Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Reese goes nuts on dash cam.....

Reese goes nuts on dash cam.....

+4
Sal
knothead
ZVUGKTUBM
TEOTWAWKI
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 7]

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

http://www.tmz.com/2013/05/02/reese-witherspoon-arrest-dash-cam-video/

Guest


Guest

Why would that be important?

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

She's a star man.. She works in Hollywood she's special.

Guest


Guest

Oh. Sorry I take it her Ass hat husband got a DUI and she was helping him. Damn I all ways miss the important stuff.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

The elites of this world are above the laws that apply to us commoners.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

knothead

knothead

Well I am going to depart from the ordinary view and say that the officer was over reacting . . . . . . she was not doing more than asking what the problem was and not being disrespectful at all. The law, of course, is designed to force citizens to cower to LEO no matter what and I think this was an over reaction on the cop's part. If she became actually 'obstructive' then it would be different but the law officer holds all the cards no matter the circumstance. If a cop were cuffing my wife you better believe I would NOT remain in my vehicle . . . . maybe I would also be cuffed but there would be a problem if the cop behaved in this manner.

Guest


Guest

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:The elites of this world are above the laws that apply to us commoners.
Agree............ and the threshold for being "Elite" seems to be getting lower.

Sal

Sal

knothead wrote:Well I am going to depart from the ordinary view and say that the officer was over reacting . . . . . . she was not doing more than asking what the problem was and not being disrespectful at all. The law, of course, is designed to force citizens to cower to LEO no matter what and I think this was an over reaction on the cop's part. If she became actually 'obstructive' then it would be different but the law officer holds all the cards no matter the circumstance. If a cop were cuffing my wife you better believe I would NOT remain in my vehicle . . . . maybe I would also be cuffed but there would be a problem if the cop behaved in this manner.

I agree.

Cops are dicks more often than not.

Guest


Guest

knothead wrote:Well I am going to depart from the ordinary view and say that the officer was over reacting . . . . . . she was not doing more than asking what the problem was and not being disrespectful at all. The law, of course, is designed to force citizens to cower to LEO no matter what and I think this was an over reaction on the cop's part. If she became actually 'obstructive' then it would be different but the law officer holds all the cards no matter the circumstance. If a cop were cuffing my wife you better believe I would NOT remain in my vehicle . . . . maybe I would also be cuffed but there would be a problem if the cop behaved in this manner.

Yeah, he overreacted and may get sued for false arrest,however, did you hear her husband say " he had nothing to do w/ it? What a wus! He threw her under the bus.

Markle

Markle

knothead wrote:Well I am going to depart from the ordinary view and say that the officer was over reacting . . . . . . she was not doing more than asking what the problem was and not being disrespectful at all. The law, of course, is designed to force citizens to cower to LEO no matter what and I think this was an over reaction on the cop's part. If she became actually 'obstructive' then it would be different but the law officer holds all the cards no matter the circumstance. If a cop were cuffing my wife you better believe I would NOT remain in my vehicle . . . . maybe I would also be cuffed but there would be a problem if the cop behaved in this manner.

Appears you have a lot of first hand experience in this matter.

The law was never designed to force citizen to cower. That's just foolish. You just wait in your car, keep your hands on top of the steering wheel and do what they ask. Problem solved.

You really sound foolish making it sound like you would do something if YOUR wife was being handcuffed and you would not remain in the vehicle. Foolish, foolish, foolish.

The officers were respectful and courteous. She was told to stay in the car, LEO's do not want an incident escalate in a dangerous location. They knew the husband was intoxicated, they had no idea what condition she was in and were protecting her from danger.

She played the "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM"; she also played the "I'M Pregnant. I'm sure all original excuses.

Ms. Weatherspoon DID man up (excuse the expression) the next day. When interviewed she said they had to much to drink, it was a mistake for them to be driving and when a cop tells you to stay in the car, you STAY IN THE CAR.

Hubby might still be sleeping on the couch. She tried to defend him but once she was tucked away in the car, Hubby told the cop, I didn't have anything to do with that....

knothead

knothead

The law was never designed to force citizen to cower. That's just foolish. You just wait in your car, keep your hands on top of the steering wheel and do what they ask. Problem solved.

*********************************************************

If this is not the definition of subservience I don't know what is . . .

2seaoat



If this is not the definition of subservience I don't know what is . . .

