It is when there has been no crime committed.

Arguing with cops is akin to herding cats.

Bocephus said:

---

Rendered Fat said:

---

Bocephus, I am 100% pro-cop and am not going to pile on, but your affirmative and conclusory statements on this thread have been unconscionable. You repeatedly slandered an innocent woman and refused to accept any possibility of innocence, before the evidence was even presented. If you can't see how your behavior is shockingly scary to average citizens, then I think you should leave the profession. There is no excuse for the defamatory way you treated this woman. Wearing a badge does not make you judge, jury and executioner and I am pretty disappointed with you and quite frankly, the entire Dallas Police Department.

---

Wearing a badge does not mean I do not get to have an opinion on the video. When SFST instructors from around the country watched the video and came to the same conclusion that I did, I feel pretty confident in my judgment.

Now I want to see the uncut video so I can find out if everything I was told about the scene was correct.

If you saw a woman or man driving on the shoulder and then they stopped in the center lane of a highway and then in the right lane, would you want that person driving your infant child around the city?

---

The chutzpah you have showing back up without an Apology is absolutely remarkable!

You chastised thirdcoast about your embarrassment that he went to our University and while carrying the banner for the DPD, you still won't admit your foolishness.

THIS is why people have issues with the police.

You are literally play out for us validation for why people say we need to defund the police. You will take the word of instructors watching a vdieo of a person OVER the actual chemical test performed. You are still arguing she was intoxicated. You probably still believe she was at 0.15+.

REMARKABLE! I am second guessing ALL of the "benefit of the doubt" I have EVER given cops.

Señor Chang said:

---

I don't understand what the footage would prove. There's probably a cup in her car, but how would a video prove if it had alcohol or not?

Sounds like moving another goalpost to not admit DPD was wrong here.

---

He has his conclusion and is trying to justify it. Evidence be damned.

He was wrong and can't accept he has poor judgment in these matters pertaining to Mrs West.

As I explained earlier, cops HAVE to make themselves believe the subjective road side test is equivalent to the quantitative lab test. To believe otherwise means you don't trust your Brother in Blue.

When they don't agree, it causes a short circuit for cops. For the rest of the population, they easily recognize what the cop did.

fooz said:

---

Buzzy said:

---

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

She was mistreated by handcuffing and taking her to jail and held overnight.

---

Merely being handcuffed and taken to jail is not 'mistreatment'.

---

Wow.

---

Buzzy has to either be one of Bocephus' socks, or a relative.

So embarrassing for DPD even The Nasty Nine are embarrassed.

she didn't fail the field sobriety test

Between the officers instructions and the obvious lack of clear understanding by Mrs. West, the test was inconclusive at best.

She was driving terrible and drifting into the shoulder, I see more egregious driving every day in College Station and no one is pulled over and I don't think everyone that drives bad is drunk.

The West Family in general is very new to Texas
Mrs West being unsure of where she is going is not crazy
Is she use to driving in general?


Bo and the rest of the "she's guilty as hell people" don't see a timid grandma at all?

pacecar02 said:

---

The West Family in general is very new to Texas

---

Everything else aside, this is why I probably won't vote for him. We already have Dan Patrick, and that's been a disaster.

And yes, I know he's infinitely more conservative than Lt Dan.

Bocephus said:

---

Rendered Fat said:

---

Bocephus, I am 100% pro-cop and am not going to pile on, but your affirmative and conclusory statements on this thread have been unconscionable. You repeatedly slandered an innocent woman and refused to accept any possibility of innocence, before the evidence was even presented. If you can't see how your behavior is shockingly scary to average citizens, then I think you should leave the profession. There is no excuse for the defamatory way you treated this woman. Wearing a badge does not make you judge, jury and executioner and I am pretty disappointed with you and quite frankly, the entire Dallas Police Department.

---

Wearing a badge does not mean I do not get to have an opinion on the video. When SFST instructors from around the country watched the video and came to the same conclusion that I did, I feel pretty confident in my judgment.

