Trooper Crosses the Line — When ‘No Consent’ Turns Chaotic 🚨 - video Dailymotion

Sarge's Tales

Real-life dashcam footage captures a shocking moment when a state trooper dives into a driver’s vehicle after being denied consent.  What began as a routine traffic stop turns into chaos as rights, authority, and recklessness collide.  Watch this intense encounter unfold and decide — did the officer go too far?  🎥 Real Dashcam Incident | Police Encounter | Law Enforcement Reaction | Rights vs. Authority #PoliceVideo #DashcamFootage #LawEnforcement #ViralIncident #CopFails #DriverRights #PoliceDrama #PoliceVideo #DashcamFootage #CopFails #DriverRights #LawEnforcement #TrafficStop #ViralVideo #TrueIncident

Transcript

00:00Wow, that is breaking news. It is video you're going to only see on five as this traffic stop

00:13turns violent. The state trooper ending up going right through that window as you see five

00:19investigates broke the story at 5 p.m. revealing that a Boston city worker is now behind bars

00:24after that wild encounter. Let's get to our Brittany Johnson. She's been digging into how

00:28all of this unfolded. Brittany? Well, Edna Maria, this is just the latest case of a city employee

00:33landing in trouble with the law in recent months. And in this case, that worker is being held on five

00:38felonies after a confrontation with both the suspect and the trooper being tased.

00:44What's up, man? How you doing? Good. Give you your license and registration?

00:48It starts as a routine traffic stop in South Boston. A state police trooper spotting a car

00:53with window tint that appears darker than allowed by law. It all unfolded here on Old Colony Avenue,

01:00just past a traffic rotary. I just got out of work. What do you do? I can't see the ad. Oh,

01:04city parking. The driver, Nasiru Ibrahim, on the city payroll, working in the property management

01:10department. No, you're good. Just relax. No, I know. The trooper writing in his report that because

01:15Ibrahim's demeanor was nervous and he admitted to prior firearms charges, the trooper asked to inspect

01:21a backpack on the passenger side floorboard. A Massachusetts trooper dove headfirst into the

01:26open driver's side window of a vehicle during a traffic stop. And for some reason, the only thing

01:31the media seems to care about is peddling their political agenda and demonizing the person being

01:37stopped. Not one story has emerged that focused on why in the hell a police officer would do such a

01:43thing. That is, until now. Let's talk about it. What's up, you guys? Welcome back to Southern

01:57Draw Law. My name is James White, criminal defense attorney, former prosecutor, former police officer.

02:02I just want to pause this here briefly and note what was just reported. This trooper wrote in his

02:08report that because Mr. Ibrahim was nervous and he admitted to prior firearms charges, you know,

02:16he did whatever he did and he was suspicious of what was in the backpack. So we have a traffic stop

02:21for a legal tent and then we have a bunch of itinerary questions. Guys, we say it all the time,

02:27but this is why you don't answer these questions. I mean, look, hey officer, I mean, no disrespect to you,

02:34but I'm going to remain silent and I'm not comfortable answering any questions without

02:39counsel present. That is an invocation of your Fifth Amendment rights and then actually shut up

02:44after that. All of the information that this trooper used to turn this situation into something

02:50that it didn't need to be actually came from the cooperation of Mr. Ibrahim and it backfired on him

02:58despite the fact that he was a current city of Boston employee and was probably expecting some

03:04professional courtesy or at least allowed to do his job and go on about his way. But that didn't

03:08happen and it ain't going to happen for you either. So keep your freaking mouth shut. Let's continue.

03:12A few seconds later. Hold on. Why? No. No. No. Stop, dude. Stop. You're going to make it worse.

03:29As the chaos unfolds, you can see them struggling over the car's transmission as Ibrahim tries to put

03:35the car in drive and the trooper struggles to keep it in park. You're going to get to kill somebody,

03:40dude. Okay. You're going to kill somebody. The struggle continues. Then you can hear the trooper

03:46use his taser on Ibrahim, not shown on the video, but in the police report, the trooper says he had

03:53to drop his taser to put the car back in park, saying, quote, Ibrahim picked up my taser and deployed

03:59the second set of probes into the lower right side of my abdomen, causing excruciating pain. What's great

04:05about this case is that it gives us an opportunity to talk about some of the traffic stop cases that sort

04:10of lay out the constitutional parameters for when it might be appropriate for a cop to do a Bill

04:15Goldberg style WWE dive across the driver and into a vehicle. And I'll give you a hint. There aren't a

04:23lot of circumstances where this would be legal or warranted, and this ain't one of them. So we know

04:28that according to the United States Supreme Court case of Rodriguez, which is 2015, that the scope of an

04:36investigation on a traffic stop, at least at the outset, is limited to the mission of the original

04:42stop. So in this case, we have darkly tinted windows. Unless and until the officer can develop

04:47some reasonable, articulable suspicion of some other crime, some other offense, then the officer

04:53cannot pivot to investigate something else. Well, what do we have in this case? Well, we have window tint.

05:01That's a violation. So had Ibrahim invoked his right to remain silent and closed his mouth,

05:07that's probably still where we'd be. Now, I'm not naive enough, and I don't expect you to be naive

05:12enough to believe that the trooper would have just accepted whatever he had to say and moved on with

05:17his life. What I am saying, though, is that the way it should have been played is not the way it was

05:22played. And that will matter more as we progress more in the analysis. The next thing that we need to

05:28consider is that the trooper noted that he detected the odor of marijuana. Okay, fine. But here's the

05:35issue. Massachusetts decriminalized possession of less than an ounce of marijuana a few years back.

