Posted on 07/28/2015 11:52:23 AM PDT by Theoria
An initial toxicology report for Sandra Bland, who died in a Texas jail cell three days after her arrest during a traffic stop, raises the possibility that she may have used marijuana while in custody, two experts said.
The amount of THC, one of the active components of marijuana, in Bland's system was 18 micrograms per liter, according to the report released Monday. That's more than three times the legal limit for drivers in Colorado and Washington, states that permit the recreational use of marijuana.
"I don't think it's possible to rule out the possibility of use while in jail," said University of Florida toxicology professor Bruce Goldberger, who reviewed the report for The Associated Press. Bland was impaired by marijuana at the time of her death, Goldberger said.
Bland, a black 28-year-old from suburban Chicago, was found dead in the Waller County jail on July 13. Authorities have said Bland hanged herself with a garbage bag, a finding that her family disputes. She was in custody after a traffic stop for failing to use a turn signal escalated into a physical confrontation with a white state trooper.
Robert Johnson, chief toxicologist at the Tarrant County medical examiner's office in Fort Worth, Texas, told the AP that a THC level as high as Bland's suggests she "either had access to the drug in jail or she was a consistent user of the drug and her body had accumulated THC to the point that it was slowly releasing it over time."
But, Johnson added, "I have never seen a report in the literature or from any other source of residual THC that high three days after someone stops using the drug."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I thought that was SOP.
Actually the officer doesn’t need excusing, since what he did was perfectly legal. That may be hard for you to comprehend, but everything he did was within his rights as a law enforcement officer. He has been assigned to administrative duties for simply violating a rule (not a law) of the department.
How dare he ask her to get out of the car.
....
He asked her to put out the cigarette. He commanded her to get out of the car, which was quite legal for him to do AFAIK.
My problems with the officer are similar to his employer’s problems with him. He violated ‘courtesy’ rules.
If you watch COPS, or something like it, you will notice that an officer usually states a reason for his actions. I.E. “I’m going to ask you to step out of the car because I believe you may be masking the smell of drugs with your cigarette.”
Just that little explanation can diffuse the situation...and the officer may be able to gauge a reaction to that statement and learn more about the situation around him.
But this officer didn’t do that, even when repeatedly asked why she had to get out of the car.
Yes she was rude, argumentative, and downright nasty (used the f word on him several times). And she eventually kickd at him, rightfully earning her a trip to jail. But that doesn’t change the fact that the cop did not do his job right.
Its possible for both parties to be ‘in the wrong’, and I think that happened here.
You should stop watching so much television and speak with a real police officer for a reality check. An officer who has a video crew taping him is of course going to act more courteous since he knows he’s being recorded, plus there’s an added element of security in not being alone.
A lone police officer on the other hand doesn’t always want to explain what he’s doing and why for his own safety.
If a person smoked Colorado store bought every evening after work, and at no other time, this is how that person would test a week after quitting. Measuring the intoxication level at any given time accurately is almost impossible with a regular user.
Here we have a nanny state cop performing the oh so Important job of "protecting" the public from turn signal violations, escalating the collection of revenue into a jail trip that resulted in killing somebody. Over an ego trip. How dare a peasant have contempt for him?
More importantly, she had a history of attempted suicide, I do believe.
I hear the new stuff is far more potent than the stuff from the 60s & 70s.
The officers booked her into jail with doobie & lighter? ...don't think so.
Officer courtesy rules shouldn't make for a 24/7 national story.
“An officer who has a video crew taping him is of course going to act more courteous since he knows he’s being recorded”
Maybe I’m naïve, but I expect those amongst us who are authorized to use deadly force to be a tad bit more professional than that.
“A lone police officer on the other hand doesn’t always want to explain what he’s doing and why for his own safety”
Do you really believe that is the reason this officer did not follow his courtesy procedures? Safety? If it were a safety issue, he would have just tased her.
Btw, I have been pulled over many times (many, many times). The police have always been very polite and professional with me...and given lengthy explanations...”the reason I stopped you today....”. Granted, if I were asked to get out of the car, I would do so immediately - so my attitude helps keep both of us under control. But, my contact with LE does go beyond COPS re-runs...and this guy acted differently than what I have experienced.
His supervisors tend to agree with me, too:
“We have identified violations of the department’s procedures regarding traffic stops and the department’s courtesy policy,”
We’re all human...he screwed up...he will lose his job, and his jurisdiction will pay some money.
As a former police officer, I’m quite certain I know at least a little more about this than someone who drives poorly and as a result has had many, many violations (or at least stops).
Yes you are naive, but I doubt you’ll admit it.
I don’t know why he didn’t explain what he was doing, and frankly, I don’t care. He doesn’t owe them an explanation, despite what you think.
We’ll see what his supervisors think when it’s all over, until then you really don’t have a clue about what they think, even though you seem to think you do.
Your arrogance is astounding. How do you know he’ll lose his job? I doubt very seriously that he’ll lose his job as he was within the boundaries of the law in the way he conducted himself. Whether or not people like you approve or not is irrelevant.
VICTORIA KING, found guilty!
See; http://www.myfoxorlando.com/Clip/10603692/victoria-king-trial-ends-with-guilty-verdict
Please note video and similarity.
Also note the actions of all persons involved.
Lesson learned should be, sign the citation, take the ticket, take it to court!