Now I want to see the uncut video so I can find out if everything I was told about the scene was correct.

If you saw a woman or man driving on the shoulder and then they stopped in the center lane of a highway and then in the right lane, would you want that person driving your infant child around the city?

---

Wow. You were wrong. Just say it. You were wrong. Extremely, totally, 100% wrong. Just say it and move on.

With how she was driving, her failed attempts at stopping, and being a complete idiot throughout the stop, I don't fault any officer for not letting her drive off with the kid. I wouldnt have. I saw plenty of reason to get her blood. If she could have blown properly instead of continuing to come off as impaired, she may have walked right there. Now if there was lying about smelling alcohol, etc, there should be hell to pay for that. But I see an impaired person, which as it turns out she was only impaired by stupidity

BigBrother said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

Rendered Fat said:

---

Bocephus, I am 100% pro-cop and am not going to pile on, but your affirmative and conclusory statements on this thread have been unconscionable. You repeatedly slandered an innocent woman and refused to accept any possibility of innocence, before the evidence was even presented. If you can't see how your behavior is shockingly scary to average citizens, then I think you should leave the profession. There is no excuse for the defamatory way you treated this woman. Wearing a badge does not make you judge, jury and executioner and I am pretty disappointed with you and quite frankly, the entire Dallas Police Department.

---

Wearing a badge does not mean I do not get to have an opinion on the video. When SFST instructors from around the country watched the video and came to the same conclusion that I did, I feel pretty confident in my judgment.

Now I want to see the uncut video so I can find out if everything I was told about the scene was correct.

If you saw a woman or man driving on the shoulder and then they stopped in the center lane of a highway and then in the right lane, would you want that person driving your infant child around the city?

---

Wow. You were wrong. Just say it. You were wrong. Extremely, totally, 100% wrong. Just say it and move on.

---

Bocephus & Buzzy be like




All the rest of TexAgs:



Bocephus:

pacecar02 said:

---

she didn't fail the field sobriety test

Between the officers instructions and the obvious lack of clear understanding by Mrs. West, the test was inconclusive at best.

She was driving terrible and drifting into the shoulder, I see more egregious driving every day in College Station and no one is pulled over and I don't think everyone that drives bad is drunk.

The West Family in general is very new to Texas
Mrs West being unsure of where she is going is not crazy
Is she use to driving in general?


Bo and the rest of the "she's guilty as hell people" don't see a timid grandma at all?

---

The takeaway should be that a cop will arrest you for DUI if they want. You will just have to fight it later. The tests are designed to demonstrate failure,not determine if you're sober, so if you're taking them, they're most likely looking for additional evidence to add and make the charge harder to fight.

pacecar02 said:

---

she didn't fail the field sobriety test

Between the officers instructions and the obvious lack of clear understanding by Mrs. West, the test was inconclusive at best.

She was driving terrible and drifting into the shoulder, I see more egregious driving every day in College Station and no one is pulled over and I don't think everyone that drives bad is drunk.

---

For me, this is the only part I am still hung up on.

The tests were definitely not conclusive. It is as fair to say she didn't fail the tests, as well as, she didn't pass them either. There should definitely be a full review of the video based upon how the tests should have been administered vs how they were administered to identify each point. That damn sure shouldn't be considered the "gold standard" of how field sobriety should be determined.

With that said, put yourself on the scene, you have stopped an individual, and the results of the tests you have given are what we have seen. I don't see a scenario in which you could feel comfortable just putting Mrs. West back in the driver seat and wishing her a good evening. What is the proper protocol at that point? Request an on-duty superior? Move to a safer and quieter location to try again? I don't know.

If the process was to detain, transport, and further test at the station, then I guess that part was acceptable and not necessarily running afoul of her 4th amendment rights. It is close, but I think what tips the scales is the her driving prior to the stop. You could argue her driving was "probable cause" while the tests were inconclusive.

Now, if this officer came to the same conclusion but decided she needed to lie to make sure the scales were tilted in her favor, then she should face disciplinary action for sure.

