that they have guardianship as long as the two adults fit your preconceived notion of "not normal".
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
No.
[
This is also to what I was refering to.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Saying that the adults who had temporary custody of the minor, and therefore had a duty of care towards her is not inaccurate.
Indeed it isn't. That is not what I contest.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Also does sleeping rough in a car at a petrol station constitute vagrancy,
No :
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vagrancy wrote:vagrancy n. moving about without a means to support oneself, without a permanent home, and relying on begging. Until recently it was a considered a minor crime (misdemeanor) in many states. Constitutionally it is evident that being poor is not a crime. The same is true of "loitering."
If it did, why weren't they charged with it?
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Have I been sleepy before? Yes. If I have to get someone from Point A to Point B do I ensure that I am in a fit state to do so? Yes. Do I believe that three people suddenly fall asleep at the same time in a car, with no warning, as they try to find a hotel on GPS? Absolutely not.
You realize this is one sentence that was communicated to us by a secondary source? That the story told to the cops was probably longer, in more details that simply didn't have to be reproduced in the news? You are grasping at straws, and are ridiculously trying to justify your doubts. Evidently, since this entire story was corroborated by the parents and no one was charged with anything, it just happened that they were all really tired and just decided to doze off.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:Again, not budgeting enough time to get from the event to the hotel and thus having a minor sleep in car, at a gas station, in a city that they are not familiar with is leaving them open to all sorts of potential problems with endangering the welfare of the child.
Not if they remain in presence of the child at all times. Seriously, what the hell is up with this insane level of paranoia? She has two guardians less than a feet away from her. I don't know if the gas station was 24h, but if it was, they were a few seconds away from a phone.
And this is hilariously sad, since the only trouble they had was being arrested without motive.
It's not really a question of statistical studies, just logic. The average door takes less than 45 seconds to break through, for an average sized man. If they had been in an hotel, it's a fair bet to say that the two instructors would've slept in different rooms than the girl. So, if anything happens, they are further away, and possibly won't even realize something is going down. And I very much doubt that the likelyhood of a crime of opportunity taking place against 3 people sleeping in a car is higher then the likelyhood of someone committing a crime of opportunity against a single teenage girl sleeping in a hotel room.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
d-usa wrote: Frazzled wrote:You're right. You're some completely correct no person should ever be stopped for any reason. In fact the cops should be executed in the public square for their evil.
If you want to pretend that this is what I am saying, then go ahead and play with T-Bone and crown yourself as the king of winning internet debates.
Or you can admit to your double standard:
It's okay for the police to not detain a minor child with two adults as long as they can answer a magical set of questions even if they don't have any legal paperwork in their possession proving that they have custody or guardianship of that child as long as the two adults fit your preconceived notion of "normal".
And
It's okay for the police to detain a minor child with two adult even after they answered a magical set of questions and they have legal paperwork in their possession proving that they have guardianship as long as the two adults fit your preconceived notion of "not normal".
Personally, it MUST be a case by case basis... Use that "gut instinct"... Generally speaking, I can tell at a glance while walking through a shopping center who the couples are, and of those couples, which are happy at the time, and which are in the middle of or just had a fight, etc.
Also, for instance, unless we're travelling through the Airport, or moving across country/multiple countries we dont carry ID for our kids, but ANYBODY who is not Stevie Wonder can see that if I'm with my kids theyre definitely mine, and if they are with the wife, they are definitely hers, and if we're together, well... there aint no denying who the kids belong to.
Ultimately, since no crime was being committed at the time (even though they suspected it), They should have let them go. Taken a note down, made some kind of report, so that, just in case something happens to one of the 3, they can get back to the other 2 and investigate that much quicker.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote:It's not really a question of statistical studies, just logic. The average door takes less than 45 seconds to break through, for an average sized man. If they had been in an hotel, it's a fair bet to say that the two instructors would've slept in different rooms than the girl. So, if anything happens, they are further away, and possibly won't even realize something is going down. And I very much doubt that the likelyhood of a crime of opportunity taking place against 3 people sleeping in a car is higher then the likelyhood of someone committing a crime of opportunity against a single teenage girl sleeping in a hotel room.
So you don't have anything to back up your claim that a car is more secure than a brick and mortar room? And how long does it take to smash through a glass window on a car with a group?
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Ensis Ferrae wrote:Ultimately, since no crime was being committed at the time (even though they suspected it), They should have let them go. Taken a note down, made some kind of report, so that, just in case something happens to one of the 3, they can get back to the other 2 and investigate that much quicker.
