Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public maybe?

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

So, turns out the cops were just doing their job and it had nothing to do with race? Internet rushed to judgement before any facts were present? Shocking.

The cops still had not reason to bother either of them. They were doing nothing wrong. What would be really shocking would be if the police had decided not to waste their time, and instead had gone to look for more important things.

http://www.tmz.com/videos/0_4i6bq2rn/

16 seconds in - Police Officer - 'Someone called the police saying there was lewd acts in the car.'
at 1:18 'Do you know what probable cause is? I have probable cause. I received a radio call.'

They had reason. There was a witness who called it in well before the police even arrived. They were responding to that and thus already had reasonable suspicion and at that point ID is required according to the Supreme Court.

Do you know what eyes are? Those are the things police officers can look around with and see no lewd acts are going on with.

 

[NataliaGrey]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

So, turns out the cops were just doing their job and it had nothing to do with race? Internet rushed to judgement before any facts were present? Shocking.

The cops still had not reason to bother either of them. They were doing nothing wrong. What would be really shocking would be if the police had decided not to waste their time, and instead had gone to look for more important things.

http://www.tmz.com/videos/0_4i6bq2rn/

16 seconds in - Police Officer - 'Someone called the police saying there was lewd acts in the car.'
at 1:18 'Do you know what probable cause is? I have probable cause. I received a radio call.'

They had reason. There was a witness who called it in well before the police even arrived. They were responding to that and thus already had reasonable suspicion and at that point ID is required according to the Supreme Court.

Do you know what eyes are? Those are the things police officers can look around with and see no lewd acts are going on with.

Just because a crime isn't currently going on doesn't mean it never did. A guy could be running around with a gun threatening people and then by the time the police get there, he could have put it away. Does that mean the police should just ignore it, or should they at least speak with him and see what's up? Should the police ignore complaints from the public? If so, domestic violence issues would be almost entirely ignored, for example.

Also, I don't think the Supreme Court requires ID...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_i ... #Detention
They accepted stop-and-identify laws, but those are decided on a state by state basis, and only require a name, not ID. California doesn't have that law, you're not required to carry ID except when driving, so she didn't even have to give her name.

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

Just because a crime isn't currently going on doesn't mean it never did. A guy could be running around with a gun threatening people and then by the time the police get there, he could have put it away. Does that mean the police should just ignore it, or should they at least speak with him and see what's up? Should the police ignore complaints from the public? If so, domestic violence issues would be almost entirely ignored, for example.

Do you believe a report of possible lewd behavior is the same as a man running around threatening people with a gun?

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/17/django-unchained-actress-racism-lapd-daniele-watts-pictures-photos/

Pics of the lewd act in progress and some more information. First page of this thread is pretty amusing. Turns out the cops weren't racist or idiots.

 

[AmberCutie]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/17/django-unchained-actress-racism-lapd-daniele-watts-pictures-photos/

Pics of the lewd act in progress and some more information. First page of this thread is pretty amusing. Turns out the cops weren't racist or idiots.

I'm having a hard time seeing the sex in those pics. Seems she was sitting on his lap making out to me...?

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

http://www.tmz.com/2014/09/17/django-unchained-actress-racism-lapd-daniele-watts-pictures-photos/

Pics of the lewd act in progress and some more information. First page of this thread is pretty amusing. Turns out the cops weren't racist or idiots.

If he touched her breasts for sexual gratification in a public place, where people were objecting to it in California then he committed a lewd act under California law. The cop still did not see any of this, and had no proof they had done anything of the sort.

Also does, "horizontally bongoing her boobs back and forth.", sound like it was giving her much in the way of sexual gratification? She is still clearly an innocent person under the law, since she did not touch his penis or buttocks.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I'm sure some will need to see full penetration and even then the cops would still be racist idiots but I guess the pics could be of something else. I trust the eyewitness reports of those there that said they were having sex tho. Got nothing else to go on when the other side is silent.

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I'm sure some will need to see full penetration and even then the cops would still be racist idiots but I guess the pics could be of something else. I trust the eyewitness reports of those there that said they were having sex tho. Got nothing else to go on when the other side is silent.

Eyewitnesses are unreliable, as you just proved. The very article you linked to said they were grinding not having sex.

Eyewitness Misidentification
Eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, playing a role in 72% of convictions overturned through DNA testing.

