Today the systematic police oppression of minorities continues, as South Carolina appears to have set the bar at a new low. A black couple was pulled over for driving a new car with new vehicle plates. There is nothing illegal about this, but the officer’s dash cam clearly shows that this is the reason for pulling them over. Let’s suppose that he was just checking to see if the car was really a new purchase.
After handing the driver her license and sales receipt back, the dash cam shows the officer telling a male passenger to get out of the car. He cuffs him, searches him, and tells him that he is bringing in a drug dog to walk around the car. Then, he tells the man he is “going to pay for this one, boy.” While they are conveniently off camera.
The dog is brought in and apparently smells drugs so the cop rips the car apart but finds nothing. The dog cannot find anything either. The officer is convinced that the man must have drugs. Why? Because, according to the officer, he remembers dealing with him while he was working in a drug unit, years ago.
Off camera, the officer decides to do a more aggressive search and runs his hands up into the passenger’s rectum hard enough that he can feel what the passenger says is a hemorrhoid. The officer says that it can’t be a hemorrhoid because it’s too hard and he’s had hemorrhoids and knows that’s not what they feel like. The man insists and objects to the search.
Dear South Carolina police officers: Reasonable suspicion and probable cause aren't suggestions. That's the law. https://t.co/mWbzkrFpEA
The officer can be heard radioing in the event and says that he has to let the couple go because even though he pulled his pants and underwear down and took pictures of the man’s rectum he could not get a visual and the man must have the rock cocaine inside of him.
“He said it was a hemorrhoid. It ain’t no… it was a rock. It was a rock of crack. It’s gotta be a rock. He’s got it up in his butt…I got nothing else to go on. Nothing. Yeah, we’re gonna have to cut him loose here.”
The man asked the officer why he did all of this. The officer said it was because he “knew” him.
The man asked the officer if he had seen how many years it’s been since he’d been in trouble, stating that he has kids now, and the woman driving the car is his wife.
The officer told him that drug dealers and users have kids, too. Then he told him to get the car detailed so other dogs don’t “hit” on it. He then thanks them and leaves.
Footage of the Full Traffic Stop bellow.
Originally Published on Apr 2, 2016
WATCH Above- Police ‘sexually assault’ black couple during roadside cavity search . Two South Carolina residents are suing the City of Aiken and its department of public safety over what they say was an illegal cavity search in broad daylight.
The Aiken Standard reports Elijah Pontoon and Lakey Hicks filed the lawsuit last September. It was moved to federal court in November.
“Black man subjected to “illegal” public cavity search by white police officers” suit alleges that white police officers subjected an African American man man to a humiliating anal search, and that they also partially stripped searched his wife, all in open public, on nothing more then suspicion that they might possess illegal drugs. A formal complaint supported by the video evidence alleges, and court records confirm that on the 2nd day of October, 2014 police officers performed and illegal search and an extra judicial anal cavity search on a black South Carolina man in search for what they claim could of been a “hard rock of Crack” in Mr. Hick’s anus.
Although it is true that Hicks has a criminal record that includes past drug charges, he’s had a clean record since 2006. He told Medlin that he has kids now, indicating that his past actions don’t reflect on his present condition. Medlin claimed he remembered Hicks and had dealt with him on previous occasions, which gave him reasonable suspicion to perform the search.
“You’ve got something here right between your legs. There’s something hard right there between your legs.”
The lawsuit, filed by both Hicks and Pontoon, names Medlin, along with several other officers and the Director of the ADPS officers, as defendants. Court documents show that the defendants are accused of improper search and seizure and improper actions.
The South Carolina police officers are being sued under the Federal law and Federal Causes of action, and Hicks and Pontoon are seeking punitive damages. The Director of ADPS and the City of Aiken are being sued under the State law causes of action, although no punitive damages are being sought against them. According to the lawsuit, Pontoon and Hicks say they were illegally stopped by officers for a paper car tag and searched without consent. In addition to the cavity search, the complaint says a female officer exposed Hicks’ breasts on the side of the road, with a search performed in the presence of three male officers. South Carolina Police Search: Cops Perform Illegal Cavity Search During A Routine Stop SC New York taxi drivers to be banned from flirting with or ejaculating on passengers cabs stopped speeding Capt. David Turno said in a statement that the city denies the allegations. Turno wasn’t available Saturday for further comment.
In the 2nd Circuit US Court of Appeals in New York, Justices Gerard Lynch, Robert Sack and Vernon Broderick ruled that the National Security Agency (NSA) data collection programs are illegal.
