Another Bicycle Rider Persecuted by Police

[XLFD]

I have made no secret that I have been energized to confront and change the local system of justice and politics in the Ludington area primarily because of the actions of the local police and what passes for the local justice system after a Ludington officer stopped me while I was riding my bicycle back in 2008.  In my case, it wasn't so much what happened at the stop, rather than what happened afterwards as far as unethical disclosures of false information by Police Chief Mark Barnett and the amateurish mishandling of my request for a formal hearing by the 79th District Court clerical staff and Probate Court Mark Raven, denying me procedural due process in many ways as I tried to deny that I had broke any laws. 

This would eventually lead me to sitting in jail for civil contempt of court when Judge Raven, claiming until he was red in the face that he had jurisdiction, never revealed that proof even after he indicated he would.  In a subsequent civil filing by myself, it was found that he never did have jurisdiction, and therefore had me sit in jail for three days because he couldn't admit he unlawfully sat in judgment for the original hearing.   

I did have previous indications prior to my bicycle incident that our local system was operating against the better interests of the community and their liberties, but my eight years as a public servant, operating as a firefighter for Ludington's fire department insulated me from some of the warning signs, and had me toe the line when it did.  Foot soldiers of a corrupted regime generally see the actions of their fellow soldiers in a good light, even if they are indisputably evil to everyone else.  This is why many internal investigations of police never turn anything up.

 

Down in Gainesville, Florida a retired First Lieutenant, Eric English, was riding a bicycle late at night when he was stopped by a rookie police officer for GPD, Benjamin Blake.  He did not have a bicycle light as required by Florida state law, (and Michigan law), and so by Florida statute (316.2065 (7)): 

"A law enforcement officer may issue a bicycle safety brochure and a verbal warning to a bicycle rider who violates this subsection or may issue a citation and assess a fine for a pedestrian violation as provided in s. 318.18. The court shall dismiss the charge against a bicycle rider for a first violation of this subsection upon proof of purchase and installation of the proper lighting equipment."

 

Lieutenant Eric English, without previous violation, could have at most been given a benign 'pedestrian' citation which would have been absolved by the court if he purchased and installed a cheap light after getting the citation.  But he never got a citation...

 

When police officers pull over an adult bicyclist minding their own safety, they need to expect a little incredulity.  I don't know particulars about the original stop, but Lt. English driving without lights after dark may have been within the law if he was off the roadway or outside the law but looking out for his safety if he was on the street (as explained here). 

 

Either way, he likely wondered why the police were wasting their time with him, and this may have been reflected in his attitude-- one can't say for certain since this was not recorded by him.  But once his recording started, the three policemen involved showed plenty of attitude themselves.  A transcript follows the recording, whose video offers very little since Lt. English was arrested right at the beginning and it was dropped aside, so you can follow along with that as it plays.  An analysis follows afterward, explaining what went wrong and is color coded and numbered:

 

.

Cop1 = GPD Officer Benjamin Blake Cop2 = GPD Officer Corporal Henry Cop3 = unknown

LEE = Lieutenant Eric English

TRANSCRIPT FOLLOWS:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEE:  Ok, can you tell me your name again, sir, please. I can’t give you an id until I see some identification (1).

Cop1: (simultaneous): Now do you have your id on you or not (2)? Officer Blake. …

Cop1: You are turning this into a more complication situation than it has to be right now.

LEE: Are you refusing to provide identification?

Cop1: Alright, go ahead and put the phone down for me. Put the phone down for me. Put your hands behind your back (3).

LEE: (simultaneously): I’m not putting this down. I haven’t seen any identification. You have refusing to give me identification. I do not consent to this. Why are you refusing to give me identification? That’s a pretty simple request. I have to watch out for my own safety. You can buy a badge and a name plate at any costume shop in the country. I do not consent to being detained. What’s the probable cause here (4)?

Cop1: Probable cause - is I already identified myself who I am and you provided…

LEE: you gave me a name and a shield. All I asked for was that – was for actual identification.

Cop1: You have anything in your pockets right now that can poke, stick, or prod me? Spread your legs for me.

LEE: Are you his supervisor? Are you his supervisor?

Cop2: Pardon? I can be, what do you need?

LEE: He refused identification and he’s now detaining me. All I did was a simple request for identification. All he pointed to was his shield and a name tag as his only identification(4).

Cop2: That uniform identifies him. … That uniform identifies him as a police officer.

LEE : ……you can get Any uniform at a costume shop. So you guys are both refusing.. what was your name sir?

Cop2: ........

Cop2: My name is Corporal Henry

Cop1: Officer Blake

LEE: And you guys are both refusing to give me proper identification? I don’t consent to any search … of my property (5).

Cop2: Well you are being detained right now (7)….

LEE: What’s the probable cause for detaining me? X2 Asking for identification is probable cause now – for detaining me (6)? When was the last time you guys looked up the law?

Cop ……..

LEE: Simply asking who you are is enough to get arrested around here? Is that how it works?

Cop1: Did I say you were under arrest (7)?

LEE: Well it sure seems like it to me ……. What’s the probable cause for detaining me? …… ……

Cop: 10-4

LEE: I do not consent to any of this. You have no probable cause for any of this. You don’t have a business card or nothing? You guys are not in uniform if you don’t have a business card and identification.

Cop2: Excuse me?

LEE: You are not in uniform if you're not carrying proper identification.

Cop2: I am in uniform.

LEE: so let me see some identification.

Cop2: I already told you who I was. …..

LEE: so I don’t have to show you guy ID, I can just say my name? That’s good enough for you (8)?

Cop2: So long as we can look it up and verify it.

LEE: so how am I suppose to look it up and verify it if you guys have me in cuffs? So you are telling me right now ….

Cop1: My name identifies me

LEE: I can get a uniform like that in any costume shop in the country.

Cop2: I – I – I - I – I challenge you to do that. Show up dressed just like I am driving a marked police car.

LEE: Get your supervisor out here please.

Cop1: Where is your ID on you ….well get you backpack

.  LEE: Get your supervisor out here please. I don’t understand the question. Can I get your supervisor out here please? I don’t understand the question. Can you get your supervisor out here please?

Cop2: The question was where is your ID card. The question was where is your ID card.

LEE: I don’t understand.

Cop2: You don’t understand what an ID card is?

LEE: I’m distraught right now. I don’t understand the question. I am being detained without probable cause and you guys are refusing to tell me probable cause refusing to give me proper identification. You have no probable cause for detaining me here (9).

Cop2: Where’s your ID at?

LEE: Am I free to go?

Cop2: Nope

LEE: what’s the probable cause for detaining me?

Cop2: Ask him. Where’s your ID at?

LEE: I have nothing to say. As per the recent supreme court ruling, I am verbally stating my right to remain silent (10).

Cop2: ok

LEE: Verbally invoking it.

Cop1......

Cop? ……

Cop2: Will do … Cop2: Same name as I gave you a minute ago.

Cop1: ...What’s going on...

LEE: Why am I being detained?

Cop1: Already told you why you were being detained (11).

LEE: No you didn't. You didn't say what the probable cause was. You said - I asked …...

Cop1: This can go one of two ways; You can do it willfully or we can push you in there and this will go in a whole different direction. I can tell you right now. This is a simple stop.

LEE: ……

Cop1: You already have our identification. It’s in …… Watch your feet. (door closes)

Cop2: Is this him?

Cop1: Stopped him for having no lights,

Cop2: Ok

Cop1: and, uh, pulled him over….identification…your id…

Cop2: …..probable cause to pull him over. He refused to identify himself. So what’s your next step?

Cop1: Gonna’ search his bag. …

Cop2: Absolutely, because you have a charge on him already (12).

Cop3: Got’ yu’ a cauuuuehhhahaha congawulashuns

Cop2: You, not so much.

Cop3: Still sitting n’ …..???

Cop2: What’s his name?

Cop1: Eric English **finds military ID** Hmmmph. Really. Go figure.

Cop2: Oh, nice.

Cop 3: Heeeuuuhh muluturuh’?

Cop1: Yep.

Cop3: Tha’ thah’ doo’?

Cop2: 1st Lieutenant.

Cop2: So, I’m guessing NOT.

Cop2: I don’t know.

Cop3: Multuruhvet.

Cop2: He asked me for my identification …. You can get one of those at a pawn shop anywhere. Go ahead and do that and drive up in a marked patrol car. He said I was not in uniform unless I had proper ID and a business card.

Cop3: Yubduhumbur

Cop2: ***Irrelevant talk of bungy cords***

Cop3: Luuuks’ like u guyz av’ it unda’ contro’ he’er.

Cop2: Yup

Cop1: This is bullshit

Cop1: Echo524200840660

Cop2: Gonna’ take him for a ride? You got resisting (13). … Cop1: yeah....Wasn’t worth it.

Cop2: ….answer question…???

Cop1: 26.

Cop2: You have ….

. Cop1: Yeah, ??? sounds good to me.

Cop?: Got me my bungy cord. Guess he didn’t want it.

Cop2: Gonna call his commander?

Cop1: What’s that?

Cop2: Gonna’ call his commander?

Cop1: I could do that.

Cop2: …Major…currant?? ….

Cop1: So… ??? am I looking for… Very satisfying.

Cop2: Especially when you didn't act like that in the military.

Cop1: Mmmhmm. Uh, oh, I didn't even tell him he was under arrest so ??? under arrest ?? (14)...

Cop1: Let’s find out what secrets lie in this backpack. **unzipping / thieving through backpack** Got some military issue OJs, got a bike bar, bike lock. ?? Bottle. **unzipping** I suppose that’s it (15).

Cop2: All that for nothing.

Cop1: Hmmhmm I think ??? another sovereign citizen in the making.

Cop2: Hmmhmm.

Cop1: That can go here (jingling keys), that can go.

 

 

ANALYSIS: 

1) Respectfully referring to him as 'sir' and using the magic word 'please' Lt. English asks for ID, which a police officer should be willing and able to produce in a non-emergent situation.  He never does.

2) Bicyclists and pedestrians do not need IDs to go about their way.  Otherwise the only reason the officer has to ask for ID is if he can voice reasonable suspicion that Lt. English was about to commit some specified crime or had just done so. 

