"You're not allowed to beat me … I'm a woman."

Sweetheart, you lost your "woman" exemption in the 60's. You wanted equality. Well, you got it.

It includes such favorites a "girl tells cop what the law is", quibbling about "we can carry alcohol if we're not drinking it", refusing to empty the bottle, not giving her name, cursing, and walking away. Then BLAM! It all goes to shit.

So predictable in all these videos.

Then BLAM! It all goes to shit.

Right at the moment to put her hands up to push the cop's face or hit him weakly on the face to fend off his lawful arrest. As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest. On top of refusal to identify a lawful request for ID or a name and a minor in possession of alcohol. They could probably go after her for child endangerment as well since she was asleep/passed out with her infant nearby.

After pushing at his face to avoid the cuffs, it really went downhill.

Recall that mouthy bitch on the subway in L.A.? She was on her way to meet the DMV so she couldn't give ID. And this one has an aunt who is "on the way", supposedly the owner of the booze. This "aunt", if she exists, caused this situation directly by not taking her booze with her when she left the beach (assuming any of that stuff is true).

I don't blame the cops for investigating. You have a woman laying unconscious (sleeping or passed out) on the beach, alcohol containers near her, and an infant not being watched by anyone apparently as the baby daddy was way off down the beach somewhere, as we saw when she kept screaming for him to come help her and she clearly had no idea where he was.

A reminder of the Subway Cunt and her Cuntish Co-protector getting arrested, being filmed by the Gay Male Cunt Cameraman. (Yes, we do get to use the word 'cunt' any time we want now. Samantha Bee made it all part of the social conversation.)

As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest. On top of refusal to identify a lawful request for ID or a name and a minor in possession of alcohol.

Yep. 100%. But you know they're going to drop all the charges to make it go away. Then people like Deckard will conclude that the cops had nothing, were in the wrong, and are bullies.

I say we start charging people and make them go to court. Being nice to them by dropping the charges obviously isn't working.

By the way, did you read that study that showed that accusations of police brutality dropped 93% since body cams were installed? The money saved in out-of-court settlements more than paid for the cameras.

In such jurisdictions, assault (also called attempted battery) is a threat or physical act that creates a reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact, whereas battery is a physical act that results in that harmful or offensive contact.

TooCon: As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery.

I was taught the difference between assault and battery many moons ago. I dislike how the media and press misuse the terms all the time, usually using the word assault in many cases when there is physical contact.

Just a little thing that irks me and I wanted to share it here.

Edit: I remember back in college studying for a law class test in a group. My smart friend said, Fred, this is assault and he raised his fist aimed at my arm. Then he said, this is battery and his fist landed (lightly) on my bicep. Very clear and concise explanation that I recall to this day.

I was taught the difference between assault and battery many moons ago. I dislike how the media and press misuse the terms all the time, usually using the word assault in many cases when there is physical contact.

Well, these laws do vary state to state. They are not federal laws, uniform throughout the states. If in doubt about a particular state, ask nolu where you can find the relevant statutes.

But you know they're going to drop all the charges to make it go away. Then people like Deckard will conclude that the cops had nothing, were in the wrong, and are bullies.

Depends on whether his superiors and the D.A. have any balls. Even just having the videos out there on YouBoob may help deter some bad behavior at those beaches. Most police chiefs are focused on reducing crime to a low level, not in trying to utterly eradicate every breach of the statutes.

So the D.A. or police chief might say, yeah that video shook people up a little and now we're down to only a handful of complaints about alcohol on the beach per week. And if they'd had a dozen complaints a day previously, they could legitimately consider it a success.

The purpose of law enforcement is not to eradicate crime but to reduce it as much as possible without forcing the citizens to live in a police state.

By the way, did you read that study that showed that accusations of police brutality dropped 93% since body cams were installed?

I thought it was amusing that on a forum where we can find someone to disagree with anything, body cams seemed to enjoy uniform support here among LF posters. Everyone seemed to think it was a good idea, for lots of different reasons. A lot less of the he-says-he-says in court, protecting good cops from malicious accusations of brutality, protecting the public from bad cops abusing their authority, etc. We see how the bodycams are paying off in countless cases.

And now the crooks know about those bodycams and they are a lot less likely to try dumb stuff, tell easily disproved lies at their trials, etc. So when they go off to Crook College (prison), they learn to anticipate that their interactions with cops will be filmed and it will rarely help them instead of the cops. Which means the smart move for crooks is to think through anything you do that the cop's camera will record.