Exactly. See, a zealous-but-professionnal cop could've asked which hotel they had reservations in, and under which name. Then the cop 'offers' to escort them to this hotel, then checks if there was indeed a reservation, and how many rooms. If any of this doesn't fit the story told, you ask the instructors to remain put until you've contacted the parents. If you feel like they might bolt, put a surveillance on them. If this is a kidnapping-in-progress, clearly it'll be worth it. Automatically Appended Next Post: Dreadclaw69 wrote:So you don't have anything to back up your claim that a car is more secure than a brick and mortar room? And how long does it take to smash through a glass window on a car with a group?
What post-apocalyptic world/third-world country do you live in where ''Getting assaulted by a random passing mob of vicious madmen'' is a legitimate concern for a guardian?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote:What post-apocalyptic world/third-world country do you live in where ''Getting assaulted by a random passing mob of vicious madmen'' is a legitimate concern for a guardian?
Do I need to, again, ask you to read what I said rather than what you want to take offense at? As I recall you are the one stated that they were safer in a car than a hotel. I certainly did not mention ''Getting assaulted by a random passing mob of vicious madmen'', much less it being a legitimate concern for a guardian?" so I don't know why you felt the need for the quotation marks.
It should go without saying that a legitimate concern for a guardian is finding an appropriate place to spend the night. Staying in a car, in a gas station parking lot, with out of state plates, in an area that you are unfamiliar with is not exactly a sensible choice.
So far you've managed to act in bad faith, slung names, and now making up quotes. Lets see what your next exchange brings.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Dreadclaw69 wrote:So far you've managed to act in bad faith, slung names, and now making up quotes. Lets see what your next exchange brings.
Quotation marks can also be used, such as in this case, to designate a proposition. Of course, the proposition was itself hyperbolical, but nevertheless, again, where do you live where, for 3 people sleeping in a car, in a parking lot, being assaulted by a group of people, is something that should be considered a risk? Because in most civilized land, it really isn't. It just isn't.
Dreadclaw69 wrote:It should go without saying that a legitimate concern for a guardian is finding an appropriate place to spend the night. Staying in a car, in a gas station parking lot, with out of state plates, in an area that you are unfamiliar with is not exactly a sensible choice.
It's far from a great choice, but this wasn't their first either. And no, it simply doesn't count as a failure to care. Again, the failure to care would've been to endanger the child by driving while in no shape to.
Anyway, the parents themselves were fine with it, or at least certainly didn't mention taking offense to it. Your outrage is entirely superfluous, and beside the point.
5470
Post by: sebster
Which means, as I already said, that some people simply for not fitting the mould of man, woman & children all of the same race... will be under greater scrutiny. Now, whether that's inevitable or necessary is a hard conversation, but it shouldn't be hard for people to realise that the situation fething sucks for people who don't do anything wrong, but end up falling under greater scrutiny simply because the colour of their skin or the circumstances of their life don't fit the mould.
37034
Post by: Marine_With_Heart
Frazzled wrote:Pfft this is nothing for Houston PD. They don't get punished for shooting of unarmed BGs. This is cake to that...
At least it wasn't Harris County Deputies. They'd still be in jail with the paperwork of the arrest lost...
On the positive they have cool horses downtown.
What is a BG? O.o
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
 Marine_With_Heart wrote: Frazzled wrote:Pfft this is nothing for Houston PD. They don't get punished for shooting of unarmed BGs. This is cake to that...
At least it wasn't Harris County Deputies. They'd still be in jail with the paperwork of the arrest lost...
On the positive they have cool horses downtown.
What is a BG? O.o
Bad guys (I'm assuming)
241
Post by: Ahtman
Xenophobia...xenophobia everywhere!
30287
Post by: Bromsy
If that gas station has a no loitering sign there was.
If there is proof that the cops chastised the parents for leaving their kid 'with black guys' that is pretty f'd in this day and age. But unless the minor had a photo ID to match with the name on the notarized letter I have no real issue with the cops taking extra steps to verify the story. Automatically Appended Next Post: Marine_With_Heart wrote: Frazzled wrote:Pfft this is nothing for Houston PD. They don't get punished for shooting of unarmed BGs. This is cake to that...
At least it wasn't Harris County Deputies. They'd still be in jail with the paperwork of the arrest lost...
On the positive they have cool horses downtown.
What is a BG? O.o
African American Fellow.
30287
Post by: Bromsy
You might want to watch out posting pictures like that. Could get a fella baned.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Alfndrate wrote: Marine_With_Heart wrote: Frazzled wrote:Pfft this is nothing for Houston PD. They don't get punished for shooting of unarmed BGs. This is cake to that...
