This is the Supreme Court ruling on that subject as of 2004:
Ummm. . . guys?
Enough speculation. The linked “Think Progress” article contains a direct link to the ordinance he was violating. Here’s the link. The fine may be between $500 and $2000. In Charlotte, NC, you can’t just put flyers on cars.
We don’t see (because it’s Turner’s edit) what was said before the officer started looking up the ordinance, but we know Turner had asked for proof that it was a “real law”. He says below the video that he’d said ‘Show me where it’s illegal to do this,’ but claims the officer wouldn’t do it - in the video, you can actually see the officer trying to look it up.
Anyway, at that point, he’d clearly already been told why he was being charged - one officer was looking it up for him. So, for the other officer to then ask for i.d. isn’t really outrageous - he was probably just trying to get the taller man to put his hands down. Turner is a full-head taller than the cop that eventually arrests him. He started resisting when the second officer tried to get him to put down his phone and cooperate. (Which, yeah, since he was breaking the law, he probably should have done.)
BTW he was doing this right outside of a Moral Mondays meeting - where the police are always on high alert. The people who operate Moral Mondays have been doing it for quite some time (with my full support).
“Acting like a child” isn’t a criminal offense. Being irrational isn’t a criminal offense.
If a cop is going to arrest someone, they should be able to tell that person what crime they’re being detained for before slapping on the cuffs and dragging them down to the station house. This sounds like a case of “that guy is pissing me off, let’s just take him downtown and figure out the details later.”
I don’t know, I would imagine it’s different in different towns. I do know my personal feelings have nothing to do with the actual answer. Have you researched this?
Aliens, however, can be required to carry government-issued identification, and Americans can be arrested for breaking that law. They, of course, can escape conviction by demonstrating that they are American citizens - by showing the nice officer (or the nice judge, if it comes to that) government-issued identification. They can, however, be subject to deportation for failing to do so - and there are documented examples of American citizens (usually the mentally ill) being deported for just that.
In any case, “everyone knows” that adults are required to carry government-issued photo ID in public. And if “everyone” includes the cop on the beat, good luck with failing to comply.
Kenneth Graham called it “cheeking the police”, going by the gasps from the jurors last time I saw Wind in the Willows it was considered a very serious crime.
I think this is less about whether or not he was breaking the law (and he was), and more about how a police officer is supposed to deal with a situation like this. A good police officer wants to and is able to deescalate situations like this. There was no attempt to deescalate (on the part of the cop who wasn’t looking up the ordinance), just robotic repetitions to see ID. The cop was making it harder for his partner who was reasonably looking up the ordinance to show the suspect. And the pointless order to “put the phone down” could only, to a thinking person and/or a good cop, act to escalate the obvious anxiety experienced by the suspect.
It’s just another example of police reacting badly to people who don’t immediately and without question follow their orders.
For those not familiar with Moral Monday protests, getting arrested is a big part of it. My impression is that the majority of the folks getting arrested at Moral Monday protests are white and past middle age. This is the context for this particular video.
In a certain sense this man volunteered, in that he elected to engage in civil disobedience at a place and time where he was likely to be arrested. Is there any value in separating civil disobedience arrests like this from stop-and-frisk arrests, profile-related traffic stops, etc.?
“They said they would charge me for distributing literature…”
And yet my local Barnes and Nobel is still selling copies of the Twilight saga and getting off scott free.
Was he distributing literature on cars? Against the ordinance, a mere misdemeanour & since it is selectively enforced quite understandable that he should ask for chapter & verse & not be willing to produce ID until the officers do their jobs properly.
Was he distributing this literature at a rally where attendees were quite likely to agree with the content & his distribution of it? Yes he was, so consent (which would allow his distribution) is in question. The ordinance does not say express consent. Did the police receive a complaint? Seems unlikely.
A 5 year old could have de-escalated that. Citing some basic ordinance, knowing when demands for ID are justified would have had that gentleman retrieving any literature he had already left & been a model for civilian/police interaction. But Guess What.
He did good to get arrested, looks far more like the two cops took his bait & not the other way around as some suggest.
Those police may have been there to keep the peace, but their actions paint them as there to keep the status quo & that man demonstrated it publicly in just the right way at just the right place at just the right time.
