# Man Who Flipped The Bird Sues Trooper Who Ticketed Him



## Goose (Dec 1, 2004)

It was a toss-up between Idiot News Articles and Police News Articles (it could go either way)...

[web:6c7f637ff1]http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/4164821/detail.html[/web:6c7f637ff1]


----------



## kttref (Oct 5, 2004)

I'm gonna say that trooper shouldn't be laughing about anything!


----------



## Goose (Dec 1, 2004)

kttref";p="55578 said:


> I'm gonna say that trooper shouldn't be laughing about anything!


It doesn't sound like he has much to laugh about; but I've learned you have to maintain your sense of humor in certain situations or you will go insane.


----------



## Macop (May 2, 2002)

Why shouldnt he laugh he did not do anything wrong. Just a side note, Northfield, MA has a town by law making it illegal to give the finger or swear at a Police Officer. I do know it has been enforced and was upheld by Greenfield court.


----------



## Guest (Feb 5, 2005)

> Just a side note, Northfield, MA has a town by law making it illegal to give the finger or swear at a Police Officer. I do know it has been enforced and was upheld by Greenfield court.
> 
> I would like to read that by-law.


----------



## topcop14 (Jul 13, 2004)

A few years ago a local seasoned officers 30 + years on the job was on his way in for a gravyard shift. He is about 2 minutes from the station when he sees blues in he his rear view mirror. He slows but doesn't stop thinking the car will pass going to a call. Cruiser activates siren. Vetran officer puts arm out window and shoots the bird thinking it is one of his guys fucking with him. WRONG it was a trooper. Trooper Calls in a pursuit holds all traffic on C troop channel. . . After about a mile the officer pulls over. Trooper runs up gun drawn and screaming at officer who is in full uniform. At about the same time another local arrives to back up trooper. Officer tries to explain what happend, trooper threatens to lock up local. Long story short trooper had no sense of humor.

I thought it was funny :lol:


----------



## kttref (Oct 5, 2004)

Macop";p="55599 said:


> Why shouldnt he laugh he did not do anything wrong.


Did you read the whole article?



> Nassan can afford to be good-natured about the suit, because it's far from the most serious one he's facing right now. *Nassan and his former partner, Trooper Juan Curry, are being sued in federal court for the fatal shooting of 12-year-old car theft suspect Michael Ellerbe in Uniontown, Pa., on Christmas Eve, 2002.*


----------



## Macop (May 2, 2002)

lancegoodthrust, I imagine you could if you go to the town hall and get it. I did not believe it until I read it myself. 

Kttref I did read the whole article and I saw nothing wrong. Cops get sued for doing everything right. They shot a 12 yr old obviosly involved in some type of felony, until I see a verdict of guilt showing they did something they should not have done they are innocent and have done nothing wrong!! You or myself or any officer on this board may have to do the same thing someday, god forbid. If so I'm sure you would agree you would not want people judging you before you day in court, right?


----------



## ecpd402 (Sep 18, 2002)

Macop";p="55599 said:


> Why shouldnt he laugh he did not do anything wrong. Just a side note, Northfield, MA has a town by law making it illegal to give the finger or swear at a Police Officer. I do know it has been enforced and was upheld by Greenfield court.


If that the case and the cops in that town enforce this rule. They are in the wrong line of work. I get the finger or told off every shift. I dont let it bother me because this is the job I picked and Bad guys dont like police


----------



## LenS (Nov 9, 2004)

Re: veteran officer & MSP

I think that what the veteran officer did was incredibly stupid, but not a capital offense. Based ONLY on the facts presented (and there may indeed be more to this):
- If he failed to stop, and just was continuing at a normal rate of speed, my take on it is that the Trooper over-reacted in a most dangerous way (this is going to go over like a lead brick amongst some readers, I'm sure). Explanation below.
-If however, the veteran officer flipped the Trooper the bird, and gunned it, then the Trooper's reaction was fully appropriate. [Facts presented do not support this theory.]
- One night we were working patrol in the unmarked detective car (marked cruiser was probably in the shop being repaired) and we got a call for a car flipped over in the median of I-95. When we get on the ramp of I-95 with siren and bubblegum (on dash) this woman in front of us absolutely refuses to yield! It is frustrating as hell since we don't know how serious the injuries are at the crash scene we are headed to, but we just gritted our teeth and beared with it until we cleared the ramp and could blow by her. Had we forced her off the road and stuck a gun in her ear, we would have been VERY WRONG!!
- Our SOP (written policy) was that if we ever drew our gun, we had to write a report on what happened. And the ONLY justification to draw the gun was with the FULL INTENT TO USE IT! Thus, there had to be a VIABLE THREAT TO HUMAN LIFE before we could draw a weapon. [Here I not only agree, but see no difference between what a civilian should be allowed ot do and what a LEO should be required to do.]

Based on that, if someone fails to yield and/or flips the bird, I do NOT see that it is justification in itself to use deadly force and if that is what indeed did happen, the Trooper could and should face charges. [The veteran officer should also be reprimanded and forced to apologize to the Trooper.]

Now I'll don my Kevlar, hide in the bunker and await the incoming artillery from the MSP. :wink:


----------



## bbelichick (Aug 25, 2002)

LenS";p="55696 said:


> I not only agree, but see no difference between what a civilian should be allowed ot do and what a LEO should be required to do.


 :roll: That's ridiculous. Police are obviously empowered to do much more than civilians...That's why they are police. Otherwise, you are just a civilian.