I have to agree with both you and Markle a little bit. First, often an officer in a rural area may not have a back up which is closer than 15 minutes. Once another person gets out of the car, this exposes the officer to risk. If only one in a thousand citizens melts down after leaving the car, would you risk your life by yourself letting people approach your vehicle while you are exposed giving a field sobriety test?

Mr. Markle in fact the officer could have given her some slack. He could have said that Maam I will need to arrest you if you do not get back in the car......he could have done it two or three times and not pushed the incident into a criminal charge if he used his discretion wisely. Too many times an officer is resentful toward citizens. An us vs them mentality turns a person in a stop into a hardened criminal instead of a neighbor and fellow citizen.

Guest


Guest

He charged her w/ physical obstruction when all she was doing was arguing.There is no law against arguing. She pled guilty which was dumb. The situation didn't rise to a criminal charge. The officer was ineffective in handling intoxicated people.

Guest


Guest

Hallmarkgrad1 wrote:Why would that be important?

"You dont know who I am....but you will"....Guess the officer wasn't that impressed...

2seaoat



He charged her w/ physical obstruction when all she was doing was arguing

He asked her to stay in the car. If she never said a word and never argued, she was physically coming into the area where an officer was attempting to arrest a suspect, and the issue is not the words she was saying, but her physical presence within a safety zone of the officer after he had instructed her not to enter that zone.......she was properly charged and was properly arrested. If she stayed in the car and rolled the window down and gave her movie credits, and told the police officer that she believed he was being unreasonable......she never would have been charged....even though she was arguing with an officer.

2seaoat



"You dont know who I am....but you will"....Guess the officer wasn't that impressed...



Nope......he saw legally blonde.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:He charged her w/ physical obstruction when all she was doing was arguing

He asked her to stay in the car. If she never said a word and never argued, she was physically coming into the area where an officer was attempting to arrest a suspect, and the issue is not the words she was saying, but her physical presence within a safety zone of the officer after he had instructed her not to enter that zone.......she was properly charged and was properly arrested. If she stayed in the car and rolled the window down and gave her movie credits, and told the police officer that she believed he was being unreasonable......she never would have been charged....even though she was arguing with an officer.

Did you just make that up? The safety zone of the officer? No such thing. There was no physical obstruction at all or any law or safety zone for arguing. Pure bullshit. Exaggerated charges that would have been thrown out if she had contested it.

2seaoat



Did you just make that up? The safety zone of the officer? No such thing. There was no physical obstruction at all or any law or safety zone for arguing. Pure bullshit. Exaggerated charges that would have been thrown out if she had contested it.


Your freedom of movement ends when an officer is making an arrest and instructs you not to get closer, or to stay in your car. You simply are a continuing train wreck talking about things you have no experience or understanding. However, I am certain you will argue or call me names. After I pass I will have my wife post my information, but in the meantime, I will try to be polite when you spew conclusions. I am glad the officers did not know what they were doing, and it is amusing how quickly the offender apologized......she probably did not have a chance to speak with you on how the officers were wrong, and have you instruct you that she would walk. It has been amusing the last few weeks learning new things from an alternative universe.........it has been comedic at best or very sad.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Did you just make that up? The safety zone of the officer? No such thing. There was no physical obstruction at all or any law or safety zone for arguing. Pure bullshit. Exaggerated charges that would have been thrown out if she had contested it.


Your freedom of movement ends when an officer is making an arrest and instructs you not to get closer, or to stay in your car. You simply are a continuing train wreck talking about things you have no experience or understanding. However, I am certain you will argue or call me names. After I pass I will have my wife post my information, but in the meantime, I will try to be polite when you spew conclusions. I am glad the officers did not know what they were doing, and it is amusing how quickly the offender apologized......she probably did not have a chance to speak with you on how the officers were wrong, and have you instruct you that she would walk. It has been amusing the last few weeks learning new things from an alternative universe.........it has been comedic at best or very sad.

Oh really, Seaoat? I have no experience or understanding? Just goes to show what you know.Squat! I've talked many times about being a police officer and I can tell you much of the bullshit they do is made up. There are no safety zones and other shit like that taught in the police academy. You would be surprised how much of it is poor police techniques made up by high school graduates. Much of what you post is your opinion and we all know what opinions are worth. Unless you were the head of the FBI or equal it doesn't matter to me who you are. You apparently think you're an expert at everything but we all know better than that.