I wouldn't be surprised in coming years if cops come to think of bodycams as the best thing to come along in some years. But it is a process overall. We give them the cameras but it takes a while to see the real result as the implications of those cams sinks in with criminals of various types.

TooCon, see my edit above. Nolu Spam will have me reading all day with what I consider a simple concept with a simple explanation.

You'd better know the statutes of the state you're in before you believe that that is or ever was true. Your buddy sounds like a dumbass. And statutes may have changed since as a result of the courts or state legislature.

No two states have identical laws on murder, assault, battery, rape, etc.

Those things are considered crimes in all the states but the trigger for prosecution varies, the elements of the crime can vary considerably, etc.

We have 50 states and 50 criminal codes. Then the feds, due to their meddling federal criminalization, added another 5,000 or more federal violent crime statutes to the tally (no one can determine an exact count of just how many federal violent crimes there are).

And nolu is not spamming us when he gives us quotes or links to the actual governing statutes and to relevant court decisions.

... jusT shorT lived flowering youTh

afTer ThaT noThing

love
boris

Your buddy sounds like a dumbass.

Yeah, ninth in his class of 800 and a medical doctor with many years of service. He would have been higher if he wasn't helping his fellow friends/students so much with his compassion and brain power.

Screw you.

Yeah, ninth in his class of 800 and a medical doctor with many years of service.

Maybe you should go ask him whether the statutes of state criminal laws are reliably uniform across all 50 states.

So maybe he told the state of the law in your state some 40-50 years ago. Let's grant that it was accurate for the sake of argument. All of these statutes have changed considerably over the years in all the states, either by court decisions or the state legislatures changing the law themselves. In all 50 states.

You are a dumbass if you think what some guy told you about assault and battery 50 years ago in one state is somehow still the relevant standard for assault and battery in all 50 states today.

Screw you.

Yeah, it really isn't my fault that you're a dumbass.

Dumbass.

UCMJ - first word is Uniform.

The woman on the beach and the cops are all civilians.

So UCMJ is completely irrelevant.

Nolu Spam will have me reading all day with what I consider a simple concept with a simple explanation.

Your smart friend gave you the correct, classic example.

You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.

Someone should beat the stupid out of her...

Someone should beat the stupid out of her...

Has the FBI knocked on your door to discuss why you have over 50,000 primers in your Mom's basement?

No? It just shows how slow the federal government is. Yes? You are hiding the questioning from us.

lol

It’s prey like you, that feed the need for bullies.

No offense, but your delusional rantings here have convinced me that you need to be put down like a rabid dog.

You and others of your blue ilk are a threat to society.

You and others of your blue ilk are a threat to society.

Just between me and you ... GrandIsland is an absolute idiot. If you create a root cause analysis of his posts .... he lives in his mother's basement, never to get out.

No offense, but your delusional rantings here have convinced me that you need to be put down like a rabid dog.

You’re just like every snowflake that flaps his shit smackers... just like that Hogg asshole. Real tough... but don’t have the ass or the balls to act.

All you gotta do is remove that geriatric diaper, put on your big boy pants... and complete the task you suggest.

lol

Lmfao

rational debating

You should go immediately to Hell, without passing go or collecting $200.00... for even typing those two words together.

lol

You should go immediately to Hell, without passing go or collecting $200.00... for even typing those two words together.

There is no objective evidence of "HELL," officer. Why did you pull me over? Is your opinion admissible in a court of law within the boundaries of the USA?

Off-camera, either she or her friend explains, “We didn’t even drink alcohol. You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age. You are. You’re not allowed to drink it. And we’re not drinking it.”

And that will be not less than $500 for disorderly stupid.

NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013)

2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.

1. a. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority or who knowingly consumes any alcoholic beverage in any school, public conveyance, public place, or place of public assembly, or motor vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense, and shall be fined not less than $500.00.

[snip]

And that will be not less than $500 for disorderly stupid.

NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013)

We can always count on you to bring some relevant facts.

I hope they throw the book at her.

I'm sick of seeing all these videos of people who don't know the laws and don't care what they are and then start mouthing off to cops who are just doing their jobs.

When it's all done, I think this mouthy beach bitch will have a lot more respect for the police. And she will learn some valuable facts about the laws and why we should obey them.

