Entrapment by police

[and1player38]

This was in Texas.

My younger brother was at a gas station with a couple friends and I suppose the police thought they were being sketchy so the police decided to follow him when they left. The only thing is the police didn't just follow my brother but the LEO was allegedly tailgating him brother very closely (within a couple feet). At first my brother thought the police officer was going trying to get by so he switches lanes. The cop stays on his ass, at this point my brother realizes what's going on. He said the police was following so closely if he had barely let off the gas for even a second the LEO would have surely hit him. So my brother speeds up just barely in order to put a safe distance between him and the LEO in order to avoid a potential accident. Of course the police officer sees this and proceeds to pull him over for going 3MPH over the speed limit.

Long story short him and his friends get arrested for possession of marijuana. His attorney requests the tape and files for a motion to suppress. They get the video tape and it starts the moment the police puts on his siren and of course doesn't show the preceding events. This took place in Collin County where the police have the very latest and greatest equipment. I have a feeling there is probably video the police aren't showing us. When video tapes are requested is the video always sent as-is or are the tapes allowed to be shortened to remove what is felt to be erroneous from the beginning and end of the tape? Can another video request be submitted for the video evidence immediately preceding when the police turned on their squad camera?

Assuming that everything my brother says is not only truthful but not skewed, besides coming to a plea agreement what options are available?

 

[Zigner]

This was in Texas.

My younger brother was at a gas station with a couple friends and I suppose the police thought they were being sketchy so the police decided to follow him when they left. The only thing is the police didn't just follow my brother but the LEO was allegedly tailgating him brother very closely. At first my brother thought the police officer was going trying to get by so he switches lanes. The cop stays on his ass, at this point my brother realizes what's going on. He said the police was following so closely if he had barely let off the gas for even a second the LEO would have surely hit him. So my brother speeds up just barely in order to put a safe distance between him and the LEO in order to avoid a potential accident. Of course the police officer sees this and proceeds to pull him over for going 3MPH over the speed limit.

Long story short him and his friends get arrested for possession of marijuana. His attorney requests the tape and files for a motion to suppress. They get the video tape and it starts the moment the police puts on his siren and of course doesn't show the preceding events. This took place in Collin County where the police have the very latest and greatest equipment. I have a feeling there is probably video the police aren't showing us. When video tapes are requested is the video always sent as-is or are the tapes allowed to be shortened to remove what is felt to be erroneous from the beginning and end of the tape? Can another video request be submitted for the video evidence immediately preceding when the police turned on their squad camera?

Assuming that everything my brother says is not only truthful but not skewed, besides coming to a plea agreement what options are available?

I would suggest that your brother seek the services of an attorney. What can YOU do? Help him pay for the attorney.

 

[Silverplum]

So the "unedited tape" might show the cop forcing your brother to have marijuana in his car, thus nullifying his arrest for possession of marijuana?

 

[and1player38]

I would suggest that your brother seek the services of an attorney. What can YOU do? Help him pay for the attorney.

He has an attorney I'm just trying to figure out some points to bring up with the attorney.

 

[and1player38]

So the "unedited tape" might show the cop forcing your brother to have marijuana in his car, thus nullifying his arrest for possession of marijuana?

Yes because that's what I'm getting at here.

It's called having just cause to stop.

 

[Silverplum]

Yes because that's what I'm getting at here.

It's called having just cause to stop.

Well, you go right ahead and call up your brother's attorney and bring up that fine point.

 

[and1player38]

Well, you go right ahead and call up your brother's attorney and bring up that fine point.

... so you just waste your time on advice on advice forums?

Your life must be riveting.

bye bye now.

 

[CdwJava]

Most camera systems are activated either manually or when the overhead lights are activated. Most do not loop continuous recording.

Your brother's attorney can certainly try to argue that the stop was bad based upon the officer creating the situation that forced your brother to exceed the speed limit. That may not fly, but he's welcome to give it a go because that may well be the ONLY thing he has to hang his hat on.

If the contact is in, I suppose that there is no real argument about the contact and search? I presume that the odor of marijuana was pretty distinct in the car?

Have you read the police report? Does it cite speed or something else as the reasonable suspicion for the detention?

 

[Silverplum]

... so you just waste your time on advice on advice forums?

Your life must be riveting.

bye bye now.

I was just looking up the TX law on the issue and reading it. Now you can look it up and read it your ownself.

Your tiny tantrum is hereby noted for the record. Because of your tiny tantrum, I've deleted from my answer the name of the document I just finished reading, so that you may spend your time searching for it.