The police conduct after his arrest is even more questionable & demonstrative of the need for close public scrutiny.
What options were they mulling that they would take him someplace quiet & away rather than taking him in & booking him?
well, at least not white people. Three strikes and all that.
Except, of course, they absolutely are not and you’re sort of making a lot of that up.
Especially the part about the police convicting people.
I hereby endorse the killing serious beating of police like these officers. These fuckers need some public justice if the courts and politicians aren’t willing to fix your shithouse country. Start by breaking the blue wall of silence with some rolling heads. Time off with pay is a fucking joke.
Edit: after reading @catgrin’s comments it seems like the police were within their rights to bust him. Nonetheless their behaviour escalated the situation instead of calming it. IMO if it’s inappropriate to put a flyer on a car then they shouldn’t be able to put a parking ticket on there either. They can determine your address from your licence plate and send it there.
Your definition of adult might not align with what is necessary to challenge authority.
The cop should not have grabbed his phone. He was entirely within his rights to record the situation even if he was breaking some nonsense law. By the way, when was the last time anyone was arrested for this in NC?
according to local activist Casey Throneburg, who also filmed the arrest, it is almost never enforced, and “certainly not with handcuffs.”
Well, there’s the answer then.
Yeah, the correct way to have done this would be for the police to write him a fresh new citation for each flyer…
Hi @teapot, you may want to watch that video with the sound off. We only have Turner’s word that the officer DID grab his phone at the start. You can’t see it happen in the video - he just yells that he did and then reorients the camera. All through the video it’s actually Turner causing the scene. The officer only raises his voice once - and all he says is, “Sir!”
When Turner flipped the video back toward the officer, he had both arms at his side. He’s not moving back from Turner as though he’d just reached for anything.
As to the need to have tickets mailed: Did you follow my supplied link? They wrote in an exclusion for ticketing to the flyer ordinance. So, that’s one to take up with Charlotte, NC.
Now one last thing that everyone here will probably find interesting:
I found this link to a 1996 instruction guide for officers of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department. It’s Directives for “Passive Protests and Peaceful Demonstrations”.
Even waaaaay back in 1996, they specifically addressed the city ordinance about leafletting vehicles. At that time, they only enforced after a complaint was made.
C. Distribution of Handbills or Leaflets (City Ordinance Section 15-1)
It is unlawful for any person to throw, deposit, place or distribute any handbills, leaflets, etc. on any motor vehicles except with the consent of the owner. With regard to material that is handed out by protestors, picketers, or counselors, this ordinance will be enforced by issuing a uniform citation requiring a mandatory court appearance, only after receipt of a complaint. The written material that is distributed by the protestors, picketers, and counselors is likely to contain lawful speech protected under the First Amendment.
Even with this restricted version of the ordinance, it’s still more severe than the version (a) written for placing items on private property. For that, police were told not to charge protestors, but that property owners had “a right to keep their private property free of debris and litter.” So - even in 1996, a flyer during a protest wouldn’t get you ticketed, but one on a car would.
- Officers should not charge protestors with littering for placing copies of their literature, picket signs or other material on public or private property for the period of the demonstration. However, private property owners do have a right to keep their private property free of debris and litter. Signs or other material placed on the private property by protestors may be taken and disposed of by the property owner or his or her designee. This does not constitute larceny or damage to property and no such report should be taken.
Hey, consider yourself lucky that you have an actual bookstore open near you. I’ve noticed several in my area close (not for lack of my support), both the big chains as well as a couple of small used book resellers.
sad sad.
And as much as I want to bash Twilight, at least it’s getting tweens to read (and, yeah, older people who should really know better)
I’m probably one of few people who did. I geek out on details 
You may be right about grabbing the phone… my question is: where is the footage from the other guy who was also supposedly filming the situation?
I also think that the exception for protests/pickets opens the door for his actions to be considered legitimate. How many people do you need to make a protest? I’d contend 1. It almost seems as if the part of the rule that allows this exception - “The written material that is distributed by the protestors, picketers, and counselors is likely to contain lawful speech protected under the First Amendment.” - perfectly describes the type of flyer he was distributing.
What color is the sky in your world?