It includes such favorites a "girl tells cop what the law is", quibbling about "we can carry alcohol if we're not drinking it", refusing to empty the bottle, not giving her name, cursing, and walking away. Then BLAM! It all goes to shit.

So predictable in all these videos.

Yes,and it NEVER means the cops are right to beat on and abuse citizens who aren't being violent or threatening.

And she will learn some valuable facts about the laws and why we should obey them.

...said the sheep to the butcher.

Right at the moment to put her hands up to push the cop's face or hit him weakly on the face to fend off his lawful arrest. As soon as she so much as tried to push his face away open-palmed, it became an assault on the police, possibly battery. And resisting arrest.

HorseHillary! We are NOT subjects,we are free citizens with rights,and the cops had no right to start the physical confrontation over such a nickel and dime "offense".

Most cops today are assholes because the job is a asshole magnet.

I'm pretty sure he's breaking some laws down there.

HorseHillary! We are NOT subjects,we are free citizens with rights,and the cops had no right to start the physical confrontation over such a nickel and dime "offense".

He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.

You are a dumbass if you think what some guy told you about assault and battery 50 years ago in one state is somehow still the relevant standard for assault and battery in all 50 states today.

And YOU are a dumbass if you think that FACTS can change. PERCEPTION can change,but not facts,and the FACTS are those pompous asses in blue were the ones that committed assault and battery.

You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.

Someone should beat the stupid out of her...

Because she was right and knew her rights?

Is that you,Cartman?

Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority

What makes you so sure she didn't have legal authority to possess it? Maybe she was carrying it for her adult friends,or just watching it for them?

He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.

The asshole CREATED a situation that borderline gave him the authority to make an arrest. If she were a lawyer or made it known her father was a lawyer,he would have tucked his little tail up into the crack in his ass and fled,whimpering for mercy.

IF she goes to court and tries to represent herself she WILL be found guilty of resisting arrest,but that represents nothing more than the thugs in the legal system protecting themselves and the system by scratching each other's backs. 99 percent of the time what will happen is the cops will threaten to charge her with felony resisting arrest unless she drops her charges they beat her and used excessive force,and that she was not guilty of the original charge. That is NOT justice,it is abuse of official power and it goes on every day in every state in this nation,while idiots like you stand by and applaud.

IF she has a close friend or relative that is a lawyer and is bored and interested in taking the case,all the charges will be dropped against her in exchange for a written agreement that she will not sue the cops or the PD they work for for excessive use of force.

It ain't right,it ain't justice,but it is what happens everyday in every courtroom in the country.

You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age.

Someone should beat the stupid out of her...

Why,because she is right and you are mad because she was questioning the authora-TAY of goobermint dawgs?

Supposes she was with her family and carrying the beer because her father was carrying the umbrella and towels,and her mother was carrying something else?

Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.

He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.

Bullshit! He CREATED the confrontation because citizens not breaking any laws stood up to him and pointed that out,and it pissed him off.

And YOU are a dumbass if you think that FACTS can change.

Really? Let's take another example of a class of gun laws.

How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago?

How many allow CCW now?

The underlying facts of a crime don't change but the laws change all the time, state by state.

And that is a fact.

Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.

So carrying narcotics is just fine as long as the cops don't observe you selling them or using them?

Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug.

IF she has a close friend or relative that is a lawyer and is bored and interested in taking the case,all the charges will be dropped against her in exchange for a written agreement that she will not sue the cops or the PD they work for for excessive use of force.

I saw no egregious use of force. The arresting officers acted lawfully based on what we have seen.

There's a rising lawlessness on beaches around the country. Local PDs are strained in dealing with it.

The longer this went on, the more I was hoping someone would accidentally kick her in the head two or three times or just light her up with a Taser for a half-hour or so.

You're an a-hole, like your homo friend FireIsland.

She did nothing wrong to deserve what happened. I hope you post a follow-up article once the dust settles.

Apparently NJ cops are a-holes too. What a crock.

Really? Let's take another example of a class of gun laws.

How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago?

How many allow CCW now?

The underlying facts of a crime don't change but the laws change all the time, state by state.

And that is a fact.

There ARE no facts in your brain fart. It only proves that what people like YOU call "Facts" are temporary things that change with the wind.

AND.......WTF is up with your rabid approval of a state ALLOWING someone to enjoy a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?

Here is a little factoid for you,it is the nature of authorities,including cops and states to try to expand their power,and there is nothing they would forbid themselves from doing if it weren't for the US Constitution preventing them from overreaching.