While eyewitness testimony can be persuasive evidence before a judge or jury, 30 years of strong social science research has proven that eyewitness identification is often unreliable. Research shows that the human mind is not like a tape recorder; we neither record events exactly as we see them, nor recall them like a tape that has been rewound. Instead, witness memory is like any other evidence at a crime scene; it must be preserved carefully and retrieved methodically, or it can be contaminated.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

lol nevermind cop was a racist and she is a victim

 

[Nordling]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

Those TMZ photos don't really seem to show shit. Maybe if TMZ wasn't so greedy that they smear their huge assed logo right in the center of pictures that they didn't create in the first place?

I don't think the question is about her mouthing off to the cop and being a B list diva...it's about the whole "show me your papers" mentality...I mean if they really were breaking some law, what difference does it make who they are? Arrest and charge them. I'd say that considering the zero evidence of wrongdoing that the Jay Leno-looking cop had received should made him laugh at the "witness" rather than the alleged perp. Watching the car from a--what?--second floor window...did they have binoculars? And they stood there while AT WORK watching a couple showing affection and taking stupid photos instead of working...maybe the witness's boss should fire them. :lol:

 

[mynameisbob84]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

The more that comes out, the more it seems like the cop was in the right. The photos prove nothing but it's looking more and more likely it wasn't racial profiling, but simply a cop doing his job, investigating a complaint. Whether or not she was guilty of anything is beside the point. A complaint was made, cops came in to investigate, at which point she had the choice to co-operate (if she's innocent, this surely seems like the sensible thing to do) OR play the race card, then play the "I'm famous" card, then play the "my daddy's an attorney" card, before finally screaming and crying about how she's been wronged, when in reality all she'd been asked to do at that point, is present some ID. She chose the latter :twocents-02cents:

 

[Nordling]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

The more that comes out, the more it seems like the cop was in the right. The photos prove nothing but it's looking more and more likely it wasn't racial profiling, but simply a cop doing his job, investigating a complaint. Whether or not she was guilty of anything is beside the point. A complaint was made, cops came in to investigate, at which point she had the choice to co-operate (if she's innocent, this surely seems like the sensible thing to do) OR play the race card, then play the "I'm famous" card, then play the "my daddy's an attorney" card, before finally screaming and crying about how she's been wronged, when in reality all she'd been asked to do at that point, is present some ID. She chose the latter :twocents-02cents:

Why though? Did he need to know who she was to arrest or not arrest? What difference does it make? If she and her bf broke a law, arrest them or let it go. There is no "show me your papers" law in California to my knowledge. I know there's a tendency to wag our fingers at Watts because she went off on the cop...and was probably imprudent in doing so. But the fact remains...why cuff her and detain her to find out her "real identity?" If she broke a law, that could be figured out when they book her. Shoot, if they can arrest a Congressman for tapping his foot, they can arrest a B List actor.

 

[mynameisbob84]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

The more that comes out, the more it seems like the cop was in the right. The photos prove nothing but it's looking more and more likely it wasn't racial profiling, but simply a cop doing his job, investigating a complaint. Whether or not she was guilty of anything is beside the point. A complaint was made, cops came in to investigate, at which point she had the choice to co-operate (if she's innocent, this surely seems like the sensible thing to do) OR play the race card, then play the "I'm famous" card, then play the "my daddy's an attorney" card, before finally screaming and crying about how she's been wronged, when in reality all she'd been asked to do at that point, is present some ID. She chose the latter :twocents-02cents:

Why though? Did he need to know who she was to arrest or not arrest? What difference does it make? If she and her bf broke a law, arrest them or let it go. There is no "show me your papers" law in California to my knowledge. I know there's a tendency to wag our fingers at Watts because she went off on the cop...and was probably imprudent in doing so. But the fact remains...why cuff her and detain her to find out her "real identity?" If she broke a law, that could be figured out when they book her. Shoot, if they can arrest a Congressman for tapping his foot, they can arrest a B List actor.

I know nothing of California law but in England, when there's been a complaint, cops will typically ask for ID so they can run it through the system to a) make sure you are who you say you are and b) to see if you have a criminal record/warrant for an arrest, etc. etc.