3) Refusing the request for ID, Officer Blake moves for two orders preparatory for an arrest, without any criminal act noted.

4) More lawful questions that needed to be asked, that should be answered by an accountable police officer.  Ignored as another officer arrives.

5) Here, Lt. English makes it clear he does not consent to any searches, and is once again ignored asking for proper identification.

6) Another request for probable cause ignored, making Lt. English's ID question appear to be true.

7) When you are in handcuffs and have not been done so for the officer's safety, you are not only being detained but are effectively under arrest.

8) The officers don't get what he implies here.  They order ID, but fail to show theirs to prove their authority.

9) Even distraught, and not understanding the officer's questions, he says everything correctly about his rights.

10) Lt. English finally invokes his right to remain silent, since the officers have indeed arrested him and are content not to give any probable cause, officially identify themselves, and ask for ID that he is not even required to have when he is on a bicycle.  They might as well ask for proof of insurance.

11) There has not been any mention of why Lt. English was detained or arrested given by any officer.

12) There is no law against having no lights on a bicycle , but one must be on after dark.  As we have seen, it is a minor civil infraction that has no penalty if remedied.  It is not a crime, as civil infractions are defined to not be so, ergo the officer could stop him to write a citation, but not arrest him without any other actual crime committed, nor conduct the illegal search on his bag or later, his backpack.

13) Here the officers claim they have him for resisting arrest, a catch-all for police officers to apply when someone tries to ask them questions or assert their civil rights, the vague wording of the Florida statute for resisting could almost apply here.  But there is no "lawful execution of any legal duty" being performed here, just police grandstanding.

14) Oop, handcuffs, detention in the back of a squad car, without telling him he's under arrest for something.  Is that important?

15) The backpack search followed by a reference to 'sovereign citizen'.  Sovereign citizens are ones that don't put up with the illegal and unethical infringement of their rights by governments. 

 

As Lt. Eric English would say afterwards in a recap, and even later a video with his dilemma on seeking what to do:

 

"The charges fabricated for the arrest (resisting an officer without violence) were dropped almost immediately, because they were obviously completely bogus, as I did nothing illegal. But I was still subjected to many criminal actions: physical touching and restraint against my will, illegal searches, damage to my personal property, physical, psychological and emotional distress, having my reputation and future job prospects affected by having mug shots on the internet, and being physically detained against my will for over 16 hours.

Incidentally, I was also subjected to the worst breakfast I have had on this planet (And that's coming from somebody who has eaten egg and cheese MREs).

 

 

Even though my charges have been dropped, I have not been made whole. I have been subjected to numerous physical, emotional, and monetary damages as a result of these officers' illegal actions, and I very strongly want to pursue a law suit against the department and/or the individual officers, but have very little knowledge of the process, and no money to spend on it. If you or anyone you know has knowledge or expertise in how to go about this please contact me via Private Message on my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/TheLordHumungus?feature=watch"

 

 

 

 

 

There is no excuse for law enforcement officers to act this way to anyone, especially those who have served our country.  Lt. Eric English rode his bicycle after dark without a light, like many other people that have used their light-less bicycle to go somewhere and stayed after dark inadvertently, he may not have even been in the roadway.  We don't know, because Officer Benjamin Blake went from considering this infraction to arresting him for an unknown crime in a matter of seconds.  Just because Lt. English questioned him about his identity. 

Now his mug shot can be downloaded from any internet provider without any reference to his innocence of the crime or the circumstances involved.  He will likely find himself targeted by law enforcement and the FBI for this incident and could get some mark against his military service.  All because of the lack of training of Gainesville Police Officers, their dereliction of duty to the Constitution of the USA, and their ignorance of what their service is supposed to entail.  These two officers need to be reassigned, and the Gainesville Police Department owes this veteran a meaningful apology.  But they also deserve a lawsuit for letting it lay for two months and running.

[Willy]

What is a person to do if they have no money for a lawyer? Not everyone has the ability to understand the law and file suits against bad cops and City officials. You are lucky X in that you were able to sift thru and understand legal terminology but a person of lesser abilities is just SOL when it comes to understanding and applying all of that legal shmegal. This type of thing happens all over America. Just look at the violations committed by police and other officials right in Ludington. You have done all of us a tremendous service and I for one truly appreciate it.

[NYC]

No money for a lawyer - means suck it up buttercup. In this country unless you have access to money your guilty.

[XLFD]

Unfortunately, if Lt. English was around these parts, I could point him at a couple of attorneys that may work on a contingency basis if they felt it was a strong case.  I think the phone recordings can make it a strong case, because it's fairly clear he was unlawfully arrested, imprisoned, and that unreasonable search and seizures occurred.  I think Eric will hook up with some legal eagle in his area and bring it on with the Gainesville Kops in Federal Court. 

He has had about a month to bounce back, and I think he will push forth, because he's not only a military officer, but a bicyclist, and that's a potent combination of will.

Thanks, Willy, for your support.  I think Mr. English has the intelligence and know-how to educate himself into legal ops, much like I have (at least enough to out-think hireling Manistee lawyers), if he so desires.