Title: A Dozen Cops Swarm, Arrest Man Because He Had an Air Freshener on His Mirror Source:
Free Thought Project URL Source:https://thefreethoughtproject.com/air-freshener-arrest-nypd/ Published:Jun 21, 2019 Author:Matt Agorist Post Date:2019-06-22 11:44:09 by Deckard Keywords:None Views:2474 Comments:8
New York, NY — In 2015, TFTP reported on a ruling by the Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals that said it is suspicious for a vehicle to have air fresheners, rosaries, or pro-police bumper stickers and therefore justifies probable cause for a stop.
The ruling stems from a 2011 Texas court case in which a couple was pulled over for having rosaries hanging from the rearview mirror, as well as a few air fresheners, and a DARE sticker on the back of the vehicle.
Nohemi Pena-Gonzalez was pulled over by Police Officer Mike Tamez when she was driving just 2 MPH over the speed limit. The officer did not pull her over because she was speeding, but because he suspected that she was trafficking drugs, and found the contents of her vehicle and the sticker to be suspicious.
Eventually, the officer questioned her husband, Ruben Pena-Gonzalez, who agreed to allow the officer search to their vehicle. The officer did not find any drugs, but did find a large sum of cash that he confiscated, and then sent Ruben Pena-Gonzalez to jail.
In 2015, the case was taken to the Court of Appeals, where it was decided that Officer Tamez had reasonable suspicion to detain the family and ask to search their vehicle.
“We do have concerns that classifying pro-law enforcement and anti-drug stickers or certain religious imagery as indicators of criminal activity risks putting drivers in a classic ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ position. But we need not decide whether these items alone, or in combination with one another, amount to reasonable suspicion because we find the more suspicious evidence to be the array of air fresheners and inconsistencies in the driver’s responses to the officer’s basic questions. We have long recognized that the presence of air fresheners, let alone four of them placed throughout an SUV, suggests a desire to mask the odor of contraband.”
This ruling upholds the idea that police officers can profile and detain people who aren’t actually committing any crimes.
As the following case illustrates, this tactic of profiling and harassing is still being carried out today and used to terrorize innocent people.
On Father’s Day, instead of spending time with his son, Sam Detroit was kidnapped and locked in a cage. He had done nothing wrong, had harmed no one and was simply dropping his friend off at work, when he was surrounded by a dozen cops who then arrested him — over an air freshener.
In an exclusive interview, Detroit told the Free Thought Project that he was parked in his car, waiting for his friend to pick up his paycheck from work when he noticed police officers from the 120th precinct start to surround him.
“They walked up to my car and ask for me to identify myself and I asked ‘why?'” Detroit said.
Detroit, who tells TFTP that he actually passed the test to become a cop in New York but decided against it, asked once more, why they wanted his ID.
When he asked for a third time why they wanted to ID him, the cops looked inside his vehicle and claimed that his air freshener gave them probable cause.
At this point, there are more than a dozen cops surrounding this innocent man and the only reason they can tell him they are there is because he has an air freshener.
As Detroit’s friends question this ridiculous harassment and detainment over an air freshener, police then move in and arrest Detroit.
He would spend Father’s Day — away from his son locked in a cage — for an air freshener.
Detroit says he was charged with interfering with a police investigation and refusing to identify.
He tells us that police also drove off in his vehicle and illegally searched it.
TFTP contacted the 120th precinct of the NYPD but they did not give us any information on the arrest.
Detroit said that when he saw the judge the next day and told him what happened, “the judge laughed and said ‘let this man go.'”
After he got out, Detroit found out that police had profiled him, claiming he fit the description of a suspect. However, because he was not the suspect, they arrested him over an air freshener.
Detroit says he has a court date on July 15th and plans on fighting the charges. If there is any semblance of justice left in the system, he should have no problem beating them.
Time after time, we hear from the apologist crowd that “if you don’t break the law, you have nothing to worry about.” And, time after time, instances like this prove the utter ridiculousness of that claim.
Poster Comment:
Time after time, we hear from the apologist crowd that “if you don’t break the law, you have nothing to worry about.” And, time after time, instances like this prove the utter ridiculousness of that claim.
"He matched the description of a man the police were looking for. Had he provided his ID, the cops would have realized their mistake and let him go."