 

[Zigner]

OP's brother is represented. OP should butt out - he's not gonna tell the attorney anything new.

 

[swalsh411]

So the "unedited tape" might show the cop forcing your brother to have marijuana in his car, thus nullifying his arrest for possession of marijuana?

If you're trying to suggest that finding contraband always justifies whatever method the police used to discover it then perhaps you need to reread the Constitution.

 

[Silverplum]

If you're trying to suggest that finding contraband always justifies whatever method the police used to discover it then perhaps you need to reread the Constitution.

I'm not suggesting any such thing.

You may speak for yourself, and I will speak for myself.

 

[and1player38]

Most camera systems are activated either manually or when the overhead lights are activated. Most do not loop continuous recording.

Your brother's attorney can certainly try to argue that the stop was bad based upon the officer creating the situation that forced your brother to exceed the speed limit. That may not fly, but he's welcome to give it a go because that may well be the ONLY thing he has to hang his hat on.

If the contact is in, I suppose that there is no real argument about the contact and search? I presume that the odor of marijuana was pretty distinct in the car?

Have you read the police report? Does it cite speed or something else as the reasonable suspicion for the detention?

Thank you very much for the thorough response CdwJava.

You're right about that being the ONLY thing to hang his hat on, it's definitely an all or nothing situation and the court room is a bad place to simply hope for the best.

Sorry if this seems like a dumb question but what do you mean the "contact is in" and also "contact and search?" I tried googling the term but couldn't find anything that would be synonymous with terms. I am not sure how pungent the odor was but I imagine there was enough there to justify searching the car. Worst part is that he asked my brother to search the car and he agreed.

I have not read the police report personally I'll see if they have a copy I can go over tonight. I am not 100% but I am fairly certain speeding was the only reason for the detention (I will confirm this ASAP). Of course in Texas at least it's not the driver in front's responsibility to keep ample space between the car behind it, but the police officer essentially forced my brother to speed up by purposefully keeping an unsafe distance for an elongated period of time. Of course if there is no video of this it becomes the police officer's word vs my brother which is never a good situation to be in.

This is why I was wondering how much of the tape the police are obligated to hand over when a request is made and if the tape can be shortened at the beginning or end.

Regardless of if you respond again thank you again for thorough and quality response. You've given me a number of leads to look into and potentially have my brother bring up with his attorney. It's always beneficial to have all of your options weighed out and you have definitely been of assistance.

 

[Zigner]

Thank you very much for the thorough response CdwJava.

You're right about that being the ONLY thing to hang his hat on, it's definitely an all or nothing situation and the court room is a bad place to simply hope for the best.

Sorry if this seems like a dumb question but what do you mean the "contact is in" and also "contact and search?" I tried googling the term but couldn't find anything that would be synonymous with terms. I am not sure how pungent the odor was but I imagine there was enough there to justify searching the car. Worst part is that he asked my brother to search the car and he agreed.

I have not read the police report personally I'll see if they have a copy I can go over tonight. I am not 100% but I am fairly certain speeding was the only reason for the detention (I will confirm this ASAP). Of course in Texas at least it's not the driver in front's responsibility to keep ample space between the car behind it, but the police officer essentially forced my brother to speed up by purposefully keeping an unsafe distance for an elongated period of time. Of course if there is no video of this it becomes the police officer's word vs my brother which is never a good situation to be in.

This is why I was wondering how much of the tape the police are obligated to hand over when a request is made and if the tape can be shortened at the beginning or end.

Regardless of if you respond again thank you again for thorough and quality response. You've given me a number of leads to look into and potentially have my brother bring up with his attorney. It's always beneficial to have all of your options weighed out and you have definitely been of assistance.

I'm sure the attorney will appreciate all the help he can get. I mean, gosh, all that law school probably really fried his brain!

 

[and1player38]

OP's brother is represented. OP should butt out - he's not gonna tell the attorney anything new.

I'm not trying to bring up anything mind blowing to the attorney just making sure all of the bases are covered. IMO nothing is wrong with that.

I got out of a possession charge after I was arrested because of an illegal search and seizure (I said no when the LEO asked to search my car). I got ranges of angles and responses when shopping for attorney's just as I did during the thread I posted here asking for advice of the situation. The more brains and collaboration the better, I'm not expecting anybody in here to spell everything out for me but if I can get a number of leads to follow I have no problem doing the research.

I do agree with what you're saying though, I am sure most attorney's pet peeves are family members and other people unnecessarily getting involved. I can appreciate that which is why I'm not bugging him but instead asking you all so I can then give my brother a few things to ask.