In this instance, someone mistook her for a prostitute engaged in a sexual act with a customer and reported it. I'm guessing the cops would want her ID to see if she has any previous arrests/cautions/warrants/what-have-you that might shed light on the situation. If she was a prostitute with a record, there'd be more probable cause for arrest than if her record was clean.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

The photos prove nothing

Proves they need to get their car fixed.

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I know nothing of California law but in England, when there's been a complaint, cops will typically ask for ID so they can run it through the system to a) make sure you are who you say you are and b) to see if you have a criminal record/warrant for an arrest, etc. etc.

In this instance, someone mistook her for a prostitute engaged in a sexual act with a customer and reported it. I'm guessing the cops would want her ID to see if she has any previous arrests/cautions/warrants/what-have-you that might shed light on the situation. If she was a prostitute with a record, there'd be more probable cause for arrest than if her record was clean.

This is not England, and our cops are supposed to obey the laws and allow people to exercise their constitutional rights without retaliating.

 

[camstory]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

If the police were dispatched there was cause to make contact. (Though I was once at a house known to be a drug house, and the police showed up claiming there had been a 911 call from that address, and they needed to come in and check to make sure there was no problem. There was no phone hooked up, and tho we told the cops that they still came in and looked around.)

I still question the expense of time on what at best was a low priority crime that was not even being committed by the time the cops got there, if it ever was. This in a area with no shortage of real crime.

Cuffing someone who is no threat is out of line. If you think she might run, stuff her in the back seat until you can determine who she is with reasonable certainty. (Which I believe is the ruling of the supreme court - not that you have to show ID once there is cause, but rather that law enforcement has the right to detain someone until they are reasonably sure who that person is.)

I think the real problem here was the one of questioning the power of the police, which is what she did by refusing to show ID. Within her rights, but stupid all the same, or at least something that was likely to cause further problems, as it seems it did. (And I am willing to consider that this was possibly staged for reasons of publicity. I think it is simpler than that, but I have about the same trust in ppl who might be publicity hogs, as I do...)

On the race thing, I think we very often jump to the race card whenever there is a minority involved in this sort of thing. There are no doubt recast in our police forces, but we, (ppl in the US) still have problems with race across the board. Too often what is a problem with police misusing/abusing their power is turned into a race problem. The example I like to point to is that of Rodney King. King was black, and b/c of that the focus became one of race, but to this day everyone missed the real problem IMhO - that being one of police brutality period. If anyone thinks those same police in that same situation would not have beat a white man, I think you are wrong.

 

[Nordling]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

If the police were dispatched there was cause to make contact. (Though I was once at a house known to be a drug house, and the police showed up claiming there had been a 911 call from that address, and they needed to come in and check to make sure there was no problem. There was no phone hooked up, and tho we told the cops that they still came in and looked around.)

I still question the expense of time on what at best was a low priority crime that was not even being committed by the time the cops got there, if it ever was. This in a area with no shortage of real crime.

Cuffing someone who is no threat is out of line. If you think she might run, stuff her in the back seat until you can determine who she is with reasonable certainty. (Which I believe is the ruling of the supreme court - not that you have to show ID once there is cause, but rather that law enforcement has the right to detain someone until they are reasonably sure who that person is.)

I think the real problem here was the one of questioning the power of the police, which is what she did by refusing to show ID. Within her rights, but stupid all the same, or at least something that was likely to cause further problems, as it seems it did. (And I am willing to consider that this was possibly staged for reasons of publicity. I think it is simpler than that, but I have about the same trust in ppl who might be publicity hogs, as I do...)

On the race thing, I think we very often jump to the race card whenever there is a minority involved in this sort of thing. There are no doubt recast in our police forces, but we, (ppl in the US) still have problems with race across the board. Too often what is a problem with police misusing/abusing their power is turned into a race problem. The example I like to point to is that of Rodney King. King was black, and b/c of that the focus became one of race, but to this day everyone missed the real problem IMhO - that being one of police brutality period. If anyone thinks those same police in that same situation would not have beat a white man, I think you are wrong.

If, in fact, the cop suspected prostitution, either because the so-called witness made that claim or not, then I'd say she was justified in believing it was a racial profiling thing. "white man, black woman...yups, must be a hooker" But really, I'm not sure that even came up, with regard to what the cop said. She may have simply made that assumption because the cop had the audacity to bother her right outside the building where she works. I don't know if she's "dumb" or not...imprudent maybe, but we don't really know what was going on in her head.