GeeBee said:

---

Does everybody realize when she first "stopped in the middle lane" she was at a stoplight and traffic was stopped in front of her? I imagine it could be difficult for some non-aggressive drivers to change lanes from a standstill all the while emergency lights are glaring into your rear view and side mirrors.

---

This is significant and always seems to be omitted by the "she stopped in the middle of a highway!" crowd.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

With how she was driving, her failed attempts at stopping, and being a complete idiot throughout the stop, I don't fault any officer for not letting her drive off with the kid. I wouldnt have. I saw plenty of reason to get her blood. If she could have blown properly instead of continuing to come off as impaired, she may have walked right there. Now if there was lying about smelling alcohol, etc, there should be hell to pay for that. But I see an impaired person, which as it turns out she was only impaired by stupidity

---

can you get any more wrong?

DallasAg 94 said:

---

Señor Chang said:

---

I don't understand what the footage would prove. There's probably a cup in her car, but how would a video prove if it had alcohol or not?

Sounds like moving another goalpost to not admit DPD was wrong here.

---

He has his conclusion and is trying to justify it. Evidence be damned.

He was wrong and can't accept he has poor judgment in these matters pertaining to Mrs West.

---

What Bo and Buzz fail to comprehend is the EDITED video is the best they have. You want to see the full video? It's only going to get worse for them.

DallasAg 94 said:

---

BigBrother said:

---

Bocephus said:

---

Rendered Fat said:

---

Bocephus, I am 100% pro-cop and am not going to pile on, but your affirmative and conclusory statements on this thread have been unconscionable. You repeatedly slandered an innocent woman and refused to accept any possibility of innocence, before the evidence was even presented. If you can't see how your behavior is shockingly scary to average citizens, then I think you should leave the profession. There is no excuse for the defamatory way you treated this woman. Wearing a badge does not make you judge, jury and executioner and I am pretty disappointed with you and quite frankly, the entire Dallas Police Department.

---

Wearing a badge does not mean I do not get to have an opinion on the video. When SFST instructors from around the country watched the video and came to the same conclusion that I did, I feel pretty confident in my judgment.

Now I want to see the uncut video so I can find out if everything I was told about the scene was correct.

If you saw a woman or man driving on the shoulder and then they stopped in the center lane of a highway and then in the right lane, would you want that person driving your infant child around the city?

---

Wow. You were wrong. Just say it. You were wrong. Extremely, totally, 100% wrong. Just say it and move on.

---

Bocephus & Buzzy be like




All the rest of TexAgs:



Bocephus:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

pacecar02 said:

---

she didn't fail the field sobriety test

Between the officers instructions and the obvious lack of clear understanding by Mrs. West, the test was inconclusive at best.

She was driving terrible and drifting into the shoulder, I see more egregious driving every day in College Station and no one is pulled over and I don't think everyone that drives bad is drunk.

---

For me, this is the only part I am still hung up on.

The tests were definitely not conclusive. It is as fair to say she didn't fail the tests, as well as, she didn't pass them either. There should definitely be a full review of the video based upon how the tests should have been administered vs how they were administered to identify each point. That damn sure shouldn't be considered the "gold standard" of how field sobriety should be determined.

With that said, put yourself on the scene, you have stopped an individual, and the results of the tests you have given are what we have seen. I don't see a scenario in which you could feel comfortable just putting Mrs. West back in the driver seat and wishing her a good evening. What is the proper protocol at that point? Request an on-duty superior? Move to a safer and quieter location to try again? I don't know.

If the process was to detain, transport, and further test at the station, then I guess that part was acceptable and not necessarily running afoul of her 4th amendment rights. It is close, but I think what tips the scales is the her driving prior to the stop. You could argue her driving was "probable cause" while the tests were inconclusive.

Now, if this officer came to the same conclusion but decided she needed to lie to make sure the scales were tilted in her favor, then she should face disciplinary action for sure.