Carrying is NOT consuming. Even you should be able to understand this.

So carrying narcotics is just fine as long as the cops don't observe you selling them or using them?

Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug.

If they are legal prescribed narcotics,the obvious answer is "YES!"

If they are illegal narcotics,as you so obviously want to imply,the answer is "No,and it would not be legal for them to be carried if the girls had been over 21,either.

Alcohol is a powerful, addictive, regulated recreational drug.

So what? Are you their daddy? Who died and gave you the authority to regulate who can and can not BE AROUND BUT NOT CONSUMING legal,tax-paid alcoholic beverages?

I saw no egregious use of force. The arresting officers acted lawfully based on what we have seen.

You are ok with a 200+ lb cop punching a minor female in the head that is on the ground?

Good to know.

You're an a-hole, like your homo friend FireIsland.

It's somewhat of an honor to be considered an a-hole by you.

I must be doing something right.

You are ok with a 200+ lb cop punching a minor female in the head that is on the ground?

Well, only if it is too inconvenient to just kick her in the head.

AND.......WTF is up with your rabid approval of a state ALLOWING someone to enjoy a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?

If she wants no interference from the state, then stay off patrolled state-owned property. Like the beach.

If they are illegal narcotics,as you so obviously want to imply,the answer is "No,and it would not be legal for them to be carried if the girls had been over 21,either.

. . .

So what? Are you their daddy? Who died and gave you the authority to regulate who can and can not BE AROUND BUT NOT CONSUMING legal,tax-paid alcoholic beverages?

You sure switched fast from "Of course, it's against the law" for narcotics and went to "you ain't their daddy" when it comes to alcohol.

We didn’t even drink alcohol. You’re allowed to carry alcohol if you’re under age. You are. You’re not allowed to drink it. And we’re not drinking it.”

This is why the cops say nothing when they're detaining someone and they ask, "What I do?"

Because if they tell them they start spouting bullshit like this.

How many states in this country allowed civilians to carry a concealed handgun lawfully 50 years ago?

It does demonstrate the radical changes of the character of our society.

50 years ago if you were carrying concealed it was assumed you were the bad guy carrying it for nefarious purposes. Why else would you have a concealed weapon?

Today, there are numerous examples of why people carry concealed for defensive, not offensive, purposes.

Obviously I don't want to turn this into a CCW chat thread

Especially after you bragged on the other thread how you stayed on-topic despite numerous posts.

"In the case of CCW, the radical change in state laws has happened in just 25 years."

The NRA deserves a lot of credit for that, I think. Plus the criminals, of course.

But the point is that there's no reason not to -- assuming you're a trained, responsible adult (even though most armed criminals aren't). It's hard to argue against self-defense, especially when that self-defense has the side effect of protecting others. Plus, no one knows you're armed, so they can't be offended.

Civilian open- carry is disconcerting. My nephew in Ohio open carries and when I'm there I feel unprepared for some upcoming shootout. Like, "What do you know that I don't know?"

The funny part is that he liked his girlriend's 9mm better as a carry weapon, so they swapped. But hers is powder blue and looks like a squirt gun. A 9mm squirt gun.

My nephew in Ohio open carries and when I'm there I feel unprepared for some upcoming shootout.

It's a right to carry but I really don't like open carry, don't like to see it. I don't even like to see cops wearing a holster.

If you want to carry, get a CCW and stop making gun-shy people nervous.

Of course, I'm sure I'm very much in the minority on this, at least on this forum. And I do live in a state with a fairly low barrier to get a CCW.

I also think that open-carry mostly hurts the gun rights cause more than it helps. I'm thinking of the rather aggressive open-carry nuts down in Texas especially. There's another bunch in California.

If you lived a few years ago you wouldn't believe in germs and you would be telling deckard that it is a conspiracy theory that the world is not flat. 🍿

God is not ABSOLUTE. God is relative to your capability & capacity to survive.

It's a right to carry but I really don't like open carry, don't like to see it.

I get nervous at a gun store when I see gang-bangers (well, they look like gang-bangers) handling firearms. I have this strange feeling we'll be meeting again.

I also think that open-carry mostly hurts the gun rights cause more than it helps.

Only when it's done to intimidate. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

I get nervous at a gun store when I see gang-bangers (well, they look like gang-bangers) handling firearms. I have this strange feeling we'll be meeting again.

