Support NeoGAF

[EdibleKnife]

Fixed for accuracy

But that quicker day tho

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

I dunno what the situation was, ask them. Not saying their assumption was correct since it obviously wasn't, but if they thought she was a prostitute then she was under suspicion for a crime.

like no offense, but you're not this silly are you?

 

[Acorn]

The sad thing is things like this probably happen everyday and the only reason we're hearing about is because she is semi famous.

 

[Sorian]

like no offense, but you're not this silly are you?

I don't see what the problem is. We have one side of the story and its fairly bare bones. You don't get the whole truth from one side.

 

[Infinite]

I dunno what the situation was, ask them. Not saying their assumption was correct since it obviously wasn't, but if they thought she was a prostitute then she was under suspicion for a crime.

But cops don't get to detain you cause they think you might be up to no good. What's stoping them from detaining every person who is handed a brown paper bag because they think you're selling drugs? You need reasonable cause for suspicion. Kissing someone isn't that. Keep in mind California isn't a stop and ID state where they could possibly get away with doing that.

 

[Byakuya769]

Her husband just let her get arrested?

 

[ponpo]

No, that's not how it works, just because the police said they thought she was a prostitute does not constitute reasonable suspicion that she was one. That is circular logic.

I don't think it's reasonable, I'm just saying if they thought she was committing a crime then isn't that being under suspicion of committing a crime?

But cops don't get to detain you cause they think you might be up to no good. What's stoping them from detaining every person who is handed a brown paper bag? You need reasonable cause for suspicion. Kissing someone isn't that. Keep in mind California isn't a stop and ID state where they could possibly get away with doing that.

I don't think she should have gotten handcuffed or anything, but what is the normal procedure for attempting to arrest a prostitute after making contact with someone? Aside from the person being someone the police have picked up before / someone being in a 'high traffic' area for prostitution, what reasoning do the cops have for ever detaining a possible prostitute?

 

[Armaros]

Her husband just let her get arrested?

Interfering is a good way to get shot.

I don't think it's reasonable, I'm just saying if they thought she was committing a crime then isn't that being under suspicion of committing a crime?

No, reasonable suspicion means that you have some sort of evidence that a crime has taken place in connection to you, someone thinking you committed a crime is not a legal reason to be detained for it.

 

[Ninja Of Chaos]

And the poster you quoted pointed out the irony of having one small freedom in the face of other more oppressive behaviors.

Which is a false comparison in the first place. If person X murders person Y for smiling, it doesn't mean that the freedom to walk is ironic.

Also, "small"?

 

[Storm Chamber]

I don't see what the problem is. We have one side of the story and its fairly bare bones. You don't get the whole truth from one side.

Shit, sometimes you don't even get the truth at all.

It's a dirty game

 

[Acorn]

Her husband just let her get arrested?

What's he gonna do? Attack the cop and escalate an Already shitty situation?

 

[watershed]

I don't see what the problem is. We have one side of the story and its fairly bare bones. You don't get the whole truth from one side.

You don't see the problem in police detaining a black woman because she kissed her husband? You don't see an issue with them cuffing her for failing to show her ID even though she is not legally required to do so? Do you think all couples kissing in public are suspected of prostitution?

Edit: nvmd banned.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

Not familiar with LAPD's history of racial problems?

I was being sarcastic.

 

[DOWN]

But cops don't get to detain you cause they think you might be up to no good. What's stoping them from detaining every person who is handed a brown paper bag because they think you're selling drugs? You need reasonable cause for suspicion. Kissing someone isn't that. Keep in mind California isn't a stop and ID state where they could possibly get away with doing that.

How do they normally catch prostitutes without undercover officers? Like can they? What evidence do they have for that anyway unless they catch the act?

Also, aren't they allowed to detain someone for a number of hours without charging them?

Again, it seems clear that in this case the officers didn't actually have a good reason to stop her, but I'm curious in general how this works in their heads anyway.

 

[SolidSnakesMyStepDad]

The sad thing is things like this probably happen everyday and the only reason we're hearing about is because she is semi famous.

Yea one of my Ex's was black and all the time we would walk to a local coffee place that was like 10 minutes away. She would never bring her ID because she had no need to. I could imagine the same thing happening to her and it would probably be a way bigger process because she isn't famous


Edit: Uh Oh bans are getting handed out. I'm gonna leave.

 

[Storm Chamber]

What's he gonna do? Attack the cop and escalate an Already shitty situation?

There's no reason for both of them to get arrested.

 

[bishoptl]

Opening your mind to a different viewpoint to learn? Nah, fuck that.

You want to equivocate and blame the victim for exercising her rights? Nah, fuck that.