Based on a lawsuit originated by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the appellate court decided that the provision in the Patriot Act, Section 215, was not a contemplation by Congress to collect massive amounts of data and information on Americans; yet it turned out that way. (more…)
The Drug Enforcement Administration is collecting information about more than just license plates with the tracking system revealed by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Documents released by the ACLU this morning show that the DEA is also using the license plate readers (LPRs) on which this system relies to capture photographs of a vehicles’ passengers. The images can then be run through facial recognition software. (more…)
Federal agencies tried to use vehicle license-plate readers to track the travel patterns of Americans on a much wider scale than previously thought, with new documents showing the technology was proposed for use to monitor public meetings.
The American Civil Liberties Union released more documents this week revealing for the first time the potential scale of a massive database containing the data of millions of drivers, logged from automatic license plate readers around the US. (more…)
According to a document obtained by the ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on Tuesday March 16, the 9/11 commission was warned on Jan. 6th, 2004 by high-level administration officials to “not cross the line” in the investigation of the events that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001.
Here’s a copy of the letter in question (page 26 of the PDF document).
Department of Defense Department of Justice Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
Thomas H. Kean, Chairman Lee H. Hamilton, Vice Chairman
Your staff has advised us that the Commission seeks to participate in the questioning of certain enemy combatants detained in the war against terrorists of global reach. Such action by the Commission would substantially interfere with the ability of the United States to perform its law enforcement, defense and intelligence functions in the protection of the American people.
Your legislative commission has had extraordinary — indeed, unprecedented in the annals of American history — access to many of the Nation’s most sensitive secrets in the conduct of its work, including detainee information. In response to the Commission’s expansive requests for access to secrets, the executive branch has provided such access in full cooperation. There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross — the line separating the Commission’s proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government’s ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks. The Commission staffs proposed participation in questioning of detainees would cross that line.
As the officers of the United States responsible for the law enforcement, defense and intelligence functions of the Government, we urge your Commission to not further pursue the proposed request to participate in the questioning of detainees.
John Ashcroft, Attorney General Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense George J. Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence
9/11 Commission findings based on torture
In December of 2009, we have published an important article titled “Much of 9/11 Commission findings cite intelligence garnered by torture” in which we describe that much of the material cited in the 9/11 Commission’s findings was derived from war detainees during brutal CIA interrogations authorized by the Bush administration. In fact, information derived from the interrogations was central to the 9/11 Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks.
The CIA has since revealed that in 2005 it destroyed videotapes of prisoners being tortured.
When asked by MSNBC News anchor if “under duress, will people tell the truth if tortured?” former CIA officer Robert Baer answered “under duress, under the threat of duress, people will tell what they think you want to hear. It is an unreliable tool. And the reason I say this is I have spent 21 years in the CIA, in and out of prisons watching these techniques, one way or another, reading reports, and the countries that torture, uniformly produce inaccurate intelligence. Torture does not work.”
They also talk about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed who has been waterboarded over 183 times.
The below text is a excerpt of the Examiner.com article on this newly released memo
The warning in the memo released by the government to the ACLU is just one example of how the Bush administration fiercely struggled to prevent the 9/11 Commission from conducting a deeper probe into the attacks. It is common knowledge that Bush and Cheney refused to cooperate with the investigation and when forced to do so, only testified together, not under oath.
9/11 Commissioners criticism
What may not be known to many Americans is that members of the 9/11 Commission have publicly stated that the investigation was a whitewash, and stymied from the beginning.
“I’m saying that’s deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing… series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked… the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration’s policy was, and its priority was, we’re gonna take Saddam Hussein out.”
— Senator Max Cleland, former 9/11 Commissioner who resigned after calling it a “national scandal”
On Democracy Now, Cleland also said, “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.
In 2006 the Washington Post reported that several members of the 9/11 Commission suspected deception on part of the Pentagon:
Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerry also has unanswered questions. According to an article in Salon.com, he believes that there are legitimate reasons to believe an alternative version to the official story.”There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version,” Kerry said. The commission had limited time and limited resources to pursue its investigation, and its access to key documents and witnesses was obstructed by government agencies and key administration officials.
Commissioner Tim Roemer suggested that Commission members were considering a criminal probe of false statements. “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting,”Roemer told CNN. “We were not sure of the intent, whether it was to deceive the commission or merely part of the fumbling bureaucracy.”
The document that the ACLU has obtained corroborates what officials involved in the 9/11 Commission have been saying for years. The entire “investigation” was nothing more than a whitewash designed to hide the facts about 9/11 from the American people.