Statistically, you're more likely to face off in a gunfight against someone of your own race. This is true for both blacks and whites.

You are several percent more likely to be killed by a black man than a non-black.

So while your thought of fellow gunshop customers as possible assailants is ironic, outside of some improbable circumstances you are still much more likely to be in a gun fight with another white.

I think you probably do know all of this already. John Lott and others have posted some well-known studies on gun violence for some years and the results regarding interracial vs. intraracial shootings is pretty consistent.

I'm pretty sure he's breaking some laws down there.

Nope. And I am whistling DIXIE!

If she wants no interference from the state, then stay off patrolled state-owned property. Like the beach.

Ahhh,"The State" is your massa,and you are happy with that.

Good to know.

You sure switched fast from "Of course, it's against the law" for narcotics and went to "you ain't their daddy" when it comes to alcohol.

Well,Bubba,you specified ILLEGAL narcotics,and legal beer.

50 years ago if you were carrying concealed it was assumed you were the bad guy carrying it for nefarious purposes.

HorseHillary! I knew several local businessmen that carried concealed weapons on a daily basis 50 years ago,and nobody thought anything of it.

Why else would you have a concealed weapon?

Uhhhh,to protect yourself from robbery and assault?

HorseHillary! I knew several local businessmen that carried concealed weapons on a daily basis 50 years ago,and nobody thought anything of it.

I was at this country tavern out in the boonies about twenty years ago in the afternoon. The thing I noticed was this large .45 caliber revolver sitting next to the cash register against the wall, not the counter. The place had a reputation for rough types showing up. I doubt they were ever robbed though.

I think the name of it was The Black Cat. I had a beer or two with friends and a nice visit. Not sure if I'd want to be there after 11 p.m. though.

Supposes she was with her family and carrying the beer because her father was carrying the umbrella and towels,and her mother was carrying something else?

Suppose you came back into reality, fag patriarch.

Suppose you came back into reality, fag patriarch.

Suppose you eat shit and die,Fire Island?

Suppose you eat shit and die,Fire Island?

Speaking of death... how old are you again?

He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.

He made a lawful arrest and he was within his rights and his duty to uphold the laws.

The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law which violates the Constitution to be valid.

This is succinctly stated as follows: 'All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.' Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803) 'When rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.'

Maybe they beat their wives as well, wouldn’t surprise me, unless the only reason they don’t is because their wives could beat the hell outa them. What a country we live in now, eh?

Man, you gotta love how many ‘men’ are in this thread cheering a girl getting beat up by a guy. I bet they’re all tough guys too. Lol.

At what point was she actually beaten up? She struggled to resist arrest and got cuffed.

You sure do love to hurl those allegations though, a real petty liberal streak of accusation. Makes you feel morally superior apparently.

Before you declare this woman more holy than the Virgin Mary, let's look at some other reporting on her little hobbies.

Maybe you don’t read what you post? By the way? I am morally superior. It just is what it is.

I don’t watch videos. Opening sentence in OP mentions a beating.

So, offered a chance to see the evidence yourself, you prefer to remain ignorant and form opinions based on slanted second-hand reporting.

Maybe you don’t read what you post? By the way? I am morally superior. It just is what it is.

Maybe being gullible or lazy is the source of your moral superiority.

In November of 2017, Weinman pleaded guilty ... she was sentenced to serve four years of probation ...

So that means she has her probation revoked and she has to serve time for the 2017 crime in addition to these new charges?

I hope.

I was at this country tavern out in the boonies about twenty years ago in the afternoon. The thing I noticed was this large .45 caliber revolver sitting next to the cash register ...

At that point I turn arond and find another bar.

Man, you gotta love how many ‘men’ are in this thread cheering a girl getting beat up by a guy.

So you don't believe in gender equality?

So that means she has her probation revoked and she has to serve time for the 2017 crime in addition to these new charges?

Judges in most states have flexibility and the probation laws vary. I have no idea what NJ does. I would think there would be some jail time.

Some additional info from Heavy.com:

So she admits that it was her alcohol and defends it by alleging that 90% of the young people on the beach were also minors in possession. The mayor was interviewed too, "Troiano told local media underage drinking is a problem. 'I don’t understand why it seems to be that this is a God-given right that they can come here and drink underage,' he said." Obviously, this is another major beach with problems of rising lawlessness as we have seen around the country in recent years.