2seaoat



Not an expert on everything.......just correct in this instance.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Did you just make that up? The safety zone of the officer? No such thing. There was no physical obstruction at all or any law or safety zone for arguing. Pure bullshit. Exaggerated charges that would have been thrown out if she had contested it.


Your freedom of movement ends when an officer is making an arrest and instructs you not to get closer, or to stay in your car. You simply are a continuing train wreck talking about things you have no experience or understanding. However, I am certain you will argue or call me names. After I pass I will have my wife post my information, but in the meantime, I will try to be polite when you spew conclusions. I am glad the officers did not know what they were doing, and it is amusing how quickly the offender apologized......she probably did not have a chance to speak with you on how the officers were wrong, and have you instruct you that she would walk. It has been amusing the last few weeks learning new things from an alternative universe.........it has been comedic at best or very sad.

I didn't have time earlier to respond fully as I had to go but I want to say it is utter bullshit and a common belief you don't have the right to question your detainment. In your famous words, you are "simply clueless" to what your rights are. As long as you are not physically obstructing a detainment, you have every right to ask questions no matter how the officer perceives it. No where in any law does it say you cannot speak or ask questions.A police officer's command is valid if there is an obstruction to his or your safety-not because he's annoyed and doesn't want to answer your questions. Far too may times the rights of the people are overrun w/ this stretching of the law. The officer had the ability to ignore her questions or tell her he didn't have to answer them but to escalate it to physical obstruction was an abuse. You have far too many erroneous beliefs,Seaoat.

2seaoat



Dreams.......did the officer ask Reese to stay in the car? Did she leave the vehicle? What do words of a person who has been asked to remain in a car have to do with the issue? It is black and white. An officer gave instructions to remain in the car, and she ignored the instruction and left the vehicle. He could have asked her to get back in the car, and if she got back in the car, most officers would let this slide. However, she got out of the car and did not get back in.......she is blonde too.......I think like you she did a movie called legally blonde......I understand the empathy. Go sister. getting all do you know who I am in people's face........heheheheheheheh........I love this place.

2seaoat



legally blonde quotes:

Elle: I just don't think that Brooke could've done this. Exercise gives you endorphins. Endorphins make you happy. Happy people just don't shoot their husbands, they just don't.

I think this was posted on a thread two weeks ago......

Elle: I don't need back-ups. I'm going to Harvard.

C.U.L.A. Advisor: Well then, you'll need excellent recommendations from your professors.

Elle: Okay.

C.U.L.A. Advisor: And a heck of an admissions essay.

Elle: Right.

C.U.L.A. Advisor: And at least a 175 on your LSATs.

Elle: I once had to judge a tighty-whitey contest for Lambda Kappa Pi. Trust me, I can handle anything.


Elle's Mother: Honey, you were First Runner-Up at the "Miss Hawaiian Tropics" contest. Why are you going to throw that all away?

Elle: Going to Harvard is the only way I'm going to get the love of my life back.

Elle's Father: Oh, sweetheart, you don't need law school. Law school is for people who are boring and ugly and serious. And you, button, are none of those things.

yep.......there has been a connection

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:Dreams.......did the officer ask Reese to stay in the car? Did she leave the vehicle? What do words of a person who has been asked to remain in a car have to do with the issue? It is black and white. An officer gave instructions to remain in the car, and she ignored the instruction and left the vehicle. He could have asked her to get back in the car, and if she got back in the car, most officers would let this slide. However, she got out of the car and did not get back in.......she is blonde too.......I think like you she did a movie called legally blonde......I understand the empathy. Go sister. getting all do you know who I am in people's face........heheheheheheheh........I love this place.

Again, Seaoat because you apparently don't get it. Unless she was physically obstructing the situation she had a right to be where ever she wanted to be. Just because an officer tell you to sit in the car and you don't doesn't qualify as a criminal offense. Failure to follow a police command applies when there is a danger to safety-not annoyance. You have a right to be informed of what your are being detained of. She said those things while she was being arrested for a trumped up charge. You simply do not know your rights.You're from Alabama,right? That explains everything.

2seaoat



In the video, Trooper First Class J. Pyland tells Witherspoon to stay in the couple's vehicle no fewer than five times.

"When a police officer tells you to stay in the car, you stay in the car," she said. "I learned that for sure. I learned a lot."

She pleaded guilty........legally blonde

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 7]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Reese goes nuts on dash cam.....

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum