Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

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.

 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.

Never underestimate the buerocratic nightmare this is the police department

 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:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That girll looks like a druggie and the boys look like hoodlums.

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.

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.

 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".

could be journalism. thats a good point.

 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

Around here sleeping in a car is highly suspicious.

 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?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Around here sleeping in a car is highly suspicious.

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:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That girll looks like a druggie and the boys look like hoodlums.

You usually look like crap after sleeping in a car.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Somehow all three dozed off and were unable to locate the hotel?

Why would this be suspicious at all? Being exhausted after physical activity?

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Somehow all three dozed off and were unable to locate the hotel?

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.

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.

 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.

 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?

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.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That girll looks like a druggie and the boys look like hoodlums.

Oh er..... how er....... scrub that, as you were.

 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.

Given that she's 13, yeah, it's a good idea to check up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 notprop wrote:
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.

 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.

 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.

 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...

 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.

 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.

 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

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

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.

 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.