So these are just summer beach cops, with minimal police training. Security guards with a badge. Maybe they're hoping to hired by a PD. You kinda notice the police chief is trying to be supportive but maybe he's not fighting for these seasonal cops like he would for his full-timers.

Like any police incident, the who/what/where/when starts to give you a better picture of the incident. I'm not sure whether it's ordinary or not for seasonal beach cops to be as aggressive as this. Maybe some of the public resentment is due to the fact that they are seasonal cops, not full-time cops or deputies who have a lot more training.

You constitutionally need one. You know that right?

You constitutionally need one. You know that right?

I don't think you can cite a Supreme Court opinion to support that. I've never heard that before.

It is moot anyway. She gave the breath sample as requested. Apparently, so did her friend though you don't really see that.

Did they get a search warrant for that breathalyzer. You constitutionally need one.

She was a minor in possession of alcohol. That gave them probable cause to test her.

But it's a moot point. They asked and she voluntarily complied. Twice, I think.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

You are more like a nazi than an American constitutionalist.

Anyhow. If there was probable cause where is the oath or affirmation.

but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

anything could’ve been written down on that paper so I wouldn’t give it to him.

She says that twice. Can't she read?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

Her person was secure, the alcohol was not concealed on her body or clothing. She wasn't in a house/home/residence, no personal papers were involved, and I don't think alcohol in plain sight qualifies as an "effect" but as visible contraband (when possessed by a minor). And they didn't search her at all. She even alleges that they didn't seize the alcohol after they arrested her but just left it on the beach. So where is your search and where is your seizure? Neither occurred.

I don't think the Fourth Amendment applies here.

She says that twice. Can't she read?

She doesn't write badly so she can read pretty well.

I'll bet her lawyer just loved her posting that little Facebook confession.     : )

And they didn't search her at all.

They searched her person. They searched her breath.

I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something.

The plain words of the constitution were violated.

They searched her person. They searched her breath.

They did not search her person that I saw. They requested a breath sample and she complied voluntarily with the request.

If you surrender a right, that's your problem. And the state and federal courts do not believe a breathalyzer violates fundamental rights. It's not like that defense has not been tried (and failed) many times in court.

The plain words of the constitution were violated.

I still don't see a search or a seizure.

They searched her person. They searched her breath.

I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something.

I'm with you Pebbles. I consider a breathalyzer the same as a cavity search.

It doesn't say you can search if someone is stupid and agrees to your illegal search. It says no searches.

She wasn't searched. The alcohol was in plain sight by her blanket.

What, you expect the cops to go around blindfolded so they don't see evidence of crimes providing probably cause for further investigation?

If she hadn't had the alcohol out in plain sight next to her, it seems very unlikely that they would have ever stopped to question her and then arrest her.

An officer seeing something in plain sight is not conducting a search. He's just seeing evidence.

That is the first positive comment I have received from you in many moons.

See? I told you that you were wrong. Now even Fred is agreeing with you.     : )

If they want to arrest her for the alcohol then so be it.

Like I said I'm only talking about the breathalyzer.

I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age.

At least the beachs I've been on.

I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age.

I'm not sure if all public beaches ban it though that is a safe bet. But a minor is always banned, on the beach or elsewhere.

This girl isn't too bright or she wouldn't have been displaying it openly. It's bound to catch any cop's eye. And the girl looks like she could be in high school.

I believe alcohol on the beach is against the law regardless of age.

At least the beaches I've been on.

Not sure if that's true.

Canned beer is fine at some, bottled (glass) beer is a no-no for obvious reasons.

So she was 5-6 months pregnant in September 2016 when she committed some pretty serious crimes. Then when her daugher wasn't even a year old, she committed more crimes and paid $10,000 restitution and court costs and got 4 years probation.

I think this is not a law-abiding person.

See? I told you that you were wrong. Now even Fred is agreeing with you. : )

Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while.

NORMALLY I'm very cynical about these types of possible over-officiousness.

I will say that the initial reports were clearly way slanted toward the Witch in question. Story was spun AGAINST LE as usual. UNTIL the Wildwood PD released th body-cam.

Drunken Witch is Guilty of several offenses. INCLUDING being an obnoxious attention-ho, disturbing the peace, incitement, lying her azz off, and assaulting a LE.