 

[Hyunkel6]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

 

[tiebreaker]

Her husband just let her get arrested?

Husband was probably dropping her off and they kissed before he went off.

 

[numble]

No, but if you are asked, everyone can go about their day quicker if you just comply. It's just an ID.

You would be okay with ID checkpoints being set up? Everyone can just show their ID and go about their day quicker if they just comply.

 

[SolidSnakesMyStepDad]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

He may have and even if he did do you think the cops would have believed that?

 

[Armaros]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

The mindset probably being that the 'john' would say anything to cover up having a prostitute, so they didnt believe him.

 

[Big Baybee]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

You think he didn't?

 

[Infinite]

Even in New York City where cops can literally stop and frisk you, all the times I been stopped, the officer usually says something along the "lines of someone just committed a robbery in the proximity and you match the physical description." That's reasonable cause for suspicion even if they just made that reason up and they don't even need to tell me that in this state.

 

[linsivvi]

SMH. Some people are always going to side with the cops and blame the victims, regardless of the situation.

 

[EdibleKnife]

I don't think it's reasonable, I'm just saying if they thought she was committing a crime then isn't that being under suspicion of committing a crime?

Beyond this kiss, I'm unsure how this suspicion is supposed to bloom. Again, is every couple kissing gonna be arrested by these fools? No. Did they see a stack of bills being exchanged between them? No. Then it stands to reason that even their suspicion wasn't very solid in the first place. They thought they had an easy collar with zero foundation.

 

[hipbabboom]

I dunno what the situation was, ask them. Not saying their assumption was correct since it obviously wasn't, but if they thought she was a prostitute then she was under suspicion for a crime.

Surely you realize that the very reasoning is where things break down... you realize that right?!

People just don't get it... the instant you are suspected of a crime, law enforcement is no longer on your side so they better be damn well sure its a crime before they start suspecting people.

One's race and perceived economical class is not evidence towards a crime.

 

[YoungHav]

Isn't she a runaway slave though? Maybe they were innocently planning to give her back to her owners.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

I'm certain the husband would've which brings up an interesting point in that the cops had to assume the husband was lying to them as well also based on absolutely no proof whatsoever. It's crazy

 

[suzu]

Her husband just let her get arrested?

What's he suppose to do? He's probably the one who's taking the photos.

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

What makes you think he didn't? lol

 

[MIMIC]

Loving v. Virginia, you dumb cops

 

[DoktorEvil]

According to Watts and her husband Brian James Lucas, Studio City police mistook the couple for a prostitute and john after they showed public displays of affection. Watts refused to show her ID to the cops, and was therefore handcuffed and seated in the back of their car until they could figure out who she was. They let her go quickly afterward.

I feel like there's a lot of context missing here.

Why would the police single her and her husband out?

What was the prostitute's description?

Why did it take cops way too long to figure out they were a couple?

Were the cops following up on a call or a lead?

Also, comparisons to the California Police Force and Nazi Germany are over the top hyperbole.

 

[SolidSnakesMyStepDad]

Even in New York City where cops can literally stop and frisk you, all the times I been stopped, the officer usually says something along the "lines of someone just committed a robbery in the proximity and you match the physical description." That's reasonable cause for suspicion even if they just made that reason up and they don't even need to tell me that in this state.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIsfttOFE3s

Reminds me of this video.

 

[watershed]

Sooooo, why didn't the husband simply tell the cops that she is his wife?

Do you have proof that he didn't?

Not just you, but with these threads there are always these "searching" questioning posts that ask why didn't X do something to not cause this situation when in fact the question is why are the police doing this in the first place?

 

[StickSoldier]

Talk about some fucked up shit. There needs to be some massive changes with cops being held accountable for their screw ups. It's not fair that they get to commit crimes and get away with them while innocent people get punished for doing nothing wrong. Are they really here to protect us or to harm us? I'm not so sure anymore.

 

[Kapsama]

Hey Obama fix the US first, then go after ISIS.

 

[Two Words]

I don't think it's reasonable, I'm just saying if they thought she was committing a crime then isn't that being under suspicion of committing a crime?



I don't think she should have gotten handcuffed or anything, but what is the normal procedure for attempting to arrest a prostitute after making contact with someone? Aside from the person being someone the police have picked up before / someone being in a 'high traffic' area for prostitution, what reasoning do the cops have for ever detaining a possible prostitute?

This is circular logic. She is suspicious because she is being suspected? Why is she being suspected? Because she is suspicious. Why is she suspicious...,

 

[MHWilliams]

That's still confusing to me. Not for this case in particular as she was just totally being harassed it seems, but in general. What's so great about not showing your ID? Telling me it's my right doesn't make me think "Oh wow. How glamorous that I can say no and make this much harder for both of us."

Like what's so bad about showing ID that people keep saying 'well, it's your right not to' as if that gives me any idea why I'd exercise that right when it seems like it can indeed become very inconvenient.

It seems like people are making it out to be a bigger right than it sounds like to me.

Pedestrians are not required to carry ID at all times, so the law does not require you to show ID if you're not in a vehicle. Therefore, our laws assume that people won't be carrying ID at all times, unless you're in certain states. Therefore an officer should be working with the idea that people won't be carrying ID.

In this situation, what if she simply didn't have it? Does that make it okay for her to be detained? Of course not.

The problem here is purely on the officers.

Her husband just let her get arrested?

What was he going to do?

 

[3phemeral]

I really don't care if the cop has to "deal with shit" on their daily job because, well, that's what they do. In no circumstances are they allowed to project those frustrations on other, innocent, law-abiding citizens just because they want to assert their authority where they could not elsewhere.

 

[dimb]

You would be okay with ID checkpoints being set up? Everyone can just show their ID and go about their day quicker if they just comply.

I mean, these exist in the United States already. Sobriety checkpoints.

 

[l2ounD]

I'm certain the husband would've which brings up an interesting point in that the cops had to assume the husband was lying to them as well also based on absolutely no proof whatsoever. It's crazy

Cause who lies to the cops right.. Cops were just asshats, or maybe next to that McDs is a high prostitute zone.. who knows.

 

[SolidSnakesMyStepDad]

What was he going to do?

Start making out with the cops and then get them handcuffed for possibly being prostitutes.

 

[Timedog]

Guys, guys, guys, the woman did absolutely nothing wrong, and the cops broke the law with their actions.

IT'S FUNNY HOW THERE'S NO MIDDLE GROUND, AND NO ONE IS WILLING TO LOOK AT THIS WITH AN OPEN MIND.

GUYS

 

[lednerg]

...
Also, comparisons to the California Police Force and Nazi Germany are over the top hyperbole.

That's not what was happening in the thread. The question of "why not just show your ID?" came up which naturally leads to the "show me your papers" comparison. In the US, we're not required to have our documentation on us at all times.

 

[xbhaskarx]

"Just because she's married to him and a well known actress doesn't mean she's not a prostitute." - LAPD

 

[ponpo]

From her husband's Facebook:

From the questions that he asked me as D was already on her phone with her dad, I could tell that whoever called on us (including the officers), saw a tatted RAWKer white boy and a hot bootie shorted black girl and thought we were a HO (prostitute) & a TRICK (client).

Because of my past experience with the law, I gave him my ID knowing we did nothing wrong and when they asked D for hers, she refused to give it because they had no right to do so.

So I guess someone called the police on them.

 

[Infinite]

How do they normally catch prostitutes without undercover officers? Like can they? What evidence do they have for that anyway unless they catch the act?

Also, aren't they allowed to detain someone for a number of hours without charging them?

Again, it seems clear that in this case the officers didn't actually have a good reason to stop her, but I'm curious in general how this works in their heads anyway.

I don't think it's reasonable, I'm just saying if they thought she was committing a crime then isn't that being under suspicion of committing a crime?



I don't think she should have gotten handcuffed or anything, but what is the normal procedure for attempting to arrest a prostitute after making contact with someone? Aside from the person being someone the police have picked up before / someone being in a 'high traffic' area for prostitution, what reasoning do the cops have for ever detaining a possible prostitute?

I mean, was there an exchange of money? If not then you might wanna hold off and wait for more evidence to present itself.

 

[StickSoldier]

From her husband's Facebook:





So I guess someone called the police on them.

Fucking racists man,smh. I can't believe people.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Cause who lies to the cops right.. Cops were just asshats, or maybe next to that McDs is a high prostitute zone.. who knows.

The point of the matter though is that how is any couple in public supposed to prove they are not prostitute and john in that scenario? It looks like broad daylight in public in regular clothing

If in that scenario some PDA makes you suspicious of prostitution, will all married people be required to bring marriage licenses with them to prove it's not being paid for? Will there be relationship licenses to prove they're dating? It's ridiculous to suspect someone of prostitution in that scenario

 

[DoktorEvil]

That's not what was happening in the thread. The question of "why not just show your ID?" came up which naturally leads to the "show me your papers" comparison. In the US, we're not required to have our documentation on us at all times.

No I understand that. It's just boggling that the first thing certain Gaffers reach for is Nazi Germany as a comparison, when it's not the case at all.

Only in certain states is ID law enforced.