That is reasomable.
"When he asked for a third time why they wanted to ID him, the cops looked inside his vehicle and claimed that his air freshener gave them probable cause."
That is unreasomable.
It is generally better to be honest. In the old days when I was in more of a camping/hiking mode and on the way back from Canada, I had the US border guys tearing up my car and asking me to disrobe because an agent said he "saw marijuana seeds" on the floor of my back seat. Let's just disregard the fact that the floor was obstructed by a large air mattress.
The customs men spent ninety minutes turning me and my old Chevy upside down. Of course they found nada. Maybe the border agent did like the look of my hoopty. Still pisses me off to think about it.
I appreciate the job these guys do, but like I say, it's always better to honest.
[Matt Agorist] As Detroit’s friends question this ridiculous harassment and detainment over an air freshener, police then move in and arrest Detroit.
He would spend Father’s Day — away from his son locked in a cage — for an air freshener.
An air freshener used in a manner that violated New York law.
- - - - - - - - - -
[Deckard] Time after time, we hear from the apologist crowd that “if you don’t break the law, you have nothing to worry about.”
He did break the law. NYCL, VAT § 375, Subparagraph 30. It is useful to determine what the law is before relying upon one's ignorant, mistaken beliefs.
Time after time, Matt Agorist reports FAKE NEWS.
[Matt Agorist] Detroit says he was charged with interfering with a police investigation and refusing to identify.
Dumb shit.
[Matt Agorist] Detroit said that when he saw the judge the next day and told him what happened, “the judge laughed and said ‘let this man go.'”
[...]
Detroit says he has a court date on July 15th and plans on fighting the charges.
Let this man go. Free at last, free at last, good God almighty, free at last.
Be back on the 15th to answer to the charges.
Non-requirement to identify only applies when there is no reasonable suspicion, and no arrest. Here there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a law was violated, and an arrest, and charges filed, and the court required dirtbag to answer to those charges.
Provision of identity is required in all cases where the dirtbag is arrested.
If the driver of a vehicle is arrested, the vehicle is subject to a search.
[randge #4] Whatever you want to call it, you need a reason, an effing reasonable reason to stop someone and demand ID.
The cops had effing proof beyond an effing reasonable doubt that an effing offense had been committed, was being committed, and would continue to be committed. As the dirtbag refused to provide ID, an arrest was required. A dirtbag may be kept in custody until his identity is verified. Citations are not issued anonymously.
"Sam Detroit" should know the law before relying upon dumb, stupid, ignorant misbeliefs.
[randge #4] De cops ain't had dat.
De popo haz dat.
"When he asked for a third time why they wanted to ID him, the cops looked inside his vehicle and claimed that his air freshener gave them probable cause."
That is unreasomable.
The cops correctly cited a violation of New York State law. As Dindu refused to provide ID, his arrest was required, and the search of the vehicle was lawful pursuant thereto.
New York Consolidated Laws, Vehicle and Traffic Law
VAT § 375. Equipment
Subparagraph 30.
30. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a motor vehicle with any object placed or hung in or upon the vehicle, except required or permitted equipment of the vehicle, in such a manner as to obstruct or interfere with the view of the operator through the windshield, or to prevent him from having a clear and full view of the road and condition of traffic behind such vehicle.
Upon request, show the police your driver’s license, registration, and proof of insurance. In certain cases, your car can be searched without a warrant. To protect yourself later, you should state that you do not consent to a search.
If you’re suspected of drunk driving, you will be asked to take a breath-alcohol and coordination test. If you fail the tests, or if you refuse to take them, you will be arrested, your driver’s license may be suspended, and your car may be taken away.
If you are arrested, your car will be subject to a search.
Lastly, an officer cannot write you a summons if you do not provide i.d; instead he must arrest you. That means that if you are stopped for a violation such as loitering and do not provide i.d., you will be arrested.
Air fresheners hanging in your car could get you could get arrested
By: Al Vaughters
Posted: Jun 06, 2016 08:21 PM EDT
Updated: Jun 06, 2016 08:21 PM EDT
BUFFALO, N.Y. (WIVB) - If you own a cardboard air freshener that hangs from your rear view mirror, it might come as a shock: dangling that scented ornament from your mirror is against the law in the state of New York.