I. FULLY. CHEERED. ON. HER. BEAT-DOWN.

*My perspective*: Having worked at the Seaside NJ beaches for several years (back when), this kind of animal was simply carted away without all this phony fanfare. By screeching and screaming, she's tried to cover her own lawlessness to exploit the fake, "MEN ARE MEAN WOMEN-HATERS!" meme.

(This is the type of selfish weaselly witch who would cry, "RAPE!!!" in public in you brushed against her.)

As TC has documented above, this disrespectful witch was already ON PROBATION and NOT a good person. What we DON'T need: A bunch of these types of Dem-Leftist trouble-making anarchists pulling this BS in public as we're all trying to enjoy ourselves in peace.

Having worked at the Seaside NJ beaches for several years (back when), this kind of animal was simply carted away without all this phony fanfare.

So was busting minors for alcohol openly displayed a usual thing back when? Was this use of force something that surprised you or seemed typical for summer beach cops like these?

[I assume you had seasonal cops back then too.]

Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while.

I'll say. Fred even told me to go pound sand. My feelings were really hurt.

So she was 5-6 months pregnant in September 2016 ...

... and 18 years old. Any record of crimes committed prior to that -- and I'm guessing quite a few -- would be sealed. So, she's off to a running start and I'm sure we haven't heard the last of her, given her attitude towards the law and law enforcement.

At least the kid has a father. No idea how that happened.

Heh -- this is one of the most widely emotional, polarizing threads here in a while.

Yeah. I'm crying.

One of the cops states she’s going to have to pour out her alcohol.

Cop: "Alcohol is not allowed on the beach. You're going to have to pour it out."
Me: "Oh, I didn't realize that. OK. I'm pouring it out."
Cop: "Thank you. Have a nice day."

No assault. No beating. No arrest. No YouTube video. No Facebook posting.

I live a dull life. (But with no criminal record.)

Apparently, some people think you have a constitutional right to display that you have alcohol on a patrolled public beach even if you're a minor.

Apparently, some people think you have a constitutional right to display that you have alcohol on a patrolled public beach even if you're a minor.

I guess she actually believed what she was saying -- as long as she's not drinking it, it's legal.

Misdemeanor stupidity.

Before you declare this woman more holy than the Virgin Mary, let's look at some other reporting on her little hobbies.

Yeah,that little thing assaulted those two fat cops and had them in fear of dey widdle lifes. Da poor bayabys! And all they did was attack her and thrown her to the ground and hit her in the head!

She's a bully! A bully,ah tells ya!

As for the rest of it,sounds like a typical example of the pigs overcharging to get a plea bargain conviction. IOW,police and judicial abuse of power and authority for profit and to cover their own incompetent asses.

anything could’ve been written down on that paper so I wouldn’t give it to him.

She says that twice. Can't she read?

Maybe she thought it would be a good idea to write it twice so slow-witted people would understand it?

They searched her person. They searched her breath.

I know i'm in the minority and you guys think the Supreme court is god like or something.

I'm with you Pebbles. I consider a breathalyzer the same as a cavity search.

The sound you are hearing is that of AKA nailing a framed copy of that post to his wall.

As for the rest of it,sounds like a typical example of the pigs overcharging to get a plea bargain conviction.

Well, if she is correct and they never did actually confiscate the alcohol, then it would seem they have no physical evidence of M.I.P. All her lawyer has to do is say, "What alcohol? I see no alcohol in evidence".

So she might get off on that charge. It could cause the D.A. to drop all the charges since that was the offense that set events in motion.

Yeah,that little thing assaulted those two fat cops and had them in fear of dey widdle lifes.

They didn't look fat.

They'd only been on the job for a month or so. So they hadn't had time yet to bulk up on donuts and steroids.

New Jersey has been under Sharia Law since governor Crisco. It's mandatory in NJ now to beat women if they have alcohol, and aren't wearing a burqa.

then it would seem they have no physical evidence of M.I.P.

Just her voluntary testimony, on camera, that she illegally possessed it.

Of course she could say she was just kidding. But the cop would say he didn't know that and based his subsequent actions on what he thought was a truthful statement by her at the time.

What makes you so sure she didn't have legal authority to possess it? Maybe she was carrying it for her adult friends,or just watching it for them?

She was UNDERAGE. It was ILLEGAL and IMPOSSIBLE for her to lawfully POSSESS an alcoholic beverage. It was a not less than $500 offense. I posted the New Jersey statute.