Say, you just had a VERY pleasant experience, and were in the process of walking home or wherever while chatting with your dad on your cell... Suddenly a cop accosts you. Her behavior after that may not have been proper or prudent, but it's understandable. People, don't like their mood ruined suddenly, and she may have overreacted.

 

[NataliaGrey]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

Just because a crime isn't currently going on doesn't mean it never did. A guy could be running around with a gun threatening people and then by the time the police get there, he could have put it away. Does that mean the police should just ignore it, or should they at least speak with him and see what's up? Should the police ignore complaints from the public? If so, domestic violence issues would be almost entirely ignored, for example.

Do you believe a report of possible lewd behavior is the same as a man running around threatening people with a gun?

No, of course I don't believe that someone waving a gun around and a prostitute are the same, but both are illegal in California, regardless of whether you think either should be. Do you think cops should ignore some laws and not others? Police just enforce laws, they don't make them. It's not as if he made some law up out of his ass so that he could harass her. If she wants to take issue with the law itself, that's fine. That's handled in court, though, not on the street.

I know nothing of California law but in England, when there's been a complaint, cops will typically ask for ID so they can run it through the system to a) make sure you are who you say you are and b) to see if you have a criminal record/warrant for an arrest, etc. etc.

In this instance, someone mistook her for a prostitute engaged in a sexual act with a customer and reported it. I'm guessing the cops would want her ID to see if she has any previous arrests/cautions/warrants/what-have-you that might shed light on the situation. If she was a prostitute with a record, there'd be more probable cause for arrest than if her record was clean.

This is not England, and our cops are supposed to obey the laws and allow people to exercise their constitutional rights without retaliating.

What Bob said is exactly how it works in California, though, too... Bob used the word typically, he didn't say that the person had to comply by law, and they don't have to in California, either. If they don't, though, the police have the right to detain the person until they do figure out their identity.

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

No, of course I don't believe that someone waving a gun around and a prostitute are the same, but both are illegal in California, regardless of whether you think either should be. Do you think cops should ignore some laws and not others? Police just enforce laws, they don't make them. It's not as if he made some law up out of his ass so that he could harass her. If she wants to take issue with the law itself, that's fine. That's handled in court, though, not on the street.

Yes I do expect cops to ignore some laws, or do you want a speeding ticket every time you are one mile over the speed limit? Police officers need to prioritize their time to best serve the people. The total violent crime count for LA is already over 12,000 incidences for the year, and property crimes are already over 50,000 for the year.

What Bob said is exactly how it works in California, though, too... Bob used the word typically, he didn't say that the person had to comply by law, and they don't have to in California, either. If they don't, though, the police have the right to detain the person until they do figure out their identity.

Only if they have cause. Two people doing nothing does not seem like a good thing to investigate.

 

[camstory]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

(if she's innocent, this surely seems like the sensible thing to do)

Yes on one hand it does seem the sensible thing to do. On the other hand, I am, and have been innocent for years now, and when pulled over on my bike, or anytime when I am asked to allow them to check my backpack, and/or search my person I refuse. I refuse not b/c I have anything to hide, but exactly b/c I am innocent. They have no right to paw through my personal shit, or pad me down! If everybody allowed them to do what they wanted b/c they have nothing to hide or are innocent, than lets just change the rules to they can search or do whatever they want b/c it wont have any consequence to the innocent.

I know that sometimes it is not sensible for me to refuse from a hassle point of view. and I understand that refusing to show ID is not the same,,, or isn't it - it is still your right and giving up your rights, sensible or not is a slippery slope to the possible erosion of those rights.

What I think I am trying to say, is I agree with you, it was a bad choice IMhO. That said, I don't like the the "if you are innocent/have nothing to hide" argument. It is a fail when it comes to sacrificing our rights.

 

[SaffronBurke]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

Even if it's not a law that you have to present ID, it's generally best to cooperate with police, as it tends to make things easier on you and they're more likely to let you go on about your day. Here in Iowa, some cops will ask for the ID of everyone in the vehicle, even if they're just letting you know that you had a light out. My husband used to refuse because he had a warrant, even though it was a non-extradictable warrant from Florida and no Iowa cop would do anything about it because there was nothing they COULD do that wouldn't be wasting resources. They would give him the option of giving them his ID or being taken to the station. They would then be jerks for the rest of the stop because he argued with them. And we were in pulled-over vehicles much more than we would've preferred because a friend kept forgetting to turn the headlights on because "I can see so I didn't know they weren't on."

I'm not saying that the cop was right or wrong, and I personally have a poor opinion of cops because even ones who were supposed to be helping me have been raging jerkholes (telling me it's my fault that my rent money was stolen from my own living room and that I shouldn't have had that much money in my wallet), but even if you hate cops, it will make your life far easier to not argue with them. I cooperate when I have to interact with them, because I know that they can make my life hell if I don't.

The article with the pictures included comes across as if they were trying to dumb down the descriptions of what they were doing or use "nicer" words. Grinding could mean fucking, and used to be used as a word substitute in pop songs back in the early 2000's. Where they say she wiped them both off with a tissue, what did she wipe? Their crotches? Their faces? Their armpits? Their buttholes?

What is the background of the person who gave this information, and the person who wrote the article? Keep in mind that different people are going to describe sex acts differently, depending on their age group and cultural/religious background.

Relevant example:
When I was in high school, I was in a secluded corner of the library with my boyfriend fingering me, and the security guard warned us that they could see our "kissing" on the cameras, even though there was very little mouth interaction happening. Someone my grandparent's age may have said "petting", while my age group would say "fingering" or "fingerblasting".

While the eyewitness's report sounds to some like it's describing a make-out session rather than sex, it sounds to me like a fairly conservative person describing sex, or maybe someone who's too shy to say "sex" or "crotch" because they find sex embarrassing. So they could have indeed been fucking, or they could have been only making out. Without a less bashful report, it's still unclear, but it is possible that that's what did happen.

The pictures are less than useless. In the first one, is that a shadow on her leg, or is she wearing black capris? I honestly can't tell. If it's not shadow, then I doubt they were fucking, as it's difficult to have sex with your pants on, unless she left them on that leg only. However, if that's just shadow, she could have had her pants off, or had on a skirt that she'd pulled up. The rest of the pictures show even less useful detail.

The tissue thing is a tipping point for me. If she wiped their crotches, that's something you might do after sex. But it's just as likely that she wiped sweat off of their faces, which would indicate nothing.

So, it's fuzzy to me as to whether they were actually having sex or not. If they were, I can understand wanting an officer to speak with them. If not, whoever reported them was being a jerk. There's not enough information for me to make an entirely conclusive assumption one way or the other.

 

[LilyEvans]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

No, of course I don't believe that someone waving a gun around and a prostitute are the same, but both are illegal in California, regardless of whether you think either should be. Do you think cops should ignore some laws and not others? Police just enforce laws, they don't make them. It's not as if he made some law up out of his ass so that he could harass her. If she wants to take issue with the law itself, that's fine. That's handled in court, though, not on the street.

Yes I do expect cops to ignore some laws, or do you want a speeding ticket every time you are one mile over the speed limit? Police officers need to prioritize their time to best serve the people. The total violent crime count for LA is already over 12,000 incidences for the year, and property crimes are already over 50,000 for the year.

What Bob said is exactly how it works in California, though, too... Bob used the word typically, he didn't say that the person had to comply by law, and they don't have to in California, either. If they don't, though, the police have the right to detain the person until they do figure out their identity.

Only if they have cause. Two people doing nothing does not seem like a good thing to investigate.

I'm on your side of the fence on this but you're being a little bit silly and it's hurting your argument.

If I made a call about a vehicle driving dangerously and gave a license plate number, they would have probably cause when they pulled over that vehicle even if the driver was obeying traffic laws. If I called and gave a description of a person peeking into my bedroom window at night, they would have probable cause to stop a person fitting that description if they found them in the area, even if that person was just on an evening stroll.

