TX - Sandra Bland, 28, found dead in jail cell, Waller County, 13 July 2015 #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Okay not missing but HD was full. At any rate it is 'missing' as we don't have it for evidence. Strange that. IMO

Not "Missing" as it was never there to begin with.

miss·ing
adjective
:(of a thing) not able to be found because it is not in its expected place.

: not present or included when expected or supposed to be
 
It never existed so it can't be missing. Saying that a police recording is missing in a controversial case implies some kind of coverup.

If evidence comes out that there was a recording and something happened to it then we have something to talk about. Until that happens, saying that the recording is missing is just a rumor. JMO

Agree. I have no doubt that the FBI and Texas Rangers will be able to look at the last contents of Officer Goodie dash cam and with her radio interactions/reports with dispatch and confirm whether her dash cam matches and confirms nothing inappropriate was done. JMHO
 
Posted her history last thread

serveral were from having no insurance, a bunch of charges were thrown out
but basically IMO irrelevent to now being dead as it relates to this whole mess imo

Its all relevant. And was also reported in Media.

Relevant to me, because she had marijuana in her system (reflects to her prior charges) has a history not following laws in at least 2 states in which she lived. Breaking driving laws (even prior not using turn signal) yet has not even been responsible enough to pay fines back to 2013. Charged and convicted of no insurance and expired tags. Again still not paid, total disrespect for the privilege of driving a vehicle. Ahh yes, she had some charges dropped, but she still didn't pay the fines on the ones that found guilty of. http://www.nbcchicago.com/investiga...ters-With-Police-316025661.html#ixzz3geb6z8s6

Are you a driver in the US? Do you think its ok that you as a assumed law abiding citizen, carry the insurance the law requires, pay the registration fees for your tags. Yet some who don't think it applies to them, get ticketed, and disregard those too. Do you disregard a ticket if you were ever given one? I have feeling if Sandra Bland ever found herself in a situation where she was in an accident, she would demand the other driver be held responsible.

And it was relevant when she broke the law and ran a stop sign and then failed to use a turn signal while changing lanes. Especially in front of a police. The reason she is dead, is because for unknown reasons to us, she chose to take her own life. Very sad and tragic. But she owns that too.

I doubt we hear anything from the Family 2nd Autopsy unless they find something that contradicts the one preformed and released. Silence speaks loud, in those cases where they are very vocal until they have same results. JMHO
 
I never saw SB kick the officer. Maybe that didn't happen.

I didn't see the man walk on the moon or the international space station zoom by over the earth, does that mean it didn't happen because I didn't see it? No, just means it was out of my view but there is others who witnessed it. So its my right to believe or disbelieve. What we think on this whole case is just our opinion. What will matter is what the Investigation by FBI and Texas Rangers determine. They have facts and more info than we do. I guarantee what the Grand Jury hears/sees will be more than what we know at this time if not ever. As we know from reading the Grand Jury transcripts from last year in Michael Brown case... Those "witnesses" that did the media circuit and started many rumors, people still believe as truth.... the Grand Jury found them to not be telling the truth. JMHO (except the GJ findings in case against Officer Darren Wilson, its avail to read)
 
When I looked at the video, and listened to and read comments about what happened, I thought you were being very, very generous to BE who had been "trolling" behind the victim, Sandra Bland (she was the victim of a violent arrest don't forget) and forced her to make the lane change so that he could have grounds to arrest her.

BE, IMO, had already decided he was going to make an arrest and get his quota made, and there was nothing Sandra Bland could have done to change it.
IMO, BE was looking for a response, and if he didn't get one through his nasty, unprofessional manner, he'd force one physically.

Sandra Bland was polite to him while she was in the car. He forced the issues, and he was not going to let her go. No matter how polite she was. It would not have mattered. He did not follow his training or correct procedures.

BE forced her to change lanes, thereby starting the incident.

BE unlawfully told Sandra Bland to put out her cigarette.
BE unlawfully demanded that Sandra get out of her car without giving her a reason.
BE refused to tell Sandra the charge on which she was being arrested.
BE held a taser to her face and threatened to light her up. If that thing had gone off accidentally she would, at the very least, have suffered catastrophic brain damage. He was not using a dangerous weapon in an authorized manner.
BE changed his story about the manner in which he claimed he had been assaulted.
BE slammed Sandra's head into the ground.
BE hurt Sandra's wrist.
When told of Sandra's medical condition, BE said "good".

IMO, Sandra was angry and frightened, and, after the recent series of situations in which unarmed black people have been assaulted (a 14 year old girl in a bikini was considered a threat by one gun carrying cop) or killed by LEOs, few could blame her. I don't think it's reasonable to expect someone who has been tailgated, bullied and told she is under arrest by a man who will not tell her what she is being charged with to just be cool and polite.