As far as drawing your gun after a pursuit, it's up to you, but common sense dictates that the mope ran for some reason and it may be a dangerous one. Better safe than sorry.

The policy you refer to is outdated and DANGEROUS. Many officers these days will draw their weapons if they fear for their safety. To hold an Officer to a Deadly Force standard for simply drawing their weapon is ridiculous. Cops get killed because they can't get their gun out before the bad guy fires.

Len, I get the opinion (from this post and a previous one) that you were a cop a long time ago. This is a different world and things have changed quite a bit...This is one of those things.


----------



## LenS (Nov 9, 2004)

bbelichick,

There is a key word that you used "RUN" . . . and from the info we have(much like the scenario I related involving myself and another officer), we weren't told that he "RAN", just that he didn't pull over. I stated that if he RAN, the Trooper was within his rights. But, lots of folks ignore police, fire, ambulances with sirens/lights . . . they keep on going at their normal pace and I do not feel this deserves a gun stuffed in one's ear. That's my opinion, totally independent of being a LEO or not.

As for your other deduction, you are correct. I was appointed in 1978 and left the department in 1996. LOTS changed over that time and lots has changed since then. I am a full-time Constable now (1999-present) and carry on that job . . . I know that many LEOs deny that we are law enforcement (and I have serious issues with the lack of training and process of appointments), but we do make arrests and do face nasty/upset people with no backup and no respect from local PDs.

I am not saying that the police aren't empowered to do more than civilians, just that whenever you draw a gun on someone it should be with the INTENT TO USE IT, not for intimidation factor. And thus, the incident must provide the justification to use a gun to kill someone who didn't stop. Last I knew, you couldn't get serious jail time for flipping the bird or failing to stop (NOT "RUN"), so it's a real stretch to threaten to kill someone for it.


----------



## Macop (May 2, 2002)

ecpd402 wrote:
If that the case and the cops in that town enforce this rule. They are in the wrong line of work. I get the finger or told off every shift. I dont let it bother me because this is the job I picked and Bad guys dont like police.

Good for you hero


----------



## j809 (Jul 5, 2002)

> I get the finger or told off every shift. I dont let it bother me because this is the job I picked and Bad guys dont like police


Letting them get away with it just makes it harder for me or other officers that have to deal with them at a later time. Because they get away with it from you doesn't mean they get away with it with other officers. If you let people flip you off everyday you work and do or say nothing about it then it's time to pack it up and change careers.

Hey MACOP, what about an immediate threat for flipping finger while driving as they lose control of their vehicle. HAHAHA. Just kidding!! :lol:


----------



## topcop14 (Jul 13, 2004)

Wow, :roll: 
I was not even trying to stir the post and look what happened. People are getting paranoid around here. I just thought it was a funny story thats all. Here are a few more facts to go with the story. Seasoned vet was not speeding, did not accelerate when the blues came on all he did was stick up middle finger thinking it was one of he own guys fucking with him. Now since I have been accused of kicking the Super Troopers in the bag, now I will. The Officer was not speeding, Had no defective equipment, a valid inspection sticker Sorry no in-proper lane change or marked lanes. Also if memory serves me right he was never told why he was being stopped. 

Now I was not there but the seasoned officer told me the story and I believe him.


----------



## topcop14 (Jul 13, 2004)

You are correct there is always two sides to the story and I only have one.
Here is a question for you. How does one tell the difference between a local cruiser and a Super Troopers Cruiser when it is dark and the cruiser is behind you. Lets see, state car has strobes on roof, local has strobes on roof. State car has spot light on pillar, local car has spot light on pillar. State car has wig wags, local car has wig wags. Sounds to me like they would look the same to me. Unless of course it is one of those troopers who spends several thousand dollars of his own money adding all kinds of aftermarket lights.


----------



## topcop14 (Jul 13, 2004)

First the original post was only intended to be a funny story. That is it, nothing more, nothing less. Funny because I bet the vet officer was embarrassed by the entire thing. Funny because of the way the trooper acted. Funny cause every cop that has heard this before thought it was funny. Funny cause that vet still get his balls busted about the incident. If this offends you you need to get a life. It is OK that we disagree but at this point If I said the sky was blue you would tell me that it was yellow and how the state police proved it was yellow. Give me a break. Are you trying to tell me that you can see what color a car is when it is behind you with warning lights, take down lights spot light activated. Is the State police issuing troopers new eyes that work different then everyone Elise's eyes. All as you can see is lights ! ! ! Next time you are on a stop while walking back to your sled look at what you see. Can you see any decals or make out if the front of the car is black or blue. 
If I am waisting your time why do you respond to my posts?


----------



## kttref (Oct 5, 2004)

Macop";p="55663 said:


> lancegoodthrust, I imagine you could if you go to the town hall and get it. I did not believe it until I read it myself.
> 
> Kttref I did read the whole article and I saw nothing wrong. Cops get sued for doing everything right. They shot a 12 yr old obviosly involved in some type of felony, until I see a verdict of guilt showing they did something they should not have done they are innocent and have done nothing wrong!! You or myself or any officer on this board may have to do the same thing someday, god forbid. If so I'm sure you would agree you would not want people judging you before you day in court, right?


I'm not saying he did or didn't do it. I'm just saying he shouldn't be laughing too hard, those are some mighty charges he and his partner have against him. Twenty bucks, he did it for the right reason, but if I were him I wouldn't be laughing. Maybe I, like the trooper, have no sense of humor. :wink:


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

This thread is sooooooooo lame now
:sl:


----------

