LAWYER: Student is Suing Police. Will He Win?

A SOBER college student was pulled over, and was arrested despite blowing 0.00 on the breathalyzer. Now he's suing the police department. Was the arrest legal? Did the arresting officer go too far? Will the student win his case?
Leave Andrew a voicemail with questions or ideas: www.speakpipe.com/flusche
NOTE: This description may contain affiliate links for you to find the items mentioned in this video and support the channel at no cost to you. Thank you for supporting the channel!

[@michaelboyes1947]

When a policeman stops you, he is NOT your friend.

[@ianbattles7290]

Exactly, the cop didn't pull you over to give you a hug; the cop pulled you over *because he is looking for an excuse to take your freedom and/or your money.*

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

Yes, but even in this case if he had managed to avoid volunteering for the tests, the stuff he said before that was probably not enough for the officer to make him do it. It is best to limit responses to questions that you do have to answer, such as providing your identification information, but it really depends what's going on how much you have to say and how far the officer is going to go to bring in somebody that's probably not guilty. If it's an emphasis patrol, they're not going to go to this much trouble for the arrest, they're going to figure out that he isn't obviously impaired and move on to somebody that is a threat to the community pretty quickly in most cases.

[@willbracken2367]

Rubbish!

[@codyway7424]

Seemed like a good young man with a healthy respect for the police. That has been changed forever.

[@mattbrown5511]

GOOD!!!!

[@paulvandervelden4087]

and 1.6 million of his friends based on the number of views

[@user-wu1jc7zr4y]

I'm sure he gonna lick pigs boots, and not only that he'll have a girlfriend and become a slave to that woman, until she monkybrach to another man.

[@Milesco]

Yeah, it's a shortsighted and just plain stupid policy / modus operandi -- "Let's piss off law-abiding citizens and treat them unfairly, and make them hate cops for evermore. Yeah, _that's_ a good idea!" 🙄

[@soujemn5]

Respect for the police is not healthy.

[@michaelwinter742]

This kid is going to go from pro-police to never again trusting the police.

[@mattbrown5511]

GOOD!!!!!!

[@Upscope777]

This is correct

[@ledenhimeganidleshitz144]

That's how to gather support from the public! Abuse the hell out of the general public!

[@philmann3476]

That's called "learning." (Comes with experience.)

[@TheSupervillain316]

If so, fortunately

[@ianbattles7290]

It is absolutely disgusting that cops can treat citizens like this without any consequences.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

You can blame the Heritage Foundation for stacking the courts with incompetent judges for that. Not that the others are necessarily that great, but they aren't so overtly corrupt.

[@Irongiantman007]

The cops are now suing the kid for defamation

[@chuckiemeister]

​@@Irongiantman007 Seriously???😳

[@andrewjackson244]

The state is not your friend.

[@ValentinoTemplari]

Never talk to police

[@Norm-R]

I used to do exactly the type of shit this kid does in the video because growing up I was taught police are there to help you, but videos like this have really opened my eyes and I appreciate your work Andrew. Hopefully I don't get stopped ever again, but if I do, I know to just politely tell the police that my lawyer friend advises me not to answer questions and remain silent.

[@Kmangod]

The ONLY and I mean ONLY way this guy loses in a civil trial against the police department is if the judge throws the suit out. If a non-corrupt judge let's it go to trial it's a slam dunk win for the student!!! People are tired of this crap from police!!

[@TEverettReynolds]

@@Kmangod The kid failed the tests. He will not win. The kid was even slow on his replies and sounded high. Sorry, but no, this kid needed to just keep quiet.

[@Tony29103]

Yup if you listen to the older generation, not just physically older but mentally, they'll say "if you behave or comply you'll be fine.." Bull fucking shit

[@Kmangod]

@@TEverettReynolds We will see.

[@jakemertens1382]

@@Kmangod I think you're right. The cop was so sure that he smelled alcohol then didn't give up after the 0.00. It'll be obvious to all but the most biased jurors that the cop wasn't acting in good faith.

[@marcsmith2708]

You left out the best part where he shames the cop that arrested him and tells him to do better!

[@deejayyy1681]

Gave him the "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed in you" speech 🤣

[@robertpolnicky7702]

That's what got him in trouble. The cop reported to someone the dispatcher that he was a smart ass. He went to jail for contempt of cop.

[@ninjabreadman8166]

6:30 - Officers depend on the legal ignorance of the common citizen to arrest innocent people, making innocent citizens into criminals

[@ianbattles7290]

The cops literally tell you that nothing you say can help you and everything/anything you say can hurt you. There is literally no benefit to speaking to the police without an attorney present.

[@ninjabreadman8166]

@Ian Battles Oh, absolutely, but even before that, before they Miranda you, they are constantly fishing for information for their investigation. So you are being investigated, likely as a suspect, from the moment they talk to you. If you choose not to talk to them and tell them as much, using your rights, it makes it harder for them to screw you

[@ledenhimeganidleshitz144]

The goal of every policeman should be to turn any conversation into a life sentence for every casual encounter. Great PR!

[@johnpublic6582]

@@ninjabreadman8166 In fact, since they are allowed to lie to you, when they walk up to you and say, "good evening" implying that they are wishing you a good evening, they are lying. They actually intend to try their hardest to ruin the rest of your life.

[@bradwatson7324]

He might win his lawsuit because he might get a jury of people like me who will give him the victory he deserves. After blowing 0.00 on the roadside test, that's as far as that needed to go.

[@karlrovey]

Especially since we have rulings throwing out confessions made after someone has been read the Mirands warming but was suspected of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The logic is essentially that if you're intoxicated, you don't fully understand your rights. It came up in a murder trial just this week.

[@brkbtjunkie]

Not that I think he’s guilty, but my friend was drinking all night on my birthday, he backed into a car at the club right in front of an officer… but he blew 0.00 even though he was drunk. It was wild.

[@tammystewart7429]

@@brkbtjunkie then the machine was broke.

[@Milesco]

_"After blowing 0.00 on the roadside test, that's as far as that needed to go."_ Exactly. At that point, the cop obviously should've let him go. If I were on the jury, I would award the innocent young man significant damages for a clearly wrongful arrest.