Perhaps BE should not have bellowed demands or shrieked that he was going to light Sandra up with his taser. I certainly don't think that made him a particularly powerful figure either.

Sandra Bland did not attack BE. BE is not a victim.
Sandra Bland was the victim.
BE instigated and escalated this fiasco every step of the way because, IMO, he wanted the result: meeting his arrest quota.

However, I will agree with you that someone at the scene could have and, I think, should have kept her cool and de-escalated the rapidly deteriorating situation.
She had the knowledge, the skills, the power and authority of her badge to do it.

And that person utterly failed to do what she had a duty to do, had been trained to do, and was being paid to do.

BE's partner failed to do her job. By not by not upholding the laws as she was sworn to do, IMO, she let down Sandra Bland, she let down her department, and she let down the citizens of Waller County.

Respectfully BBM.... :laughcry: ... How in the WORLD can you give Trooper BE the Power make Sandra Bland change lanes and not use her turn signal????? WOW, what other super powers does he have??? WOW... and on any injuries she may have alleged to her sister (broken shoulder iirc) or her wrists.... she refused medical from the EMT that responded. We dont know yet any medical or meds received while in jail ..JMHO
 
She had been charged with DUI twice. One conviction for dui and the other dismissed. I don't consider previous Dui incidents and being arrested while having high amounts of mj in her system irrelevent. Nor do I consider the numerous unpaid fines she had in multiple counties irrelevant. They're indicative of a pattern.......

I live in the area in IL where she had the numerous driving tix and dui. I know how the court system works for in IL and she would have had plenty of setvices available to help her. Her decisions were a snowball effect. It was quick fast bottom coming off pot and nictine as well as considering she was charged with felony and her family and friends had let her sit there a few days. That was a lot happening at once for someone with untreated depression and substance abuse problems.

Agree. We don't know if she was or wasn't allowed cigs in jail. Never been so not sure if they get to smoke or not. But all her priors as with this one was of her own doing. Maybe her family was letting her set out her bad behavior. Only the week prior per her own Mother at Sandra funeral stated that they had not been close but and that Sandra had apologized for things in her past. Maybe she was tired of bailing her out.
 
Since that man experienced both those situations, and you haven't, I think his opinion carries more weight then yours.

Once you have experienced waking up to the sound of police breaking down your door, and jumping on to your bed pointing guns in your face, then come back and tell us how much you enjoyed it. But I have a feeling that once that actually happens, you will change your mind pretty quickly.

Which didnt happen in this case at hand.
 
IIRC, the levels referred to in the autopsy would have had no relevance to any levels in Sandra Bland's system on the day of her arrest and incarceration. If I'm incorrect, then I hope one of the medical professional sleuthers will post the correct information. Sandra Bland was not stopped for weaving in and out of traffic, driving too slowly and causing traffic problems or any behaviour that would indicate intoxication. So implying that she was stoned while driving is a stretch. Again, IIRC, any presence of marijuana in her system on Friday would have been gone by Monday. The importance, in my understanding, of the level that is claimed on the autopsy results released by LE is that she must have ingested that drug while being held prisoner. So this should have nothing to do with BE. It has more to do with the conditions of the jail and the competency of its employees from the time Sandra was put into their custody until she died.

If BE did suspect Sandra Bland of driving while intoxicated, he could, and possibly should, have followed the correct procedure and conducted a sobriety test. But he didn't.

Respectfully, also possible that she ingested it in the car as Trooper BE was running her DL.
 
One time is one time to many. Yes... I would like to know if others have had any issues with BE during traffic stops and if any complaints are in his file.IMO

Which if there were prior reports, would be in his personnel file and would be part of any investigation I would think. JMHO
 
I didn't follow this story from the start so it sounds as though I missed a lot of the rumors. I think it's that way with many cases. The media gets it wrong or it's transcribed from people that get a word here or there wrong.
Again it would be great if the HD wasn't "full" on the second patrol car and the male citizen was able to get more on his recording.
That would have answered a few questions at least.
I don't know about the race issue. I'm keeping an open mind on that one. I doubt if it could be proven either way. IMO

Missing words/transcribed incorrect~not verbatim is not facts. And when incorrect alleged facts are repeated, people end up believing something not true. Facts don't change, they stay the same. Interpretation or opinion change. True facts don't. Media is horrible about getting facts right. Especially with the tension going on in this country over alleged police brutality, heck, no one wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole. Did you listen to why they released the last batch of video's?? I encourage you to listen to that. JMHO
 
Lt. Scott Lewis, with the Springdale Police Department, said there are only two things you have to do during a routine traffic stop. You must give the officer your drivers license, vehicle registration and proof of insurance and exit your vehicle if an officer asks you to do so.

