Over-policing plus justified fear of impersonators

[Pawpaw]

The bottom line is that just because you understand how things work, that doesn't mean everyone does.

I'm quite aware of that

So the girls in a panic made a mistake. I have no real issue with that but her mistake escalated the situation and all the blame goes on the cops? Yeah that makes sense.

Right there is the crux of the problem. What do you suppose put the girls into a panic?

Since I wasn't there, I don't know what caused their panic, but I can't think of anything other than the way the police approached them. Of course the police didn't know about the event the girls had just attended, but if handled differently, there might not have been an issue.

BTW, I'm not slamming the cops. Mistakes were obviously (to me) made on both sides of this event. I do think the police overreacted for such a minor possible infraction.

[EEllis]

Agreed on all points.
A simple blast of lights and siren would have worked here.
Seven officers? Are the local college/underage kids all hardened Zeta Narco commandos?

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

[SQLGeek]

Right there is the crux of the problem. What do you suppose put the girls into a panic?

As I hit on in my other post, we don't really know. Too many times to count I saw overblown reactions to the mere presence of anybody from a LE Agency and not just by intoxicated people.

Or the agents messed up, which seems to be the preferred narrative by the majority posting here.

I don't have an opinion on this because too many times I've seen the media get things completely wrong in reporting and both sides are going to tell their own story to paint themselves in the best possible light. The truth is somewhere between the two and probably doesn't read much like it does in the paper.

[Keith B]

Agreed on all points.
A simple blast of lights and siren would have worked here.
Seven officers? Are the local college/underage kids all hardened Zeta Narco commandos?

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

That's the story from the ABC, but the girls when interviewed never stated that were approached by a female first. All that ever comes out is they were already in their vehicle when they were approached by people with unidentifiable badges in plain clothes, one of the plain clothes people drew a gun, and they drove off calling 911 to verify if they were real officers. They stopped when a car with emergency lights pulled them over. The state quickly dropped all charges, so I can guarantee you something doesn't match with the officers statements and actions and the girl's testimony.

[E.Marquez]

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

And you continue to belittle those with a differing opinion. I think your better then that.. so please just share your opinion.

It seems you continue to ignore the rest of the reported story. Cherry picking just a small part to make misleading responses to.
Sorry, no way to have a decent conversation like this. Again I get the impression your better then that

Again, still.. It was not ONE LONE female plains cloths look maybe like an officer involved, I know you know this as you can read.. so why continue to ignore that in your responses?

It was a group of adult males and one female in plain cloths approaching two young females at night.
It would appear they were doing nothing illegal (no charges remain, and nothing even attempted from the initial PC for the encounter)

This entire event was over the WRONG guess by ABC officers that the girls had beer....and the officers made a bad choice to attempt a stop at night, in plain clothes of two young girls who have rightfully been taught to be suspicious of cop impersonators, and even women working as part of a gang rape, murder, robbery team.

All of this over a non violent possible crime of minor in possession

[Keith B]

OK folks, it's getting a little personal and heated and comments are starting to become personal attcks. Drop the discussion if you can't discuss without attacking the other person posting.

[Cedar Park Dad]

Agreed on all points.
A simple blast of lights and siren would have worked here.
Seven officers? Are the local college/underage kids all hardened Zeta Narco commandos?

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

Seeing police lights is not uncommon, especially for teenagers. Being swarmed by seven people, not so much.

EDIT: Further I believe they actually stopped when the saw lights (and were dialing 911 at the time). That reads like people who aren't thinking the seven who tried to swarm them were police.

[EEllis]

That's the story from the ABC, but the girls when interviewed never stated that were approached by a female first. All that ever comes out is they were already in their vehicle when they were approached by people with unidentifiable badges in plain clothes, one of the plain clothes people drew a gun, and they drove off calling 911 to verify if they were real officers. They stopped when a car with emergency lights pulled them over. The state quickly dropped all charges, so I can guarantee you something doesn't match with the officers statements and actions and the girl's testimony.

