RE: STOP AND FRISK
by Dr. Thomas E. Davis, Col., USA (Ret.), ©2016
(Sep. 27, 2016) — Lester Holt is fabulously lucky; Brian Williams messed up and Lester got the job and he has never studied “journalism.” Yet, last night he was the “moderator” of the first Trump-Clinton presidential debate of the 2016 election and he BLEW IT big-time. First he attempted to be a “fact-checker,” which was NOT his responsibility; he then revealed his liberal bias, and he was DEAD WRONG!
“Stop-and-Frisk” is a perfectly legal police tool. It has been the subject of litigation by those who have been “frisked” by police who were legally authorized to do so, in search of a weapon, illegal drugs or other contraband. Mr. Holt, who gained such notoriety or personality standing as he may have, did NOT gain it for his journalistic abilities nor any legal ability or even legal basic knowledge.
The “Stop-and-Frisk” police tool has been ruled “CONSTITUTIONAL” by the Supreme Court in Utah vs Strieff as a necessary procedure to be utilized by police in their performance of protecting the American public from thugs. The notion that “Stop and Frisk” constitutes “racial profiling” per se is ridiculous. The mere fact that there may be more S & F actions of members of one of America’s so-called minority groups does not in and of itself constitute “racial” profiling.
In an obvious attempt to discredit Mr. Trump, Lester Holt was simply another instance of the bias so prevalent in the mainstream media which Mr. Holt represents as do the infamous Candy Crowley and CBS’s Bob Schieffer. I have yet to hear a member of the overpaid and over-praised MSM even suggest that our sitting faux president and Mrs. Clinton have committed TREASON, perjury or any crime, for that matter.
Dear Scott Menze,
POLITIFACT? Really?
I would like to point you to:
http://www.politifactbias.com/
And I am curious about your opinion of the video. Do you consider the recorded interaction a violation of the 4th amendment?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/28/donald-trump/debate-donald-trump-says-stop-and-frisk-constituti/
I would also point you to Terry v. Ohio.
Police may stop and frisk a person if they have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime or is about to commit a crime. Police may not simply stop a person at random to frisk them.
The NYPD was clearly conducting unlawful stops based upon the color of a person’s skin.
Judge Shira Scheindlin found that New York City had been conducting unconstitutional stops and frisks on two grounds: Officers were stopping and frisking people without reasonable suspicion, in violation of Terry and the Fourth Amendment; and a disproportionate number of those stopped and frisked were minorities, in violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
“Stop-and-frisk was not outlawed,” said Andrew Schaffer, former deputy commissioner for legal matters for the New York Police Department and an adjunct professor at New York University Law School. The ruling only sought to correct a supposed problem of officers making stops without a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and disproportionately stopping black and Hispanic people.
None other than Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer, was mad as hell on a tv show following the debate. He stated most emphatically the Stop and Frisk is a legal police technique utilized by police from coast to coast and has been ruled ‘CONSTITUTIONAL’ by the United States Supreme Court. With al due respect Mr. Menze, I believe you are well-intentioned but categorically mistaken.
Col. Davis;
We sent your editorial to the people who should know the answer to the question, “Is Lester Holt Simply Stupid or Blatantly Biased?” at the North American Duck Institute.
Hello, Chief New Leaf here for ‘Pulse of the Nation.’ What’s the verdict?
“Well, we ran the standard test: does it walk, talk, look and act like a duck? We concluded that Lester Holt is just plain old stupid, there’s no other possible conclusion.
“In addition to the standard tests, we went overboard and gave it the NAVY test: right way/wrong way/Navy way and Lester Holt got an ‘F-minus’; ‘F-minus’; ‘0.00’, so we again had to conclude that Lester Holt is just plain stupid, there’s no possible way around it.”
So Lester Holt is stupid?
“Without a shadow of a doubt.”
Thank you for answering our question and solving our problem.
Well, you heard it: after many comprehensive tests, it has been concluded that Lester Holt is stupid.
This is Chief Leaf signing-off from the North American Duck Institute: So long.
Sincerely,
Chief New Leaf
Actually this case did not rule on the constitutionality of Stop and Frisk policies as carried out in NYC.
In this case a suspect was searched after the police officer ran a search for warrants. The court ruled that although the initial detainment was unlawful, the subsequent search was ok as it was done based upon the discovery of outstanding warrants.
Read the decision. The Supreme Court actualy stated that the detainment was unlawful, but that the search was ok because the arresting officer discovered outstanding warrants after the unlawful stop.
Stop and Frisk is a clearl violation of the 4th amendment. Police have no right to detain or serach a citizen without probable cause that a crime has been committed. If you want to understand just how bad it is, read this:
https://www.thenation.com/article/stopped-and-frisked-being-fking-mutt-video/
[Editor’s Note: Readers are cautioned that the video referenced above is not for children and contains very strong language.]