She was UNDERAGE. It was ILLEGAL and IMPOSSIBLE for her to lawfully POSSESS an alcoholic beverage. It was a not less than $500 offense. I posted the New Jersey statute.

Define "possess". Sounds to me like you think it is illegal for her to be on a beach,or maybe even in a state,where alcoholic beverages exist.

Was she not a part of a family group,at least one of whom was an adult,who at that particular moment was in the water with her child?

Define "possess". Sounds to me like you think it is illegal for her to be on a beach,or maybe even in a state,where alcoholic beverages exist.

I posted the New Jersey statute. Try reading it.

NJ Rev Stat § 2C:33-15 (2013)

2C:33-15 Possession, consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons under legal age; penalty.

1. a. Any person under the legal age to purchase alcoholic beverages who knowingly possesses without legal authority or who knowingly consumes any alcoholic beverage in any school, public conveyance, public place, or place of public assembly, or motor vehicle, is guilty of a disorderly persons offense, and shall be fined not less than $500.00.

Was she underage?

Was she in a public place?

Did the police find the alcoholic beverage?

Did she argue that it was legal for her to possess the alcoholic beverage?

If either you or she need someone to define the word possess, a judge will do that for not less than $500.

Was she not a part of a family group,at least one of whom was an adult,who at that particular moment was in the water with her child?

Nope the "aunt" she claimed was on the way never showed. The baby daddy was playing in the water some distance away. You may have noticed she screamed for him a half-dozen times and it took him a minute or so to show up (seen in the tape by the cops yelling at him to back off).

If either you or she need someone to define the word possess, a judge will do that for not less than $500.

But she says they didn't confiscate the alcohol as evidence.

Maybe this will all blow up on an evidentiary challenge from her attorney.

"What alcohol was my client alleged to possess, your honor?" Then the other charges probably evaporate.

The baby daddy was playing in the water some distance away. You may have noticed she screamed for him a half-dozen times and it took him a minute or so to show up (seen in the tape by the cops yelling at him to back off).

Well,he was probably foolish enough to think there was no danger of his wife being attacked on a public beach in broad daylight.

Well,he was probably foolish enough to think there was no danger of his wife being attacked on a public beach in broad daylight.

He was just a baby daddy, not a husband and has another 16.5 years of being on the hook financially for her baby. Assuming that it really is his baby and not some other guy's. IOW, he's a dumbass however you slice it.

He was just a baby daddy, not a husband

So what?

So what?

So: you were factually inaccurate. Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.

So: you were factually inaccurate. Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.

That's just pathetic. Desperation in order to try to win a losing argument is never pretty,but you are taking it to new lows.

Desperation in order to try to win a losing argument is never pretty,but you are taking it to new lows.

The article describes him as "her daughter's father". Not a husband, not a fiancee. The child is an infant only 18mo old. And that makes him the baby daddy.

The article describes him as "her daughter's father". Not a husband, not a fiancee. The child is an infant only 18mo old. And that makes him the baby daddy.

So what? In WHAT important way does that make any difference at all? How does it change anything?

I was merely correcting this impression. They aren't married, they aren't engaged, she and her baby live with her mom, I think.

You were suggesting they were a pair with legal status or declared intentions.

I was suggesting there was an adult of legal age to possess beer as a part of the group.

I was suggesting there was an adult of legal age to possess beer as a part of the group.

There wasn't. She told the cops her "aunt" was on the way. The "aunt" never showed. She made a CreepBook post after that said she was M.I.P. and excusing it by saying the 90% of the minors on the beach were also M.I.P. Then she deleted the post but someone snapshotted it before she got it deleted.

Neither he nor his Feckless Cunt baby mama had any lifetime commitment to each other.

Hey! You can't say "cunt". Oh, wait. Yes you can. I forgot that word is now an accepted part of American lexicon. Sorry.

(But why do I have this nagging feeling that the word would still be taboo if a conservative comedian referred to Michelle's children that way?)

She told the cops her "aunt" was on the way.

Well, you see yer Honor, I thought it was legal for me to have a gun as long as I didn't shoot it. And, uh, my aunt was on the way and she has a license. And, uh, just about everyone else had a gun.

Well, you see yer Honor, I thought it was legal for me to have a gun as long as I didn't shoot it. And, uh, my aunt was on the way and she has a license. And, uh, just about everyone else had a gun.

Exactly. These ne'er-do-well Feckless Cunts will lie at the drop of a hat.

These ne'er-do-well Feckless Cunts