We can't even say that. We just know the that the paper didn't publish them saying. They also haven't contradicted it . We have not been given a transcript just what the paper felt made the story. The gun gets mentioned after the car starts the state took weeks to drop the charges and the prosecutor said he stood behind everything the agents did just didn't want to throw the girls in jail. Again part of the reason for dropping the charges was the rape awareness thing they went to earlier that the officers wouldn't of been able to verify and then there is the press push that the girls lawyer had worked up. Press can cause all sorts of things good charges or not. So as "proof" goes it really isn't proof. Stuff that makes you wonder? Things that make you suspicious? But proof? Come on now.

[EEllis]

Agreed on all points.
A simple blast of lights and siren would have worked here.
Seven officers? Are the local college/underage kids all hardened Zeta Narco commandos?

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

Seeing police lights is not uncommon, especially for teenagers. Being swarmed by seven people, not so much.

EDIT: Further I believe they actually stopped when the saw lights (and were dialing 911 at the time). That reads like people who aren't thinking the seven who tried to swarm them were police.

But kids do panic when they see police lights, It happens a lot and we don't stop using lights because it's kids. Advocating something that we know causes some kids to panic rather while condemning agents for panicking the girls seems illogical to me because if the lights had panicked them wouldn't we still be having this conversation? Something is going to frighten everyone and while some keep repeating 7 officers over and over it's not like we have really been given any real info on anything the agents did, tactics, timeframe, who was where, just enough info to make the girls look as sympathetic as possible so they could try and get the charges dropped. Heck there isn't enough info to even make specific claims against the agents but still people persist in holding he agents out . It simply is not logical.

[talltex]

[That's absurd and unrealistic. IMHO

Not to pick on just you, ( I often qualify)...but "IMHO" has to be the most out of place abbreviation used on any forum....but certainly, in your case, the "H" just doesn't fit!

You may be right but what should I change the H to and would people get it. IMEO? IMCO? IMIO?

IMTWOUOWIODLEOAWNCTEWTNIO

Anygunanywhere

well, I've waited for someone to ask the question....c'mon Anygun...just got to know what it means...

[texanjoker]

How about these plain clothes LEO realize they are NOT IN UNIFORM and while they may know that they are LEO's and good guys, us the poor stupid non-mind reading citizens do not know. If you run at me and shout at me and wave your hands at me with an object in a dark parking lot I am going to flee if I possibly can.

The problem not one of you fellow LEO have addressed is the fact that these girls had no way of knowing that these were LEO's and not some nut jobs intent on attacking and killing them. People are not mind readers. If you don't look like a LEO don't expect people to treat you like one.

This is all alleged. These defendants claimed they didn't know they were LEO's. FYI that is the first thing the defense will tell you to claim if the the LEO are plain clothed. Plain clothed and off duty contacts are dangerous for that reason. I worked plain clothed for years and never once had a person not know I was a LEO. It is all about how you present your self. Before I jump on the anti LEO bandwagon based on one news article with a biased view I will await the facts. If they did wrong they will be dealt with, but then again, it may have happened just like the LEO's stated in their arrest affidavit and the DA is just being lazy. DA's love to drop assault on LEO charges and do so all the time. They consider it part of the job.

[texanjoker]

Way overboard for a potential of minors possessing a supposed12-pack of beer. Even if they are trying to get evidence to arrest the supplier, it was stupid to bring guns into play. I caught quite a few under age people with beer back years ago. If they were cooperative and not intoxicated, they usually walked with no beer and a good warning the first time.

Why are these guys targetting teenagers? have they so taken down every other threat that they can now concentrate on teenagers with a supposed 12 pack. Isn't that what the local constabulary is for???

Why are we leaping onto hoods, trying to break windows etc? I'm surprised no one was shot with this band of supposed law enforcement. Again people should be fired and again absolutely nothing will happen. George Orwell indeed.
Pick up that can citizen.