[@chrisp9046]

@@Milesco Unless he had traces of THC in his blood, he will win, but he does kind of seem like a pot head. Yah I know he said he can’t smoke weed because he supposedly gets drug tested weekly for football. Like those rules don’t get bent all the time. The cop was still an ass. And hopefully the kid wins.

[@savagesociety85]

Policing for profit is road piracy

[@a-liberal-patriot]

Andrew, you'll never be able to say "Don't talk" enough times! There was one time my lawyer dad gave a guest lecture to a 1L class. He walked in shouting SHUT UP! CLOSE YOU MOUTH AND KEEP IT THAT WAY! DON'T TALK! He then went on to explain, to the stunned students, about Miranda and more. Not just in traffic stops, but anytime an officer approaches you (in many circumstances, not all). His philosophy was simple: one word: Lawyer. Use it before Miranda, and after. He didn't dislike cops -knew and liked most of them- just knew that they operated on a different level.

[@wholeNwon]

You really must state that in choosing to remain silent you are asserting your 5th Amend, rights. You should not simply remain mute. Do not say, "My lawyer TOLD me to remain silent."

[@bradcrosier1332]

@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket - More like beneath contempt. Either that or with the equivalent of an eighth grade education. Most likely both.

[@eugenetswong]

I agree about reminding is to not talk to cops. I think that the desire to talk is too ingrained to western culture. While watching this video, even I thought about what I would say, even though I knew full well to just keep quiet.

[@johnpublic6582]

However, do not ask for, "a lawyer, dog." as is common in some social circles. There is established case law that you are clearly asking for a dog with a law degree and since that isn't possible your request is invalid and equivalent to not asking for a lawyer in the first place. You must clearly articulate that you will not answer questions without the presence of your lawyer. And you must stick to it regardless of the verbal judo they use to get you talking.

[@Milesco]

​@@johnpublic6582 Yeah, that decision by the Louisiana State Supreme Court is a ridiculous farce and a slap in the face to the Rule of Law. Such nonsense really brings our courts -- especially Louisiana's courts -- into disrepute. So-called "Justice" Scott Crichton of the Louisiana Supreme Court (a Republican appointee) penned an opinion concurring in the court’s decision. He wrote, apparently in absolute seriousness, that “the defendant’s ambiguous and equivocal reference to a ‘lawyer dog’ does not constitute an invocation of counsel that warrants termination of the interview.” Such intellectual dishonesty should not be countenanced in our justice system.

[@Heather-xm9ul]

I made cards that have my attorney's number on them, and that say, "I cannot answer any questions without my attorney present." There's another one for when my kid gets his license that says, "I am a minor, you must have my attorney or my parent present before I answer any questions." I fully expect these to be ignored by LEOs, but they're to be handed out with the required documents. We're already training our kids to never answer questions unless they're the ones who called LEOs to the scene.

[@ranger135xp]

Even then, they've been known to incriminate the ones that call them as well. Best to not talk to them.

[@Heather-xm9ul]

@@ranger135xp that's true, but my kids aren't great at nuance yet. Even though I already have the cards, my oldest is 12, so we still have time to hammer in that message, and add nuance.

[@albireotheredguard1599]

He definitely messed up by talking to the police.

[@ianbattles7290]

"I don't answer questions. Either place me under arrest or let me leave. Direct all further inquiries to my attorney."

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

It would have been better for him to provide the required information and keep his mouth shut, but prior to volunteering for the tests, he probably would have been let go with no further action. Even after the tests he probably would have been let go if the officer thought there were bigger fish to fry coming down the road. Sometimes, just having somebody doing a field sobriety test on the side of the road can remind other motorists that they could be the next one doing it.

[@TheBooban]

@@SmallSpoonBrigade if the cop wants to make an arrest, there is no escaping it. So cuss the cop out like a mofo. A good cop wouldn’t care. With a bad cop, you’re doomed whatever you do.

[@ColonelSandersLite]

@@TheBooban No. You also have to think about what that body camera footage is going to look like to the judge and the jury. There's no point in doing any of that. At best, it will accomplish nothing. More likely though, it's going to make you look like a POS that had it coming when it goes to trial.

[@Matty272]

@@SmallSpoonBrigadeTrue. But then he’d never have been able to give Winters a stern lecture.

[@fountainvalley100]

If you get to court and get the officer on the stand you get to ask him about smelling alcohol. Blowing 0.00 establishes the officer’s sole objective was to falsely arrest the person and is nothing but a liar.

[@wholeNwon]

You can't know what was in his mind. Considering his other "evidence" he might have thought that his machine was defective.

[@lostbutfreesoul]

They simply state that the smell was present in the vehicle. No matter what happens, it comes back to being the suspects fault... every time, imagine that! /sarcasm

[@fountainvalley100]

@@wholeNwon I'm guessing once you subpoena all the records related to how accurate their road side tests have been they will settle. His other evidence will disappear.

[@Milesco]

@@wholeNwon Depends on the facts of the case. In this case, there really was no other evidence of intoxication. The driver performed the field sobriety test quite well, in my opinion. He didn't appear to be drunk at all. (And indeed, he wasn't!)

[@TheXxemarosaxx]

A good lawyer will break down every test and the ability to do the tests and certifications the officers has taking the officers credibility in question to show he wasn’t qualified and willfully lied to take the kid in. I’ve seen the dui lawyer guy destroy cops like this

[@sbcinema]

Here in Germany that would never be legal, the USA should drastically improve its laws to protect citizens

[@Milesco]

Totally agree. We have given our law enforcement apparatus far too much power and far too little accountability. And it's getting worse. See _Egbert v. Boule,_ U.S. Supreme Court, docket # 21-147 (2022)

[@KeithOtisEdwards]

@@Milesco Not to mention _Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents._

[@Milesco]

@@KeithOtisEdwards That case actually _created_ the right to sue federal agents for constitutional violations. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has not only refused to expand that ruling beyond the specific facts of that case, it actually *reduced* the scope of _Bivens_ in the very case I mentioned above. In _Egbert,_ the SCOTUS took away our right to sue Border Patrol agents, making them immune from lawsuits, and specifically said that _Bivens_ was "disfavored" and instructed the lower courts to look for any possible excuse to throw out lawsuits against federal agents in general (not just Border Patrol agents, which now cannot be sued at all). Most legal scholars believe that _Bivens_ is moribund at this point, if not already dead. ☹ The only way to resurrect our right to hold federal agents accountable for their misconduct is to contact our elected representatives and senators and tell them to allow federal agents -- and the agenices they work for -- to be sued when they violate our constitutional rights. There's already a federal civil rights law on the books that makes state and local agents liable for violating our rights -- why shouldn't it be made to apply to federal agents as well?

[@sd906238]

Cop: Where are you going? Student: I'm going to your house. Your wife called and said "Come on over, that asshole just left for work".

[@trilliondollarman2514]

Maybe we should file suit against MADD for bribery.

[@senna3]

The cop lost all credibility in this arrest. If he arrests anyone else, this video will be played at trial to discredit him. The Newton Police department should fire him immediately.

[@Sonny_AA]

Cops live by "You can beat the charge but not the ride" its a thing. He didn't man handle the kid ...this was just another day for them and their superiors.

[@olstar18]

Should but they won't. The most they will do is let him resign and go to another station.

[@user-fe8gx3ie5v]

No, they shouldn't. Train and discipline, then fire if no improvement is seen.

[@deebee4575]

Quotas and expectation of racking up arrests are what cause this type of bad policing.

[@ianbattles7290]

And far too many people think they are immune from arrest because they haven't done anything wrong.

[@KevinTumlinson]

I think there IS a chance of success for the lawsuit, primarily based on the fact that Officer Winters initially said he smelled alcohol, and tested based on that assertion, then changed his "suspicion" to drugs when the kid blew zeroes. His attorney can certainly make the case that the officer had no reasonable suspicion for drugs, and that the arrest was retaliatory in nature.

[@johngalush8790]

We just watched the video. Lame story

[@williamlockwood4621]

At my first DUI, I pretty much made all of the same mistakes. Got arrested and hauled to jail where eventually I was released. However, I pissed off a good friend by calling him at 2:00 in the morning to pick me up and had to pay a towing fee. I wish I knew then what I know now. Keep up the good work Andrew.

[@theunaimedarrow4903]

I watched the full bodycam, a few other things stood out to me. First, the student stated a line was uneven (it's unclear if that's the line the cop chose). He's walking on a crack on the pavement, an irregular, likely not flat line. Second, he stated he injured his ankle and it prevented him from walking "a little bit", but "I'll be able to do this"(with no idea what "this" was. And it didn't hurt because he had all his weight on his other foot. Finally, the officer went through the instructions leaving out the count out loud, then just before the student went the cop mentioned counting out loud. This test was so arbitrary that it shouldn't contribute to any reasonable suspicion to arrest.

[@Milesco]

I agree. The student's performance on the field sobriety test was more than adequate, in my opinion. It doesn't have to be *_perfect._* No one is perfect. If a cop rattles off a thousand instructions for you to follow, and you don't remember every single one, that means you're drunk?

[@jsokolosky]

If I was on the jury, he wins or the jury is hung. I was once accused of DUI because my wife had gathered registration and insurance papers and rolled them into a tube inside my glove box. She forgot to tell me and I couldn’t find them. Fortunately I was let go. But she regrets doing that to me some 15 years later. People are people, the kid was just being a kid, and regular people make innocent mistakes.

[@TEverettReynolds]

If the jury only sees the tests, the kid failed. If the jury only sees the questions and the delayed reply from the kid, he failed. The kid failed the tests, the cop did nothing wrong. There is no way the kid wins.

[@piper998877]

@@TEverettReynolds I agree, but in life, there is the right thing to do and the best thing to. The cop may not have been wrong, but nor was he right or did the best thing in this situation.

[@piper998877]

I actually think that IF this gets to a jury, he may win. I think the cop switching from being extremely sure about him being drunk, to suddenly being high or wasted on drugs strikes most people being unfair and possibly a violation of his 4th and 14th amendments rights. By looking at the video, he may have made mistakes, but those are instructional mistakes, where most laypeople will be looking for slurring and balance issues. He had none of that. I hate to say it, the other thing he has going for him is that he is a sexy, young, football player that comes off extremely wholesome. This really does look like an jealous overweight bully picking on the popular kid. I can see a jury punishing the cop for that behavior.

[@thenerdnetwork]

@@TEverettReynolds So I don't know what planet you are from, but on planet Earth, when someone files a civil suit against the department, where video evidence is already widely available (OBVIOUSLY), there is no way on this planet that the plaintiff's attorney isn't going to be showing the jury the entire video. Also, there is no way his attorney won't show the jury the clip of the video when the officer claims he smells alcohol on the kid. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qKCwfImJbaZ8itk and there ya go. Then to switch it to weed after he blows 0.00? I mean get real lol.

[@davidskjeie945]

Yea, well my wife may not be perfect, but she is ideal enough to have put my traffic related papers in a bifold to organize and isolate them from other stuff in the glove compartment. Oh yea, and she drew my particular attention this bifold and its contents.

[@realburglazofficial2613]

In the UK, as soon as our police got issued roadside breathalysers, the roadside dance routines stopped. If you blow below the legal limit, you're free to go.

[@jim.h]

He blew .000. The idiot cop arrested him for DUI drugs.

[@nailsofinterest]

But what about non alcoholic imparment? Meds? drugs?

[@realburglazofficial2613]

@nailsofinterest they have drug swabs to test for the presence of drugs in the nose and mouth, so if you've smoked or sniffed any substances, it'll pick it up. If it picks up a medication, as long as you have a valid prescription then you're fine

[@cellis5111]

hey can remaining silent (literally) turn into "subject was so intoxicated he was unable to understand nor respond to my questions" on the police report?

[@jim.h]

I'm guessing that all you have to do is invoke your 5th amendment right to remain silent.

[@Milesco]

Jim is correct. And just to be clear, you should always invoke your 5th amendment rights, rather than just clamming up and saying nothing. If you simply remain silent without claiming your 5th amendment rights, your silence can be used against you. _Salinas v. Texas,_ 570 US 178 (2013)

[@peterb2272]

I know that the lawyers will use every means at their disposal to get the lawsuit thrown out, but if it get to court and I were on the jury my only question would be " how much are we going to award him"?

[@Milesco]

Same here! If the roadside breathalyzer said 0.00, that should've been the end of it. The cop should've cut him loose right then and there.

[@JohnkyTonkbadonkadonk]

If it were a jury case, and I were on the jury, I wouldn't be allowed to be on the jury. I would tell the judge from the start, that no matter the evidence, I'm finding him not-guilty.

[@Milesco]

@@JohnkyTonkbadonkadonk Who is the "him" you're referring to?

[@JohnkyTonkbadonkadonk]

@@Milesco Same 'him' referred to in the entire string of prior comments.

[@ianbattles7290]

"I don't consent to any searches, seizures, or questions. If I am not under arrest at this time, let me leave. Direct any further inquiries to my attorney. I have nothing else to say at this time." *And then you shut your mouth and keep it shut* until they let you go and/or your attorney arrives.

[@deniableplausibility6983]

Many moons ago, I was a reserve officer in the small town where I live. On a Friday or Saturday night, I was riding around with the chief (department consisted of the chief, two full time officers and 5 reserves) and we pulled a guy over for erratic driving (crossed the center and fog line multiple times). The smell of alcohol was there when we talked to him. He agreed to a field sobriety test, which the chief administered (I had yet to have any formal training for it). This guy had a hard time balancing and doing the walk and turn. Clearly inebriated. I'm sure his prosthetic leg had nothing to do with it, right? Now, he was inebriated. After cuffing and stuffing him, then driving the 30 minutes to the county lock up, where the Intoxolizer 2000™was located, he still blew around a 0.13. Clearly over the 0.08 limit. I do remember thinking this is a bunch of bovine fecal matter that a guy with a fake leg is deemed under the influence because he can't walk a straight line.

[@Waroftheworldsz]

Try living in Utah. Our limit is 0.05 😂 If I recall you can refuse the field sobriety test given certain medical exemptions they just have to be listed with the DMV when you renew your license. One woman around my age of 19 (at the time) had a similar issue. She was an amputee, lost her right leg. In Utah we have implied consent laws, basically making it illegal to refuse an FST after being arrested. If it’s alright for me to ask, has anyone in your time as a reserve officer had a genuine medical exemption to the FST where it wasn’t administered? I know glaucoma and medications like lisinopril can cause dizziness or eye stuttering and therefore effect the legality of the test, but I find very few instances of the FST not being administered despite obvious medical exemptions. Suppose that’s up to the courts after the arrest.

[@fullenw]

Saw this video awhile back. Love seeing your response to it!

[@mochaandmuses]

I have a sneaky suspicion that this case is gonna die on "qualified immunity" :\

[@TEverettReynolds]

No. This case will fail on the fact that the kid failed the tests and slurred his words and delayed his answers. The kid failed and was arrested. The charges were dropped, but the kid was still arrested.

[@timlewis2068]

@@TEverettReynolds

[@tammystewart7429]

@@TEverettReynolds yet he blew a zero and the tests are meant for you to fail. I would fail these simply for balance and being nervous while being sober. Never take roadside tests. You are only required to blow in machine. Never answer questions. Isn’t it funny how the cop lied about smelling alcohol til the test came back zero. Then his ego couldn’t let it go and then claimed he was high. Cops are liars and much of what they do is based on being rewarded with promotions, prizes and winning awards for these DUI arrests. It is an abomination to the constitution and law. Also point out in the video where he slurred his words. Not answering quickly isn’t a crime.

[@LC-uh8if]

@@TEverettReynolds Where did he slur his words? The delay could be reasonably argued to be covered by the 5th Amendment. He had to think for a second to decide if he was going to answer and how to answer without self-incriminating for an unrelated crime (having used weed sometime in the past). He did very well on the tests other than taking the wrong number of steps. As for the difficulty finding his papers, you can't just call something a sign of impairment when its not. If we allow that, then they can literally call anything a sign of impairment and justify arresting anyone.

[@Milesco]

@@TEverettReynolds Nope. Tayvin's performance on the Field Sobriety Test was quite reasonable. Perfect? No, but more than adequate. Perfection is not required. If it were, we would ALL be subject to arrest at all times. And as "L C" pointed out, he didn't slur any words. I don't know what video you were watching. His delay in answering the "when did you last smoke weed?" question by itself does not constitute grounds for suspicion of DUI, either. It's quite common for a person to have to think for a moment in order to answer a question honestly. The kicker here is the 0.00 on the breathalyzer. Proof of innocence! What more do you want?! At that point, the cop obviously should've ended the whole interrogation right there and let Tayvin go on his way.

[@saltycreole2673]

I'm 65 with a bad hip. No way I'd do those tests. I'll blow on the machine of course. Blood test if nessessary. Then sue the shit out of them. Of course, I'd refuse to answer any questions.

[@senna3]

Unfortunately for civil cases, qualified immunity is the police officers' equivalent of the get-out-of-jail-free card in Monopoly.

[@jcadult101]

NEVER do ANY of the roadside tests including blowing.

[@LC-uh8if]

@@jcadult101 Unfortunately, in most states refusing any test authorized by law will result in an automatic suspension of your license.

[@jcadult101]

@@LC-uh8if False. In MOST states, you must be arrested BEFORE a refusal results in implied consent refusal. There are 7 states which do not have "if arrested" in the language of the implied consent statute.

[@Milesco]

​@@LC-uh8if Yeah, as jcadult101 indicated, that's not correct. There are two tests: the handheld breathalyzer for preliminary roadside use, and the desktop machine at the police station. The handheld test is simply to determine if there is probable cause to arrest you. The full-size desktop machine is more accurate and is used to determine whether you actually have an illegal amount of alcohol in your bloodstream. The handheld breathalyzer is optional, except in a limited number of states (see below). The desktop machine is mandatory, but only after you have been validly arrested, based on probable cause. You cannot be arrested merely for refusing the roadside handheld preliminary breath test. And you won't have your license suspended either, except in the following states: Alaska Nevada Michigan New York Montana North Dakota Nebraska Rhode Island Indiana is a weird exception: there, you can be arrested for refusal if you refuse to take the roadside test _after having been involved in a fatal car accident._ So if you've had any significant amount to drink, *don't* take the handheld roadside breath test. If you're completely sober, then it's probably okay. But NEVER submit to the field sobriety test (the "walk the line, touch your nose" dog-and-pony show), even if you're completely sober. As you can see, those test are designed to make you fail.

[@joat1979]

Saw this video on another channel, glad you're covering it!

[@fudogwhisperer3590]

This is despicable.

[@zekeigtos7240]

Excellent analysis. Thank you. One thing I have been really wanting to ask you is what to do if you're questioned by police as a potential victim. Are there things you need to be careful about saying which even as a victim can get you into trouble.

[@Andrewflusche]

Funny enough, this angle came up with family last weekend. Stay tuned for an answer... :)

[@CarysCorner]

Unbelievable. Fortunately, as of February a Judge has this case to go forward. Prior to that the city of Newton appealed the lawsuit and filed a countersuit.

[@JamesQMurphy]

I was wondering if you were going to cover this story... thank you! I've seen this reviewed on other channels and you didn't cover the part where Tayvin interviews the cop afterwards... *that* part is not only hilarious, it might actually give Tayvin a shot.

[@LeviathantheMighty]

That "officer" deserves jail time for that.

[@ianbattles7290]

If cops don't face any consequences for making bogus arrests, they have no incentive to avoid doing so.

[@llsher5210]

Okay, I have a question for you that wasn't clear to me in the video. I had this EXACT thing happen to me as a teenager. Going home around midnight from a movie with a passenger friend, pulled over for a tag light out and the officer asks me to come sit in his car where he absolutely blasts the heater the whole time asking me questions. He did eventually let me go because he didn't smell any alcohol like he wanted. I'm almost 40 now and I have vowed for years that I will NEVER do that again, get in the car, I'll get arrested first. I was a 17 year old girl on a deserted road at midnight locked in a car with a grown man with a gun. Police officer or no, had that man wished me harm, harm it would have been. That is a situation in which I would still fear for my safety today, even if it is a police officer. What are my rights? Can I refuse to get in his car? Can I keep going until I find a populated area I feel safe to pull over? In this case having kept going would've been another 20 miles for any kind of population unless I had turned around and headed back into town.

[@br4524]

Glad to know you weren't hurt. I bet you were scared

[@wholeNwon]

No, you must stop promptly. Tell the officer you do not feel safe and ask to move to a lighted area. He may decline your request.

[@itsnotme07]

Wow! I hope I never have to "test" my ability to shut up and not talk to the police. But one of these days...I'll probably get my chance. Great job as always Andrew explaining the situation!

[@wholeNwon]

You must state that you are doing so to assert your 5th Amend. right and then DO IT...shut up!

[@br4524]

​@@wholeNwonabsolutely never forget that assert your 5th ask for an attorney then shut up

[@djs12007]

Mr. Flusche MIGHT want to check county or municipal financial records. In Bexar County Texas, a woman was arrested for DUI, (after blowing a 0.00), because there is a program that offers financial payment for arrests for DUI, that do NOT require a conviction or even a trial. It was brought to the attention of the public by WOAI news, and as far as I'm aware, no resolution was ever mentioned regarding the status of this "program".

[@Milesco]

If the driver is blowing a 0.00, the cop has no business arresting him. If I were on the jury, I would award a substantial amount of damages for wrongful arrest.

[@danielpalmer643]

This is a great example of how badly designed incentives are for police. We need to get rid of anything that incentivizes arrests but not convictions. How obnoxious!

[@russellrini6575]

Wow I didn’t realize being silent could mean the difference between getting handcuffed and arrested, or getting to go on your way.

[@stephenwhittier6439]

Thanks again for sharing !

[@quentinhirschfeld9382]

I hope people that says 'why don't you just comply' understand now why you shouldn't, especially if you're innocent! By helping the officer in his investigation, this gentleman basically said, without even realizing it 'i give up my right'.

[@scottduke]

Darn it Flusche! You are definitely following the “Always leave them wanting more!” Rule of show business!!

[@russelgild2356]

Very informative content..keep it coming.

[@AmericanNinja85]

Stop talking and refuse the field sobriety test.

[@Milesco]

YES! Good advice. 👍

[@shadowsmirk]

Love the practical video talking though an example DUI arrest. I'm a bit surprised that being placed in the cop vehicle wasn't considered to be "in custody." Do we really need to follow EVERY cop's request/command with the question, "Was that a request or a demand?"

[@robertduffy5805]

What's in it for the officer? Stats, Better Reviews, Invites to MADD and other events and awards, Overtime if done at the end of a shift, On Call Court Pay, Actual Court Pay. And if you are a really good guy you'll pull in a few other officers to transport, do the test, book, etc., etc. so they get their names on the report and get some OT and Court Time too. It's all a shakedown of the system

[@audiewilliams3417]

The charm of this video is that even though he gets arrested he actually dunks on the police officer.

[@DanCycles]

That’s messed up, idk about you guys, but being arrested or detained would be a big shame for me and my family, I would feel like a criminal, the police officer made a mistake, and they should pay for it…

[@ianbattles7290]

Exactly, it's not fair that the cops don't risk anything for being wrong *when the private citizen can lose everything just by being accused.*

[@cosbyc2]

I guess my question would be the officers claim that he smells alcohol on the dude that blows a zero. Seems dishonest to me.

[@jim.h]

That's why the officer jumps right to DUI drugs.

[@karlrovey]

I found it interesting that he was mirandized before he was asked the weed question. If he's under the influence as the officer suspects, he isn't able to comprehend the Miranda warning, which makes his statement inadmissible (this came up in a murder case, the confession was thrown out due to the accused being under the influence when he was initially arrested and interrogated).

[@purdysanchez]

Oh boy. Everyone with a new car can be pulled over. Their regular headlights are 14,000 times brighter than traditional high beams.

[@tammystewart7429]

The cop is full of it. He said he smelled alcohol yet he blew zero. Then when he blew zero he changed it to pot. Also taking too long to find your stuff is quite innocent and doesn’t mean someone may be drunk. People keep a lot of stuff in their car.

[@Hoxle-87]

Great video!

[@snex000]

Given that you cannot voluntarily get out of the cop car, how does it not count as custody the second the officer closes the door?

[@Milesco]

Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. In my opinion, the guy was in custody the moment he got in the cop car.

[@tayvingalanakis]

Man, you just going to expose my address like that 🤣🤣

[@johnsimca7093]

The 0.00 on preliminary Breathalizer test gives weight to lawsuit

[@roseydiva1183]

A few months ago I was stopped going 62. The speed limit in that rural area has *always* been 65. (I mean for 50+ years.) At the top of the hill was a motorcycle cop who pulled me over. I gave him my license and insurance and he asked was there an emergency that I needed to be there for. I just said no. He leaned his arm along the window frame where a device in his hand hovered over the area of the VIN not so subtly scanning it. He told me the speed limit was 55 and to slow down - no ticket. I went on my way but was baffled. How could it be 55?? The next time I drove that way, I saw the city limit sign had been moved a mile from where it had been all these years! I assumed this was done so they could acquire that land for the new veteran's cemetery BUT never heard a word about it on the news. Anyway, the only words I said to him was 'no' and 'ok'.

[@Ridinfixinman]

I agree with you here.. The kid DID schlep up a few times and that really long pause on the smoking weed question... But, it was clear to me that he wasn't under the influence (I actually thought he might have been trolling the cop/maybe trying to drum up a lawsuit) and I too think the cop was wrong to arrest. Your comment about cops asking "Should I" vs "Can I" arrest is a good one! It really seems that cops would much rather arrest first and let you deal with it later if you're not guilty or not under the influence. And that is completely wrong IMO!!!! It should be the minimum amount of intrusion into our lives.

[@BillySBC]

It seems like no matter what you do with these roadside tests there are "clues" that will discover that you are guilty of something no matter if you are or not. These kind of cutesy "gotcha games" have got to be stopped, it makes the government look a sinister entity out to create a world of distrust.

[@lostbutfreesoul]

The whole thing is 'subjective' to the officer. Completing the test without error is also suspect....

[@wholeNwon]

So, organize with your friends and neighbors around the issue, go to city/county council meetings, your state senator's office, etc. and work for the changes you want.

[@jesstreloar7706]

B.B.C. (before body cameras) I clearly heard the officer say step 10 paces heel to toe and turn to the left. He claimed he said "turn to the right." The police can lie to you. You get in more trouble if you lie to them. Double standard? Don't talk to the police.

[@randyriegel8553]

I had a accident in 2018 where I choked on my drink while driving and passed out. Went through a guard rail going 70mph and hit a tree at the bottom of the ravine. I walked the hill toward the highway on my own power. A cop about 30ft away from me said "I smell alcohol". WTF? EMT's were there. Cop kept insisting I blew into the portable. I said I can't breath. He made me try. Then EMT's told cop that they are taking me. I got to the local hospital ER and they sent me straight to Pittsburgh (UPMC) trauma unit. At local hospital the cop showed up for blood draw. They gave it to him. They sent me to Pittsburgh because I had 10 broken ribs, punctured lung, and punctured spleen. Only thing cop tried to do was get evidence of something... he didn't give fuck about injuries.

[@mattbarrett41]

Yeah…….. even in NH where they suspend your license for being uncooperative, take the suspension. Never, blow or test.

[@itowmyhome797]

Thank you

[@jarlaxle2421]

Do you have a video on id laws in VA and when we are required by law to provide one? Not talking about when you are driving though

[@TheKingOfInappropriateComments]

My papers are in a brightly colored envelope in the glove box. I thought that was a brilliant idea!

[@hockysa]

great video. the sad part is the cops are creating an environment that penalises good behaviour. Then they wonder why people are so rude to them and don't want to talk to them.

[@stevef68]

Why did you cut out the part about him being a college athlete and being drug tested REGULARLY? I see no PC here. If I am on the jury, he wins!

[@christopherhennessey8991]

Shouldn’t be called drug recognition experts ,they should be called drug recognition evaluators.

[@AbNomal621]

The very idea that he had to sit in the car and it is “voluntary” can only be understood be lawyers. If he had no choice, he was detained. And our country shouldn’t put up with such manure.

[@joehayward2631]

I've told so many family & friends NEVER ADMIT TO ANY THING. HONESTLY DOES NOT HELP YOU

[@charlesmuhmanson3928]

I get my documents out before the cop gets there and have them in hand with my hands on the top of the steering wheel.

[@stevenbanks1548]

As someone who has spent time in Newton, it sucks so hard.

[@carlam6669]

There’s a “wallet” you can buy at any auto supply store to put your registration and proof of insurance documents in. Keep these documents up to date each time your insurance and registration is renewed. Keep this wallet in the glove box. If you let someone borrow your car, tell them where it is. Also, periodically check to be sure all your lights (including tag light) works, tires are properly inflated and not worn out and engine oil is above minimum on dip stick. Don’t hang anything from your rear view mirror, especially not air freshener. When cops see an air freshener they assume it is to cover up smell of weed.

[@Richardrefund]

The police almost NEVER take the accused, without unnecessary delay before a magistrate for a determination of probable cause. Usually it’s straight to booking. That is the real issue at hand for almost EVERY arrest, absent a warrant.

[@Waroftheworldsz]

The sixth amendment exists for this reason. It’s particularly useful for when you’re being interrogated because it guarantees you a fast and public trial WITHOUT unnecessary delay. Alongside your lawyer, an impartial jury, etc. More than that most people don’t realize the sixth amendment actually forbids the government from deliberately eliciting incriminating information from an accused, in the absence of a defense counsel. Even better it requires the detectives to inform you of your charges and your accuser. So none of that trying to get you to admit to something you didn’t do or make you look guilty by falsely informing you of the *“overwhelming evidence”* or the classic *”you will be charged if you don’t tell us your side of the story”* / *”You could face serious charges if you don’t come clean”* BS. If they tell you that, they’re already charging you, they just dance around the charges trying to get you to admit to it or incriminate you. However most interrogators and officers get around the sixth and fifth amendment through *”Miranda rights”* and *“Messiah rights”* which while they are required to read to you, do not count as the fully invoked rights they are based off of. In an infamous case a man was actually proven guilty because he remained silent after being read his Miranda rights, the reason? Because he did not invoke them and his silence was used against him. If you’re being held or interrogated do not say *”I want a lawyer”* Instead, invoke your sixth amendment right by saying *”I invoke my sixth amendment rights.”* Don’t even say *”I invoke my sixth amendment right to legal counsel”* because that can be assumed you only invoked the right for legal counsel and thus forfeited the rest of the rights under the sixth amendment. So they might still end up interrogating you or even holding you for unnecessary amounts of time. Typically your lawyer might ask you to forfeit your right to a speedy trial so they can build a defense, but you can invoke it to put the police in the hot seat and thus create less time they actually hold you absent of evidence and lack of legal counsel. ALWAYS invoke your rights by invoking the right itself. The *“you have the right to remain silent”* phrase is a sneaky sneak around the fifth amendment and it’s powerful rights. Just as the *”you have a right to a lawyer”* is a sneak around the sixth amendment. The best way to counter the *”anything you say can and will be used against you.”* Is the fifth amendment, but if you’re in an interrogation room the sixth amendment might be better because if invoked it prohibits the detectives from eliciting incriminating information from you absent of legal counsel as mentioned before. A detective might actually try to talk you out of the sixth amendment by saying it’s only applicable as quoted *”once adversary judicial criminal proceedings have commenced”* as some clever con to get you forfeit these rights. However it should be noted that when you were arrested such proceedings have already commenced since the police are unable to un-arrest you. Only a court can do that so from a logical standpoint, those proceedings have already begun. Hope this helps.

[@Richardrefund]

@@Waroftheworldsz Wow, that was an entire thought process! Actually, law enforcers are bound by specific requirements and duties. None of them outweigh the many rights of the People. If by chance a law enforcer violates one of the People’s many rights, it becomes the duty of said person to prosecute the violator. That is where most People have fallen short, they do not know how to protect their many rights. The government schools have failed the People, it is now up to the People to educate themselves to defend their many rights.

[@Waroftheworldsz]

@@Richardrefund I agree, despite law enforcers being bound by requirements and duties, they can and have outright abused the power they are given. You can plead your rights all you want, but whether or not the officers honor them is up to them. It's important to invoke these rights whenever you're being arrested, processed or interrogated due to the proliferation of video camera technology. If by invoking your rights a court finds out the officers denied you or violated them, various violations, penalties and doors to further legal action open up. Most infamous was Massiah V United States where the Supreme court upheld that the Sixth amendment prohibited the elicitation of information from the accused. However, it should be noted the US views "Interrogation" different from "deliberate elicitation." Quote: "The definition of "deliberate elicitation" is not the same as the definition of "interrogation" under the Miranda rule established in Miranda v. Arizona. Miranda interrogation includes express questioning and any actions or statements that an officer would reasonably foresee as likely to cause an incriminating response. Massiah applies to express questioning and any attempt to deliberately and intentionally obtain incriminating information from the defendant regarding the crime charged. The difference is purposeful creation of an environment likely to produce incriminating information (Massiah) and action likely to induce an incriminating response even if that was not the officer's purpose or intent (Miranda)." However as was upheld in Rhode Island V. Innis and United States V. Henry: Rhode Island V. Innis: "The Court went on to emphasize that no sixth amendment "protection would come into play if there had been no interrogation." and that: United States V. Henry: "When an objective observer would infer that the officer's speech or conduct was "designed to elicit a response," he will perceive it as at least an implicit demand for information. If, as will generally be the case, the suspect shares this view of the police activity, he will experience the "functional equivalent" of direct questioning." So, it seems that you may have to call out the police on their behavior absent of your legal counsel in order to qualify for 6th amendment protections against interrogations, such as *"I will not answer questions without a lawyer present"* or my earlier phrase *"I invoke my sixth amendment right to legal counsel"* You are not lying about public schools failing people. Ever watch those videos where Harvard students couldn't even name basic countries? In my opinion, it should be made clear that we are indeed responsible for our own education and should never rely on the government for said education. Either way, stay safe friend :D

[@PaulRubino]

I keep my documents in an envelope above my sun visor.

[@timothyortiz2222]

He wasn't drinking he was only snorting coke 😂

[@mobilemcsmarty1466]

I hope he wins the lawsuit, big, even though the chances may be slim. the competition by police to incriminate you with impossible tests is just downright dirty. even if you get off later it's still a huge cost in time, expense, and stress. just because you're not a lawyer when pulled over that doesn't in no way excuse this racket. that's why this behavior needs to be curbed at every opportunity. maybe the cops can spend more time looking for real crime instead of shaking down the citizens they are duty bound to protect. the cop even got the test he wanted, saw the 0.00, but instead of saying "oh, it's a zero, fix that light ASAP, sign here for this easy fix-it ticket, I'll escort you home to better keep everyone safe, have a nice night," like a mobster, the cop went to harass the kid and family by arrest anyways 😕 I salute the kid in his further effort to encourage law enforcement to protect us instead of preying on us 🍻😎🇺🇸

[@StriperScott]

If I do refuse those tests, but agree to the road side breath test, will the state immediately take my license?

[@PJL7095]

No - he will not win unfortunately. The judge will usually side with the police officer. While the young man has good standing, so does the officer. Everything you said is correct.

[@TheEricdeforrest]

It's a whole system against the citizen. The resources of the state versus one's individual resources. The DA, the judge, and the officer are all on the same side. The system rarely if ever admits it is wrong. The judges are biased in favor of the officers.

[@charleshaines9715]

There needs to be a case that brings in to question their methods. It needs to change HOW they collect data and WHICH things can be considered evidence.

[@jasonmartinez9051]

I've heard of some cities or towns where a lot of residents drink a lot of alcoholic beverages. Law enforcement officers may assume that "It's five o'clock somewhere" and just about everyone is drinking. I hardly ever drink. I'm a bit resentful of some law enforcement officers or politicians who assume that just about everyone drinks and drives.

[@ValentinoTemplari]

“Likely” needs to be proved by the police and court of law. There is video fortunately

[@additudeobx]

Where are you going tonight? Do I have to answer that question? Where are you coming from? Do I have to answer that question? Yes. Am I under arrest? No. Have you been drinking tonight? Do I have to answer that question? .........

[@chaseSCZ]

I'm schizophrenic, so I have saccaded eye movement and the medication I'm on for it causes ataxic gait. I'm also prescribed a benzodiazepine, therefore I am screwed if a cop pulls me out of a car.

[@307living3]

This is why I never dance around like a puppet

[@TEverettReynolds]

More people need to hear this @6:58 Many police officers are rewarded for the number of arrests they make, not how many convictions they get. This is a very very bad policy that leads to many people being falsely arrested or arrested and then having charges "dropped". The average citizen thinks the police are on their side when the reality of the situation is very very different.

[@deboshadow]

In short, give only required paperwork and verbally state you plead the 5th and stay silent.

[@KhanTrav]

I think you did a good evaluation of this video. Bad on them for making an iffy arrest, good on them for dragging a DRE in and sorting it out. He may not win a lawsuit but the heat it brings will make this agency pay more attention to DWI enforcement. Most cops are not trying to win the toaster and DWI arrests are complex, time-consuming, and rarely worth the squeeze. I arrested a guy for DWI who had 19 DWI arrests with 9 convictions. This tells you how hit-and-miss they can be. His condition at the time was significantly more obvious than the average DWI if you know what I mean.

[@forgottenkahz]

This officer took advantage of the suspects trust.

[@Milesco]

Sure did. Frankly, the officer's conduct was outrageous. The breathalyzer showed 0.00 and he *_still_* arrested him! If i were on the jury, I'd award big $$$. This is why we (sadly) need to teach our children *not* to talk to the police when they start asking questions. Like seatbelts and fire extinguishers, it is crucial that we know our rights *_before_* we need to use them. It's a shame that it has to be this way.

[@d3athdanc3a48]

had a situation like this happen to me years ago, coming off the highway with my brights on, didnt talk much just had to go through a lot of stuff to get to drive home. it was stupid. made me not trust law enforcement. know a few local police that i trust but beyond that i dont trust any of them.

[@Frankowars]

The plot twist is that the cops are now suing him for defamation

[@SooSmokie]

So curious, When refusing these tests, you automatically go to jail and your license is suspended. How do you counter that? Because that suspension sticks, even if found not guilty.

[@jim.h]

I was under the assumption that your license only gets suspended if you refuse a blood/breath test, not the FST.

[@krane15]

Did you watch the video? He cooperated fully and still went to jail. At least this way you don't give the cop probably cause to make the arrest.

[@SooSmokie]

@@jim.h So yes you're correct. wasn't thinking. Refusing that test is the one I was wondering about refusing. They just arrest you for DUI for refusing the roadside Then ask for the blood or breath

[@SooSmokie]

@@krane15 What are you talking about? your comment has nothing to do with what I asked. I'm curious how to bypass a suspension for refusing a blood or breath test. Also if you deny a roadside test, the officer usually already has enough to bring you in if He has enough to ask you to do a roadside.

[@krane15]

@@SooSmokie Question: How do you bypass getting arrested for DUI? Answer: Don't drive when you've been drinking? Really? That's a rational and legal answer. Except the above video shows just the opposite. The system is inherently corrupt, so in your scenario do you believe things would be any different? Cops get to write citations and arrest people that haven't even committed any crimes. That's the global answer you missed.

[@nonewmsgs]

I thought my man figured out to stay silent after the Miranda

[@jrose353]

Is it appropriate to have your license & registration ready before the cop gets to the car?

[@icepicjoey]

It helps end the stop quickly

[@OtaconProductionsWorldwide]

Not unless he mistakes that you are reaching for a gun and shoots you in the face.

[@TessaBain]

Many of them are such pansies and control freaks that they'd probably haul you out of the car out of "fear for their safety" because you leaned over or reached around before they told you to. "I see you leaning over as I walk up towards the car how do I know you don't have a gun?!", is a thing there are videos of similar if not exact occurrences of.

[@jrose353]

@@OtaconProductionsWorldwide mmhmm that’d be the one I’d be afraid of

[@mitchrodee]

How would following a police officer’s direction to sit in his cruiser be considered voluntary? We all know by now that the courts have agreed the police have the right to remove us from our vehicles because of the officer safety issue; and we’ve seen how politely refusing such requests-or refusing to answer questions-are met with confrontation and charges of obstruction.

[@Asmodeus9988]

and yet the police are all "why does everyone hate us?"

[@tommywolfe2706]

Wow. Every time I get pulled over (I manage to only get warnings, 15 years consecutive now) I never have my proof of insurance. Main reason is that I havent had it in about 7 or 8 years, not the registration, the actual insurance. I just tell them that I cleaned my car, accidentally took it out, but it "should be the same that is on file with the BMV when I registered my car this year", since they need to put that info in the computers when you get your registration, I just tell the officer its probably what he can see when he pulls up my BMV file. I can see on their faces that I am at least partially right and its good enough. Having the old paperwork that is expired is good at "sowing confusion" with them as well. "Dang it, I cleaned out my car and must have take the wrong one inside"......of course my act has been in the works, a 10 year old expired thing wont work lol. All of these times I feigned looking for my insurance, I am grateful they didnt assume I was drunk and go that route. I have a DUI on my record too (almost 20 years ago), they are automatically suspicious of me.