 

[Nordling]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

The argument, "if you're not doing anything wrong, then..." sounds an awful lot like some folks' attitude toward government wiretapping, and other snooping by the NSA and other such agencies. I may not put up a stink like Ms Watts did in the same situation, but I refuse to diss her because she stood up for her rights. The only way laws and police behavior get changed is if brave people refuse to "be prudent." This can backfire, and probably does in more cases than not, but still I don't understand why so many seem against her. Do you feel the same way about that bozo in Nevada who refused to bow to the BLM and allowed irregular militias to stand down the Federal Government? I hope so, because that land is ours, and the BLM should have arrested them.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I refuse to diss her because she stood up for her rights.

haha yeah we should all like applaud her poor behavior like you always do. I think most people are "dissing" her because, naw why bother. She is a female so she will always be the victim to the Nordlings of the world.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I refuse to diss her because she stood up for her rights.

haha yeah we should all like applaud her poor behavior like you always do. I think most people are "dissing" her because, naw why bother. She is a female so she will always be the victim to the Nordlings of the world.

LOL pretty true. I love how everybody was quick to condemn the cops, without even asking, "I wonder if there is another side to the story." I know we've probably seen too many library/coffee shop shows, but actually have sex in a public place in a car is illegal. I suspect the much/maybe even most of the time when it happens in broad daylight in involves prostitution. Most generally law abiding citizen are quite eager to cooperate with cops on things like providing ID. When she refused to provide a ID it made even more probable she was engaged in prostitution.

The cops were doing their jobs and she was being a Diva. Frankly, I can't believe the sheer stupidity of her and/or her publicist thinking that going public would get her public support. Doesn't she know that everybody has a camera now days.

 

[schlmoe]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

the Nordlings of the world.

O.M.G.

 

[Shaun__]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I'm on your side of the fence on this but you're being a little bit silly and it's hurting your argument.

If I made a call about a vehicle driving dangerously and gave a license plate number, they would have probably cause when they pulled over that vehicle even if the driver was obeying traffic laws. If I called and gave a description of a person peeking into my bedroom window at night, they would have probable cause to stop a person fitting that description if they found them in the area, even if that person was just on an evening stroll.

Do you think an accusation of lewd conduct is the same as an activity that could kill people, or a peeping tom that could be looking for victims? I only ask this because you said I was looking a little silly, and you used these to explain why what the cop did was sensible. There are crimes with victims, and then there are crimes with none. They do not both deserve the same level of intervention.

 

[LilyEvans]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

I'm on your side of the fence on this but you're being a little bit silly and it's hurting your argument.

If I made a call about a vehicle driving dangerously and gave a license plate number, they would have probably cause when they pulled over that vehicle even if the driver was obeying traffic laws. If I called and gave a description of a person peeking into my bedroom window at night, they would have probable cause to stop a person fitting that description if they found them in the area, even if that person was just on an evening stroll.

Do you think an accusation of lewd conduct is the same as an activity that could kill people, or a peeping tom that could be looking for victims? I only ask this because you said I was looking a little silly, and you used these to explain why what the cop did was sensible. There are crimes with victims, and then there are crimes with none. They do not both deserve the same level of intervention.

So doing lewd acts on a street when children could be passing by has no victims? If someone could see what they were doing clearly enough to call the police it's obvious that someone saw it who did not want to see it. Exposing yourself to someone who has not consented is sexual assault and sexual harassment.

 

[schlmoe]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

This keeps getting better and better...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... y-gay.html

EXCLUSIVE - 'I know my rights, I played a cop on TV!'
New audio of the moment Django Unchained actress was handcuffed on suspicion of having sex in public

*Actress Danièle Watts claimed she was harassed and racially profiled by the LAPD because she is black and her boyfriend is white
*A new audio recording obtained exclusively by MailOnline reveals Watts used the N-word
*Claimed she knew the law because she played cop on 'Weeds'
*Sgt Jim Parker is speaking out to defend his actions and the actions of his other two officers on the scene
*Sgt Parker revealed he is gay, one of the officers involved is a woman and the other is Hispanic

 

[JerryBoBerry]

Re: Daniele Watts cuffed and detained for being in public ma

LOL pretty true. I love how everybody was quick to condemn the cops, without even asking, "I wonder if there is another side to the story."

Slight correction. Everybody but 'moi.' :-D My opinion hasn't changed in the least since I first saw this. Cop did everything correct and professional. In fact he really should have arrested her for obstruction of justice the moment she tried to walk away. But he was really nice about it actually by letting her go. As for her, she's an idiot who turned nothing into a mountain in an attempt to get race card sympathy and publicity. Glad they recorded it so everyone in the world (except for shaun, evidently, who has blinders on) can see how phony she is.