Milwaukee Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr has repeatedly said “don’t argue you case on the side of the road”.
No, eating raw marijuana will mess you up just the same.
The only thing that heat does is to help dissolve the active ingredients in butter or oil quicker, so that you can then throw out the vegetable matter.
Well, thank goodness for the little things.
I showed this video to a close family member of mine who is an LEO the other day, and you know what he told me? That the officer involved did everything he could to escalate the situation. Once she hit him with attitude, the officer reacted in a manner calculated to anger her, so that she would give him an excuse to give her a "ride." At any point he could have "stroked" (a ticket to) her and been on his way, but he decided that he was going to teach her a lesson. So, in the words of my relative, "He was a dick, and is the reason cops get a bad name."
See, an officer has a responsibility that goes along with all of those powers and privileges that make the job so attractive to some of the wrong sorts of people. That responsibility is to the public, meaning every single person that he comes in contact with. Sometimes those people he comes in contact with are scum. But once an LEO allows himself to decide when he does and doesn't have to perform his duties fairly, impartially, and professionally, he's just become the same as the people he wants to bend the rules to "punish" himself.
I know a lot of very good cops. Some are my family; some are my friends. They are, to a man, patriots, professionals, and deal with stuff on a daily basis that most people would have nightmares if they only encountered once. And, to a man, they do their job right, which means they understand their responsibilities as well as their powers. I've heard them talk about how they are always trying to diffuse, calm, and de-escalate bad situations. And people like this cop give them all a bad name...
Well while you can only talk to people who do the job, this guy has to actually perform. Enjoy sitting on your couch second guessing those who put themselves on the line every day so that you can sit back and make ignorant judgments. I disagree with your “relative” on who the d_____ is.
“As a former police officer...”
Yes, that was already showing.
“Yes you are naïve”...well, I do expect professional conduct from law enforcement officers. Naïve or not, it is a very reasonable expectation.
“He doesn’t owe them an explanation, despite what you think.”...this is not what I think. This is what the Texas State Department of Public Safety thinks. In particular, they have already ‘found violations in the agency’s procedures regarding traffic stops and the department’s courtesy policy”. Remember - that’s not me guessing, or my opinion...that’s his employer. So I think, well, I am right - he most certainly DOES owe an explanation, at least if he wants to work for the Texas State Department of Public Safety. To say otherwise, well, might indicate that the finger pointing at me as clueless is misplaced.
“I doubt very seriously that he’ll lose his job as he was within the boundaries of the law in the way he conducted himself.”...Again, you have called me clueless, but you tie his keeping his job to acting lawfully? People get fired everyday for things that aren’t a violation of the law. He violated a department procedure...and embarrassed his employer when the whole thing ended up as national news. Add to it, if you watch the hour long tape in its entirety...and listen to his communications with his supervisor after the event...he was not truthful with his supervisor, and claimed that he attempted to de-escalate the situation “I allowed time to de-escalate and so forth”. I challenge anyone to find that in the video...its not there, and its a complete fabrication made by the officer to his supervisor - a compounding factor in his impending firing.
“Your arrogance is astounding”....as a conservative, I do not at all believe it is arrogant to expect professional behavior from public employees. The mere notion that being critical of police professionalism is ‘arrogant’ actually leads me to once again believe the pointed finger forgets the other four doing a 180.
We are obviously not going to agree. Look, I’ve been very supportive of the officer in Ferguson, and the officers in Baltimore. And I have already acknowledged that Bland was part of the problem. I’m not a cop hater. But this is important: It is physically impossible for every single cop to act perfectly on every single day. This guy had a bad day, a very bad day. He screwed up that day.
It’s funny how you two want to qualify yourselves as judges, not on the basis of your own accomplishments, but on those of people you know or are related to.
I’d rather be a former police officer and a former marine who has actually served his country and community than a couch coach who wants to sit on their ass and criticize those who actually do the job.
Decent human beings will actually withhold judgment until all of the facts are in. Our police officers deserve it. Our military personnel deserve it. I don’t expect you or Charles H to understand that though as you’re obviously better at critiquing others that actually doing something useful yourselves.
My relative (you know, the one who IS actually doing the job) made that call, not me. He’s managed to keep his job as an LEO for more than a decade, and his professionalism and honor as well. I’ll take his opinion over a keyboard warrior “former” cop. Good luck in your present endeavors, and hopefully they suit you better...
I disagree. I’ll cooperate with the police up to the point that they break the law. After that they’re just another criminal and they deserve whatever happens to them.
Case in point:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-usa-oklahoma-rape-idUSKCN0J324I20141119
I do not have an obligation to cooperate with these people just because they have a badge! They have my cooperation because they enforce the law and because they respect the Constitution.
The moment they cease enforcing the law or respecting the Constitution then my obligation as a citizen turns from respecting their authority to resisting their tyranny.
Ok...its not sinking in. My judgement is meaningless - but he has already been suspended, and his boss has already stated that he violated procedure.
The Texas Dept of Safety has judged. Not me.
But on the subject of judging. This is where I think we fundamentally disagree. You have essentially said that the public cannot ‘judge’, since we have never been police officers. I have to tell you that the public most certainly have every right (and responsibility) to judge police conduct. To say otherwise is both informative and chilling. IOW, the police serve the public. Period.
BTW, this couch warrior doesn’t spout off about his time in the Army, but been there, done that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.