For many people the use of Alcohol by minors is a major issue complete with lobbying groups and major political muscle. The idea that the agency responsible for alcohol regulation in the State should ignore minors with alcohol is at the least politically unrealistic.

Then we return to someone calling for firings without even an accusation of laws broken or policies violated.

"I was following policy" is the excuse of the decade. I'll avoid the immediate Godwin reference.
Is it policy to jump on hoods, swarm teenagers and pull guns on teenegers over... beer?
If so then:
1. The policies need to change
2. The people thinking up the policies need to be fired for being that stupid.
3. The people implementing the pollicies need to be fired for not having the intelligence to realize how stupid they are.

WOW, fired over one news article that doesn't tell the whole story? I would hope you would want a thorough investigation if you were alleged to do something wrong .

[talltex]

Also it is not at all unusual for plainclothes (different from undercover BTW) ABC agents to make stops outside of establishments selling alcohol. My grandfather worked as a California ABC agent in the 70s and shared many different stories of him doing just that.

I can't speak to current policies...and I'm sure they have changed like most everything from in the early 70's, but in 77-78, I worked in Sheriff's Dept. in a college town...we had an ABC agent stationed with the dept. and I spent quite a bit of time working with him and we never arrested any minor for possession even when we observed them purchasing from a bar or store. His job was to ensure the licensed establishments were following the rules and regulations...not the customers. If we observed them serving/selling to underage or not checking ID's, he wrote citation to the seller, not to the kids. He'd go in a convenience store and observe and if he thought the kids looked underage (and this was when legal age was 18) he'd follow them out and have me approach in uniform and ask them for ID...if they were underage, he'd confiscate the beer and send them on their way. If it was in a bar, he'd approach them in a friendly manner and introduce himself and explain what he was doing and ask to see their DL...if they were legal he'd apologize for the intrusion and thank them for their time. If they were underage, he'd tell them he was sorry, but they had to leave immediately, and then he'd go write up the owner/licensee.

[Cedar Park Dad]

Agreed on all points.
A simple blast of lights and siren would have worked here.
Seven officers? Are the local college/underage kids all hardened Zeta Narco commandos?

You did hear that they girls were first approached by a single female agent and I guess that scared them so badly they locked themselves in the SUV. You don't think the lights and siren might of scared them also? Sound like that would've been over kill also. But go ahead why let reality get in the way of a good rant.

Seeing police lights is not uncommon, especially for teenagers. Being swarmed by seven people, not so much.

EDIT: Further I believe they actually stopped when the saw lights (and were dialing 911 at the time). That reads like people who aren't thinking the seven who tried to swarm them were police.

But kids do panic when they see police lights, It happens a lot and we don't stop using lights because it's kids. Advocating something that we know causes some kids to panic rather while condemning agents for panicking the girls seems illogical to me because if the lights had panicked them wouldn't we still be having this conversation? Something is going to frighten everyone and while some keep repeating 7 officers over and over it's not like we have really been given any real info on anything the agents did, tactics, timeframe, who was where, just enough info to make the girls look as sympathetic as possible so they could try and get the charges dropped. Heck there isn't enough info to even make specific claims against the agents but still people persist in holding he agents out . It simply is not logical.

I'll repeat. Per the article when someone hit them with police lights they stopped. So it actually worked.

So moral of the story-swarming teenage girls because they might have a six pack is bad. Pulling up with marked patrol car and flashing lights better.

[Cedar Park Dad]

If they did wrong they will be dealt with,

Judging by police responses noted in the articles so far, I highly doubt that.

Can someone post what policy followed here was actually good in this case?

-See someone with cans they can't identify coming out of a store- how is that PC?
-Using seven officers to arrest a six pack? how is that efficient use of resources?
-Using seven plain clothes officers without uniform officers too? really?
-Pulling firearms, attempting to break windows, jumping on hoods- really?

How would others handle this situation - again with the albeit limited info we have?