How so?
-
-
He directed that his office will not prosecute cases arising from pretext police stops. Pretext police stops are literally intervention in low-level crime with the goal of preventing more serious crime. Now he’s criticizing the cops for not intervening in low-level crime.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I disagree, but appreciate you responding. Pretextual stops are a form of profiling. By definition- pretending one reason to hide another. A tactic that’s primarily targeted people of color. Almost always ineffective. And rightly creates distrust between those profiled and police
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Define “pretending”. Pretext stops have been ruled lawful in case law because they are based on the commission of an offense regardless of whether that offense is related to the eventual arrest.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The last time it happened to me, the officer pulled alongside me and looked at me. Then fell back. I signaled and turned. He pulled me over and told me I didn’t use my signal long enough, 5 seconds instead of 10. Then asked if I had drugs and told me he needed to search my car.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This anecdote doesn’t answer my question. Also the CA vehicle code says your turn signal has to be active for 100ft. Says nothing about 5 vs 10 seconds. So if your story is true then that’s an unlawful stop, not a pretext stop, and it’s not applicable in this discussion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That incident was in Utah, just outside of Salt Lake City. I took him at his word that I’d violated the law, but not that my violation was the more than a pretext (a pretend reason) for a search.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jrwiese @nbay2nbeach and
I’m a white dude. This happens to me once every few years. It’s annoying, but I’m not typically a target. The fact that it happens all the time to people in SF who live in certain neighborhoods or have a certain skin color is wrong and probably a violation and the 4th Amendment.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Utah vehicle code says you have to signal for 2 seconds. So if it happened the way you say it did then it’s still not a pretext stop. It’s an unlawful stop. Not the same thing.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think it's a harmful police tactic and the anger and distrust it fuels far outweigh the relatively rare occasions when a more serious crime is discovered.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So what’s the difference between pretext stops as a tactic to prevent more serious crime and stopping a sideshow to prevent more serious crime?
-
-
IMO, the goal of stopping a sideshow should be to stop the sideshow. The goal of a pretextual stop is something other than the stated reason for the stop. I'm OK with police stopping folks for breaking traffic laws, if that's their actual reason.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.