At least it wasn't Harris County Deputies. They'd still be in jail with the paperwork of the arrest lost...
On the positive they have cool horses downtown.
What is a BG? O.o
Bad guys (I'm assuming)
Sorry, yes Bad Guy. Automatically Appended Next Post:
I saw the Cartman version of Bain before I saw Batman. I like the Cartman version better.
"You did not respect my authority"
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Kovnik Obama wrote: it just happened that they were all really tired and just decided to doze off.
Really? Because that is not what the minor said happened.
Kovnik Obama wrote:Quotation marks can also be used, such as in this case, to designate a proposition. Of course, the proposition was itself hyperbolical, but nevertheless, again, where do you live where, for 3 people sleeping in a car, in a parking lot, being assaulted by a group of people, is something that should be considered a risk? Because in most civilized land, it really isn't. It just isn't.
A proposition is a statement or assertion that expresses a judgment or opinion. What you did was try to attribute an argument to me (or at the very least distort my position) so you could tilt at a strawman.
In no civil country would criminal ever look for an easy mark. Like three people sleeping in a car with out of state plates? Then again you believe that you're at less risk sleeping in your car by the side of the road than in a hotel room, so your ability to assess what is a risk, and what is not may leave a little to be desired.
Kovnik Obama wrote:It's far from a great choice, but this wasn't their first either. And no, it simply doesn't count as a failure to care. Again, the failure to care would've been to endanger the child by driving while in no shape to.
Anyway, the parents themselves were fine with it, or at least certainly didn't mention taking offense to it. Your outrage is entirely superfluous, and beside the point.
No outrage here, hence the lack of emotive language (unlike your good self), just an examination of the facts available to us. Just because the parents haven't said anything in public does not mean that no one else is allowed an opinion. Its nice to see though that you say a direct quote from the minor in a secondary source is not to be trusted, but the omission by the secondary source of any statement by the parents about the sleeping in a car can be trusted.....
You seem to keep pushing this point about them driving while unfit. I never stated that they should have. Their first choice should have been to know where the hotel was, how to get to it, and to leave enough time to make it to the hotel even if that meant leaving the event early. Sleeping in your car, at a gas station, with a minor that you have temporary custody of, in a different state, in an area that you don't know, at the end of November/start of December when the weather is not likely to be in your favour, is not a responsible choice by the adults involved. It falls short of the duty of care expected.
This is not the binary choice that you are trying to make it (drive while unfit, or park up), the adults had more than enough options - leave early, take a taxi, stay with trusted friends, seek alternate accommodation, or many other prudent choices.
But if you want to look at the actual facts, the adults never claimed that they had pulled in to sleep for the night. The direct quote stated that all three of them fell asleep unexpectedly while checking their GPS for directions. They were not making a conscious decision based on the best interests of the child. In fact, if you pass out without warning while checking your GPS you were probably very lucky to make it to the gas station to begin with.
It is interesting to see though that your comments calling others bigots, or claiming that they are apologists for racists, or saying that you are pointing out their defects in character have all been allowed to stand.
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
I would be curious to hear what the people who called the police said. That might explain the overreaction.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
 SlaveToDorkness wrote:I would be curious to hear what the people who called the police said. That might explain the overreaction.
Good point.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
SlaveToDorkness wrote:I would be curious to hear what the people who called the police said. That might explain the overreaction.
I didnt think anyone called... but that the police were on their normal patrol, saw a car with people sat in it, by a gas station, car not running, etc. checked it out further, blah blah blah
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
Well, from them saying they were "surrounded" it sounded like a coordinated group of police dispatched to the scene instead of a single car investigating something they'd seen.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Well, perhaps Houston PD are forced to roll out in heavy convoys for protection??
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
They should just pack 10 wiener dogs per car.
Beat you to it, Frazz!
221
Post by: Frazzled
Studies have shown that wiener dog assault squads are practically worthless near gas stations. They immediately charge the store and raid the burritoes and hotdogs. Their strong constitutions withstand the toxic goo that is 7/11 burritoes quite nicely. They will only leave once the supply of fast food snacks and ice cream have been exhausted, and have been known to go on rampages to nearby gas stations. We've had to call out the state guard on several occasions when early experiments failed spectacularly.
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
Wieners eating weiners....'Merica!!!!
Did I do that right?
221
Post by: Frazzled
You forgot the "HURR!!!"
5182
Post by: SlaveToDorkness
Damn this ovresized brain!
|
|
