Posted on 10/08/2004 9:39:18 AM PDT by skyman
WASHINGTON -- A woman from Bowie, Md., who was arrested for eating a candy bar at a Metro station, had her day in court Thursday, but it was a brief visit.
Stephanie Willett claims she was frisked under her shirt, handcuffed and held for three hours after a Metro transit officer confronted her for eating a candy bar on the escalator.
Transit police claim Willett was "belligerent."
In court Thursday, Willett tried to tell a judge what happened that day, but she was cut off after a few minutes. The judge told Willett her case is over and that it ended when she posted $10 to get out of jail last July.
Willett has a year to appeal the arrest.
The incident gained worldwide attention, and goes on a list of other Metro Transit Police actions that have raised both eyebrows and questions.
In September, a transit officer reportedly forced a pregnant woman down on the floor and pushed his knee in her back, after he claimed she was talking too loud on a cell phone.
In 2002, an officer ticketed a wheelchair-bound cerebral palsy patient who the officer said cursed when he was unable to find a working elevator to exit the system.
And in 2000, an officer handcuffed a 12-year-old girl for eating a french fry on a subway platform.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbc4.com ...
LOL.
We have one of those in Baltimore also. It's a matched set with our subway (ha!) that goes almost nowhere of interest.
In each case, the perp escalated the situation to the point where an arrest was necessary. It's BPOC Syndrome.
You will be shown to be correct on that prediction.
"Small crimes" is one thing. Eating a candy bar is another.
The "Nanny State" is upon us.
pay the fine or do the time.
Can we agree that
1. The regulations are just, reasonable and beneficial
2. The woman is not innocent
3. The case is an example of police handling a regulation poorly
4. An officer handling a regulation poorly does not mean that any fault lies in the regulation
5. under-zealous law enforcement is a very sever problem, and the example of an over-zealous officer should not be blown out of proportion to the extent that it forces officers to become under-zealous
6. But the officer should be corrected, in a manner that is not also over-zealous: something that has a definite but temporary effect on him (as opposed to permanently scarring his record.)
The issue here isn't whether or not there should be rules on the subway. And it isn't a question of should these people should have been kicked out or even cited for their behavior.
The issue is the insane overreaction and complete disconnect between the level of offense and the severity of the response.
Take for example the pregnant woman. I don't care how belligerent she got. The ONLY time such force against such a person is justified is when they are an immediate threat to the life or limb of another. And a bad attitude falls several orders of magnitude short of that threshold. Imagine the response to anyone else but the 'King's men' committing such an assault!
And cuffing a 12 year old...?
So far, the dumbest comments have come from Florida, Georgia, and an unspecified location. I'd bet that the unspecified location is not MD, DC, or VA.
Not sure the woman is guilty. She put the candy bar in her mouth and was chewing with intent to swallow (good Lord, I've worked in a law office too long!!). So it seems to me, at least on the surface, that she followed the order not to take food into the system by putting it in her mouth. I know if someone had stopped me and told me not to take food in, but I had just the last nibble of a candy bar, I'd say, "Sure!" and pop the rest in my mouth. I wonder if this is what the woman with the candy did, intending to comply.
I've noticed a fair amount of PerpSympathy has invaded FR of late. Not on my part of course. The police are usually trying to keep some level of civilization in public places for those who don't want to behave like third world cultures. The problem is, the police are not supported enough and have to constantly battle liberals who have a calling to defend perps of all sizes.
I don't think a lot of us are defending bad behavior (I know I'm not). I'm just wondering if the woman's intent was to obey by putting the candy in her mouth. I think it goes without saying that if she took food down stairs she was absolutely wrong.
See, I read this article and I get nervous. I travel the metro all the time with what I consider to be reasonable guesses at what is permissable. What does "no food" mean? I travel carrying a bag of groceries all the time. It's sealed, so I presume it's OK. I don't mind paying a small fine to find out it's not OK. I would mind being arrested.
I've also put half-eaten candy bars in my jacket pocket.
I've eaten breath mints.
What a butthead reply. You don't think you'll get shot if assault a cop?
Jesus, they're arresting people for eating candy bars, but you, the great Prime Choice, can assault a cop without ramifications?
And you call me ignorant. You're a hoot.
Scream a string of obscenities at me in public for no rational reason, and I will kill you on the spot. People who act like that are mentally unbalanced, and I would perceive an imminent threat to my life. IMNHO, the cop acted with a degree of restraint.
And cuffing a 12 year old...?
Again, in both cases, the arrestee was in an advanced case of BPOC Syndrome.
I suggest you tour all the neighborhoods in DC and take a poll. Enter and exit each metro stop at all hours of the day and night.
Right, Dangus, that's why I'm asking, too. I take Metro frequently. It's scary to think that they'd arrest someone who didn't have the wrong intentions. I can understand arresting someone who pulls out a bag of fries or is munching a candy bar, etc. But this puts a fine line on things, and it makes me skittish, too.
Dang, dangus. Your reasonable and logical analysis should cause the heads of several folks on this thread to spin rather comically! <:-)
You forgot to take your /sarcasm tag off. ;-D I will, if you'll come with me.
Do you suffer from BPOC Syndrome?
I agree. No one forced that lady to take the Metro. If she doesn't like the "no eating," "no litering," "no cell phone" rules, then she should take a cab.
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.