05:40So if he asks Ibrahim if he's been smoking marijuana and he says, yeah, I was earlier, but not recently,

05:47and the thing that you're smelling is coming from the ashtray, there's nothing there that would suggest

05:52that a crime is afoot. Now, again, that's not going to dispel the suspicion of the trooper because

05:57that's impossible to do. But there is a distinct difference between the odor of burnt marijuana

06:03and the odor of green marijuana. Burnt marijuana is consistent with prior use. Green marijuana may

06:11suggest that there's some more marijuana somewhere, but it varies quite a bit in the strength of the

06:16way marijuana smells based on how it's packaged, whether it's packaged. I mean, there's a lot to it,

06:23and it's not all something that could be laid at the feet of criminality, especially in a city

06:27where marijuana possession has been decriminalized. So we don't have reasonable, articulable suspicion

06:32of crime or some offense in order to even pivot away from an investigation into vehicle tent.

06:40So the first thing we have to look at here is a violation of Rodriguez. Did he even have enough

06:45to pivot to a criminal wrongdoing investigation in the first place? Are we even beyond the scope of the

06:51original traffic stop just by simply asking him about the bag and all this stuff, right? So we never

06:58do find out if he goes back, runs the license to figure out whether he has warrants, any of that

07:02stuff. This all turns into a shit sandwich, all because of what Ibrahim says and does in response

07:07to the trooper's questions. So unless this trooper is going to investigate impairment, that would be like

07:15the only thing that maybe if he suspected that Mr. Ibrahim had recently smoked, maybe he could have

07:22started an impairment investigation. But the thing is, that's not what he did. He didn't ask him to step

07:26out. He didn't ask him questions like that. He didn't ask him anything about impairment. So it's not

07:32reasonable to think that that's what he was actually doing. He was thinking that he had drugs or guns or

07:37whatever, and that's where he was going. It's obvious from the line of questioning. Now, we don't have the

07:41whole body cam, and we probably won't because they've been real selective, because again, their agenda is

07:46just to talk about something that doesn't matter. Importantly, though, the courts in Massachusetts have

07:50said that the odor of marijuana alone is not sufficient for probable cause to search a vehicle. And so if you

07:56don't have probable cause to search a vehicle and marijuana is decriminalized, I would argue you don't even

08:01have reasonable or articulable suspicion to pivot to a criminal investigation because we don't have any evidence

08:07of a crime. I don't know how anybody makes a straight face argument that based solely on the smell of even burnt or

08:13green marijuana, that you could smell that there was more than an ounce of marijuana. It's just not there. If the trooper

08:21had suspected that this backpack was a place where he had an illegal amount of marijuana, the odor alone is not enough for

08:27probable cause to search the backpack. When you reach inside the car, that is breaching the doorway for the purposes of either

08:34seizing or searching. And that's what's illegal and what's in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

08:38And again, in the absence of probable cause or some other exception to the warrant requirement like

08:42consent, we don't have enough here. Now, the real turning point in this scenario is the conversation

08:47about guns and prior arrests. And again, this is why you don't answer these questions. So you might say,

08:52well, James, if I say, hey, man, have you ever been arrested for guns? And you say, yeah, yeah,

08:57I have a long time ago. And then I say, well, what's in the backpack? And then you immediately pull it away

09:02after I ask you about guns. That's suspicious. Yeah, you're right. The problem is guns aren't

09:08illegal and neither are having them in your backpack. So I might just not want you up in my

09:14business. And there's nothing wrong with that. That's called denying consent when you ask to search

09:18it. You can't punish me for that. That's retaliation for invoking a Fourth Amendment right

09:23to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. I agree it's suspicious, but it's only

09:29suspicious that I'll have something in there that I don't want you to know about. It doesn't necessarily

09:33mean that the thing in there is illegal. And even if it does mean that the thing in there might be

09:39illegal, it's still not probable cause and it's still not an invitation for you to jump across the

09:44freaking window. You got to tell me somewhere in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence where it says that simply

09:50because you're suspicious of something, you can dive into my window and investigate anything you want to

09:56investigate. That part of the Constitution, I mean, I have no faith that it's not ultimately going to

10:02be written, but it hasn't been written yet. In closing, this is a perfect example of law enforcement

10:08using phrases or buzzwords to justify their bad deeds and then acting in ways that makes it obvious

10:15that they are not operating on sound legal principles. What this trooper did was not only illegal,

10:20but it was unjustifiable and it was reckless. If this exact same scenario played out the same way

10:27nine more times, I would predict that seven or eight of those nine times, someone would be dead.

10:33And half of those times, it would be the trooper himself. He endangered himself, he endangered the

10:39driver, and he endangered the public so that he could feel like a hero. And it was stupid and he should

10:45be immediately fired as a result of it. If he gets away with this without consequence, mark my words,

10:52this trooper will eventually do something that leads to the loss of human life. And it probably

10:58won't be that far down the line. As a final note, I want to thank attorney Peter Morano,

11:02who represents Mr. Ibrahim on these criminal charges. I reached out to him. I asked him if he'd be willing

11:08to sit down with me and talk about this case. He was more than willing to do it. And we connected a

11:12little bit over the telephone, but we just didn't have the ability to make the schedules line up.

11:17So hopefully I'll be able to get an update or speak with him at some point on the record in the

11:22future about what's going on with this case. But it wasn't that he didn't want to be involved or that

11:27I didn't want to talk to him. It just happened to be that we couldn't work it out. Anyway, I just saw

11:31this case and it was wacky. And I knew that this was something that was, there was something off about

11:36it. And I wanted to bring it to your attention. Until I see you again, take care. Always film your

11:41interactions with the police and keep your evidence to yourself.

Trooper Crosses the Line — When ‘No Consent’ Turns Chaotic 🚨

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended