I agree with you completely. Hill should be held responsible for his driving behavior and his entitled post-stop behavior.
The cops’s job was to make the stop, issues the summons, stabilize and de-escalate the situation and move on. Nothing more.
I’ve watched the video a few times. I see no reason why the cops needed to remove Hill from the vehicle. The public safety issue was resolved. Hill had been identified. He was no longer doing anything dangerous. He is a famous athlete driving recklessly to his first game of the season - I don’t think the cops could clearly articulate Hill’s actions in the stopped car constituted a threat necessitating forceful removal from the car.
If the cops had merely issued the summons, this does not make news, beyond a headline like “NFL speedster stopped for speeding in his McLaren”. No one cares. There is no story.
If you’ll indulge, I am curious what happens if someone is pulled over for speeding and absolutely refuses to roll down the window and hand over license and registration. This goes well beyond what Hill did — since his refusal to obey lasted only several seconds. But, if the refusal persists, what’s the next move? I would think they are now committing a misdemeanor, and not a mere traffic offense, and the police have the right to arrest the driver.
Being a jerk isn’t against the law. This thread is littered with people conflating being a jerk (Hill probably was) and breaking the law (Hill certainly was speeding). You are issued a ticket for speeding. Just because you broke the law speeding doesn’t mean you are subject to a new set of behavior laws that don’t exist.
It’s difficult to argue that the police weren’t trying to teach Hill a lesson that wasn’t there’s to teach.
I dont think the orders to roll down the window or to get out of the car required automatic compliance. The officer was conducting a traffic stop, Hill provided the information he was legally obligated to provide. How were those orders a furtherance of the law? What purpose did they serve beyond harassment and intimidation?
Of course, as I and multiple others have said, the officers are responsible for their behavior.
Maybe I misunderstood what you were driving at with this -
And for those that feel that HIll was mostly to blame, I disagree. Criminals are going to criminal; speeders are going to speed. Cops have to expect and anticipate that. Criminals are going to be assholes.
When people say Hill was “mostly responsible” I think they’re looking at the totality of the event. Nobody has claimed that Hill is mostly responsible for the cop’s decisions or actions. Quite the opposite, I think. Most people have been pretty much on the same page in saying that Hill is responsible for his part and the cops are responsible for their part. However, not one bit of this happens without Hill’s actions and attitude.
I don’t think anyone is conflating those two things.
I dont think the orders to roll down the window or to get out of the car required automatic compliance. The officer was conducting a traffic stop, Hill provided the information he was legally obligated to provide. How were those orders a furtherance of the law? What purpose did they serve beyond harassment and intimidation?
I don’t know how it’s interpreted, but FL does require citizens to comply with the lawful order or direction of law enforcement officers (and firemen, and traffic crash investigators, etc).
(3) OBEDIENCE TO POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS.—It is unlawful and a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083, for any person willfully to fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any law enforcement officer…
My question to Jack was intended as a hypothetical refusal, not Hill’s specific situation.
But, even in his situation, going 30-49 over the limit can be charged as a misdemeanor, and not merely as a civil traffic violation. Going 50+ can be charged as a felony. So, Hill’s 45 over the limit is getting pretty high on the misdemeanor scale. I don’t know Florida law or practice on what sort of compliance an officer can demand when it’s a misdemeanor. However, it may be more than just writing a ticket.
I’m on the same page as you. Of course none of this happens had Hill not driven like an asshole.
I’m separating his criminal behavior from the cop’s behavior.
This exact scenario (minus the millionaire athlete) happens every day with my squad, with minor variation. Frequently, the driver’s behavior is much worse than HIll’s.
For example, just this afternoon, I contacted a male for poor behavior on a bus. During our brief encounter he tells me to (and this is a direct quote): “Suck his big black Mexican dick.” The convo went down hill from this high point.
This happens relatively frequently. It used to be common with “sovereign citizen” types. Lately, it’s mostly drunk drivers. The misdemeanor is generally failure to comply with a lawful command, which is a CO state statute that requires compliance with order from police.
The first strategy for resolution is negotiation by someone other than the officer who made the initial stop, usually a sergeant (that would be my role). This works 90+% of the time. When negotiation fails, we resort to force. We may break out a window and open the door or pull the person through the window. I’ve only had to do this a few times. Prior to using force, the person would be given a very specific and detailed use of force warning and ample time to comply.
We use tools to disable the vehicle before using force to remove the person.
A complicating factor as of late is the newish statutory limitations on the use of police force for low level non-violent crimes. I would be very hesitant to authorize the use of force for a non-violent misdemeanor, barring something such as a drunk driver trying to drive off.
Yeah, I think we’re on the same page. It’s not Hill’s fault that the officers in this case (one in particular) weren’t able to let his attitude roll off their backs and deal with this stop like they’ve probably dealt with countless stops before.
When people say Hill bears most of the fault, I think they’re speaking about the totality of the event. At least, that’s what I meant.
Of course criminals are at fault for their actions, that’s for the justice system to determine their relative punishment though. Speeding nets you a speeding ticket, not dragged out of a car, pushed down to the pavement and handcuffed.
So after seeing the video replay, I think we can all agree that Tyreek committed the foul. And the officer(s) should be called for unnecessary roughness.
Yes, people are always very quick to pile on the police because they are ‘paid professionals’. They aren’t superheroes, they certainly aren’t highly paid and I’m not convinced that training attitudes is as easy as training them to shoot or drive in a pursuit. They are as human as the rest of us except we don’t have to put up with the worst of society each day or worry about if we are coming home that night.
I have little sympathy for those who think their wealth or fame gives them special privileges.