“If an officer asks you to exit your vehicle he’s usually got a really good reason for that and that’s something you can not refuse,” he said. http://5newsonline.com/2015/07/30/knowing-your-rights-during-a-traffic-stop/
 
Not "Missing" as it was never there to begin with.

miss·ing
adjective
:(of a thing) not able to be found because it is not in its expected place.

: not present or included when expected or supposed to be

I'll go with not present or included when expected or supposed to be.
The camera was meant to record or it wouldn't have been in the patrol car.So it was expected that it would record or was meant/supposed to be recording.
Seriously though...moving on from the dreaded word 'missing' IMO
It will come out if there was any fiddling with the dashcam from the second cruiser. Hopefully.
Depending on how much of an investigation is done. IMO
 
Just read an article that said, traffic stops once the warning is given. You do not have to answer any questions. Sandra Bland did not have to "tell Trooper BE what was wrong with her" She did not have to answer about the cig. She only had to ask was she free to go. Darn now I have to see if I can find it again. JMHO
 
Missing words/transcribed incorrect~not verbatim is not facts. And when incorrect alleged facts are repeated, people end up believing something not true. Facts don't change, they stay the same. Interpretation or opinion change. True facts don't. Media is horrible about getting facts right. Especially with the tension going on in this country over alleged police brutality, heck, no one wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole. Did you listen to why they released the last batch of video's?? I encourage you to listen to that. JMHO

Yes, I did catch that some thought SB was already deceased when the mug shot was taken. I didn't think so after seeing the mugshot. IMO
 
Lt. Scott Lewis, with the Springdale Police Department, said there are only two things you have to do during a routine traffic stop. You must give the officer your drivers license, vehicle registration and proof of insurance and exit your vehicle if an officer asks you to do so.

“If an officer asks you to exit your vehicle he’s usually got a really good reason for that and that’s something you can not refuse,” he said. http://5newsonline.com/2015/07/30/knowing-your-rights-during-a-traffic-stop/

There is no reason people would know this. Is it taught in Driver's Ed now? Is it on the written test for your permit? How would anyone know what there rights and the rights of LE are?
 
There is no reason people would know this. Is it taught in Driver's Ed now? Is it on the written test for your permit? How would anyone know what there rights and the rights of LE are?

If LE asks me to do something, if it's not an outrageous request, in the absence of not knowing for sure whether I have to comply, I'm going to comply. It seems SB did not know the law and what rights she had or did not have despite rants on SM.

ETA: I don't consider being asked to step out of the car an outrageous request.
 
The U.S. Supreme Court decided many years ago, in a case called Pennsylvania v. Mimms, that an officer may order someone who he has stopped for a traffic violation to get out of the car. Thus, you do not have a choice in the matter. It does not matter that the weather is unpleasant or that the officer does not have a clear reason for asking you to get out. When the officer asks you to “please step out of your car,” you have to do it. As mentioned in Part VIII of this series, these sorts of “requests” can be confusing. A polite officer will often ask things like, “May I please see your license? Would you please step out of your car? Would you please pop your trunk? Would you please open your glove-box so I can take a look?” All of these sound like requests. But the first two are orders which may not be refused while the last two are fully optional requests which may, and should, be refused. The only way to tell the difference is to know your rights. Thus, as the CORRECT and BEST answers recognize, you must get out of the car when the officer asks you to. http://www.columbuscriminaldefensea...ng-a-traffic-stop-police-interaction-part-ix/


U.S. Supreme Court

Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977)

Pennsylvania v. Mimms

No. 76-1830

Decided December 5, 1977

434 U.S. 106
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/106/case.html
 
Since police issues are the new normal, I think a law should be made that there are questions that must be passed on the driving test re police encounters.

What to do so you don't get killed and what you should do if your rights are being violated.

BBM: We are only supposed to discuss this case on this thread. Nobody was killed on this traffic stop.
 
There is no reason people would know this. Is it taught in Driver's Ed now? Is it on the written test for your permit? How would anyone know what there rights and the rights of LE are?

It is ones responsibility to know what ones rights are I guess. Especially if one is going to say they know their rights. Especially with so much avail at our finger tips. Google is amazing. I am learning all kinds of stuff following these cases.
 
During a traffic stop, do not answer questions that are not related to the stop, such as where are you coming from or where you are going, if you are carrying large sums of cash, where your work, or what the purpose of your travel is. If the officer persists with these questions, tell him you want to speak with your attorney. If the officer tells you that you are free to go, then LEAVE. Do not agree to stay and answer more questions.

3. If a police officer asks you to exit your car, roll your window up, exit the car and immediately close the car door. Lock the car door and place your keys in your pocket. If passengers are asked to exit the car, tell them to do the same thing.http://jayrameylaw.com/know-your-rights/
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
168
Guests online
1,708
Total visitors
1,876

Forum statistics

Threads
606,845
Messages
18,211,939
Members
233,982
Latest member
beth43china
Back
Top