---

yeah, I dont really disagree with you

In a scenario like this where you had probable cause for the stop but testing is inconclusive, maybe this needs reexamination?

Perhaps leaving things to a single officer is insufficient, there was a second officer present but he wasn't very involved other than keeping eyes on the baby?

Bo is right in wanting to see the rest of the body cam footage. I want to hear all the dialog from the start and see the cup.

What are the rights of the driver?

If you have your kids in the car and you screw up while driving and swerve or something, is it reasonable that you should go to jail overnight and your children be sent to CPS?

That seems extreme

You guys keep missing the point - officer on the scene said she flunked the test. Chief of Police said she flunked. Cops on here said she flunked

With a subjective test, pass/fail is in the opinion of the judge, who is a cop in this case. I don't know why y'all keep arguing it was inconclusive - the cop said she flunked. And then the cops put just as much credence to this subjective test as they do real chemistry.THAT is the root of the problem.

Here is what you claimed you said:

OldArmyBrent said:

---

No, I referred to chances of arrest and was making the opposite point - that you'll likely get arrested either way but have a better chance at getting it dismissed later if you refuse to give more evidence against yourself.

---

Here is what you actually said:

OldArmyBrent said:

---

Why wouldn't there be just as much chance the cop had no additional proof and was forced to let her go if those tests weren't performed?

---

I never got an answer from you on this. Can you please explain how "forced to let her go if tests weren't performed" actually means get arrested and taken to jail?

I've been told by team OldArmyBrent I'm too "dense" and "obtuse" to understand.

wbt5845 said:

---

You guys keep missing the point - officer on the scene said she flunked the test. Chief of Police said she flunked. Cops on here said she flunked

With a subjective test, pass/fail is in the opinion of the judge, who is a cop in this case. I don't know why y'all keep arguing it was inconclusive - the cop said she flunked. And then the cops put just as much credence to this subjective test as they do real chemistry.THAT is the root of the problem.

---

Just like Civil Asset Forfeiture and No Knock Raids: we the people should demand revokation of any tool that's entrusted to law enforcement that they subsequently prove themselves to be incapable of using appropriately.

nm

OldArmyBrent said:

---

pacecar02 said:

---

she didn't fail the field sobriety test

Between the officers instructions and the obvious lack of clear understanding by Mrs. West, the test was inconclusive at best.

She was driving terrible and drifting into the shoulder, I see more egregious driving every day in College Station and no one is pulled over and I don't think everyone that drives bad is drunk.

The West Family in general is very new to Texas
Mrs West being unsure of where she is going is not crazy
Is she use to driving in general?


Bo and the rest of the "she's guilty as hell people" don't see a timid grandma at all?

---

The takeaway should be that a cop will arrest you for DUI if they want. You will just have to fight it later. The tests are designed to demonstrate failure,not determine if you're sober, so if you're taking them, they're most likely looking for additional evidence to add and make the charge harder to fight.

---

If the tests are designed for you to fail, how do I and others like me pass them?

Actually, she did fail the test. Ignore the balance on one leg portion and parts people claim grandmothers can't do, just watch the heel toe test. She didn't count and continued walking back and forth well past the count, plus did not walk heel toe.

That's failing.

backintexas2013 said:

---

So what I don't get is how in the hell are West and his wife catching any heat whatsoever? Then someone actually calls out the DA for not pressing charges when the lady had no drugs are alcohol in her system. We must live in a clown world.

The only person wrong in all this was the arresting officer. She falsely arrested a woman. There is no argument to be made to support her but somehow we have people doing it. Absolutely pathetic.

---

West is catching heat bc his immediate response was to act like a leftist and demand an in-person apology from the chief and the mayor (entitled) with a deadline. He tried to dox the officer. He threatened to make their life hell if they did not meet his demands. These are the actions of the people that he supposedly opposes. If he's going to react emotionally to something relatively small (an arrest that lasted a few hours), how would he respond in a real crisis as the governor?

Most of us thought he was a common sense conservative and a leader. He has acted like anything but since the arrest of his wife. They said on the radio this morning that he posted pics of the officer's house online. If that's true, he is following the antifa playbook to the letter.

Buzzy said:

---

Actually, she did fail the test. Ignore the balance on one leg portion and parts people claim grandmothers can't do, just watch the heel toe test. She didn't count and continued walking back and forth well past the count, plus did not walk heel toe.

That's failing.

---

I disagree, IMO the instructions were less than clear

she did count, listen to the video again (again, understand that the audio in the video is not indicative of what is said or heard by either the officer or Mrs. West, it is only from the perspective of the body camera)

She finished the first round and was waiting for further instruction/direction. That was the point of her looking at the officer. She kinda even said what now and the officer said I already told you.

The whole field sobriety test were not conducted in a fashion I would classify as worthy of a "gold" standard

I would be hesitant to give the test a "C"

I've no reason to believe the officer acted out of malice but she does seem indifferent as to the ramification of a failed test to the individual being tested.

Still not going to admit you were wrong?

I've been wrong before, even on Texags, I admitted it


It's not so bad

The officer demonstrated the test immediately before, except with 3 steps vs 9 (which she also clarified multiple times). Part of the test is being able to follow simple instructions.

I've been around plenty of drunk, impaired and people wrought with nerves in my life. That lady was nervous not drunk. The cop sounded nervous, unsure and unclear herself. Reminded me of a teenager trying to make a public speech. If that cop can't differentiate between nerves and alcohol, she doesn't need to be a patrol officer.

Common sense says you try and calm the grandmother down and sooth her nerves, not just push through the test and make the outcome go the direction you wish it to go. That is what it seems like that officer was doing. My assumption is those are probably her directives and how she was taught to handle those situations, and if so, that is the wrong way to do it. Public SERVENT, not public robot.

I keep imagining my own mom in that situation who is of the same age as Mrs West. I don't believe my mom has ever been pulled over or received a traffic citation in her 70 years of life. If she was put in the same position I can see her being just as nervous and bewildered. Possibly deserving of a citation for swerving out of her lane but definitely not arrest on suspicion of intoxicated driving when the test and instructions were administered so poorly. I also would be livid if my mother or wife were arrested under these circumstances.

DannyDuberstein said:

---

The officer demonstrated the test immediately before, except with 3 steps vs 9 (which she also clarified multiple times). Part of the test is being able to follow simple instructions.

---

huh

If you cannot fully hear or understand the instructions are they simple and easy to follow?

I can't believe you are still here. Alan isn't a leftist for calling out the LGBTQ pioneer Cali Chief. He is a genius, because it caused the DPD police chief to show everyone the level of abuse of power at DPD. It goes all the way to the top, and I have yet to see a single DPD officer speak out against obvious misconduct.

1) Garcia puts an edited version of the video out to press to provide cover for what we now know to be a lying cop.

2) He inadvertently exposes that DPD uses CPS and towing to punish or show mercy to citizens.

3) He shows that DPD will falsley use alcohol probable cause, to open a search for "something".

4) He claims that when "DPD is wrong we take accountability", then when wrong doing is proven, he says "the officer made her decision based on info she had at the time".

I don't think we would have any of this transparency into DPD leadership if West hadn't gone so hard in paint.

We also smoked out an incompetent cop on TexAgs that said he/she would admit he/she was wrong if BAC came back 0.0 and still hasn't. You called people stupid for questioning your matter of fact claims of "alcohol in car". I think everyone here would much rather leave their kid with Mrs. West than a cop like you. You are a true disgrace to DPD and A&M, the type of person you make a bet with, and never pays up after losing.

a welcher, that's the word

Did YOU actually hear that, or did your buddies at the scene who were listening to the radio tell you he said it?

Quote:

---

Alan isn't a leftist for calling out the LGBTQ pioneer Cali Chief.

---

That's your big issue with Garcia, that he's okay with the alphabet people? It all makes sense now.