Pregnant Woman Tasered by Police

First, I want to commend anyone who it still engaged in this thread. This material is important. The law is not fashionable, like shoes, or "fun", like Saturday morning cartoons. If you're bored, sorry we can't be more entertaining. Go watch TV.

Go back up and read the case law. The issue is not pregnant women or signing the ticket. The issue is that the signature section forces you to make a commitment that they cannot legally force you to make. You are only required to sign for RECEIPT, so why do you think they slipped a PROMISE TO RESPOND AS DIRECTED in there instead of just I HAVE RECIEVED THIS TICKET? That statement converts it from a receipt to a CONTRACT. Come on. Think about it. The court of appeals already has in Port Orchard V. Tilton, and they decided you DON'T have to sign the promise, and that if you decline to make that promise, ie. if you are not a big enough freaking idiot to throw out your constitutionally protected rights against, oh, say being forced to contract or to testify against yourself, maybe your right to due process (did anyone check the word "infraction" in Blacks?), that there is a SECOND STEP the cop must perform on the ticket to convert it to a receipt or he's asking for trouble, especially if he arrests or threatens to arrest. That is the advice directly from their own Law Enforcement Digest, June, 1995, page 7.

Anyone can, and most people do, voluntarily toss out all their constitutional protections several times a day. We are CONDITIONED to think this is normal - everybody does it. Who is conditioning us? I was in court 2 days ago on this very issue. I weigh 120 pounds, I wore a suit, I speak well, I have a Master's degree, I can behave civilly in the face of great insult, they've never seen me before this court before. I don't have any tickets or accidents. There were FIVE armed cops in that court room and mine was the only issue on the docket. Who do you THINK is behind the brainwashing? Who profits from it? Who is threatened when one of the peasants figures out that the whole thing is a big fraud? Clue - FIVE ARMED, PUMPED-UP COPS. Here's another clue - 115,000 speeding tickets in America every day, 42,000,000 a year, X an average of $150 = $6,296,250,000 a year. Oh, by the way, the population of my town is about 5,000 people - that was probably the entire on-duty police force tied up for an hour in there.

If you are going to refute the conclusions of the court of appeals and the Law Enforcement Digest, you'd better come up with something better than brainwashed, dangerously naive, knee jerk, police state drivel. The judge I sat in front of Friday couldn't, so she decided to just try to scare the crap out of me with a squad of jack-booted thugs. Whatever. I'm still in there swinging. Sometimes I go watch the mass rape they call traffic court to remind myself I'm not one of the ignorant peasants anymore. Makes me really ill.

good luck in court.

and i agree, it should be...wait a minute...IT IS illegal for the authorities to force you to sign any contract. I-L-L-E-G-A-L. i tried explaining it, but many seem to be more than willing to be stripped of their rights. "she shoulda just signed the f***ing" is the best they can come up with. indeed, and by that logic, leaders of the american revolution should have just shut up and payed their f***ing taxes

Originally posted by PVS
and by that logic, leaders of the american revolution should have just shut up and payed their f***ing taxes

Originally posted by PVS
regardless of the disclaimer over the signature line, we
most of us know that being pulled over is a very nerve racking experience.
even if the cop is polite and easygoing, it still sucks and makes people very nervous. nervous enough to not calmly sit and read the ticket in front of the cop to make sure that they werent signing away their right to challenge the ticket.

just look at the scan.
it clearly says "the UNDERSIGNED certifies and says that in the state of washington---did operate the following vehicle/motor vehicle on a public highway and---DID THEN AND THERE COMMIT EACH OF THE FOLLOWING OFFENCES."

i've signed so many forms in my lifetime. in EACH and EVERY form there is a seperate signature page, where the header reads something like "i, the undersigned...." undersigned means just that. UNDERsigned. when that word is placed on a contract, it must be on the same page as the signature line.
unless anyone in here has ever signed a form or contract where they saw an 'undersigned' agreement on a seperate page than the signature line? dont think so :/

and whats more screwed up is the guilty plea signature line is on the BACK.
it seems purposely misleading and i find that very disturbing.
the solution would have been as simple as placing the agreement signature on the BACK of the frikin ticket. so why wont they do it? why is it that upon viewing the ticket for like 2 minutes anyone can see the problem and come up with the solution with zero tax payer salary, and these assh0les cant figure that out?

i would have questioned it as well. goddamn right.

I always thought that that part of the ticket at the top that says Undersigned refered to the police officer stating that the person commited such and such offense.

correct. HOWEVER, when you sign the same page, you become part of the "undersigned". its understood that they cant turn around and say that the signature was a guilty plea, but i can clearly see cause for confusion.

but thats superficial. people are being forced, under penalty of arrest, to sign a contract. this is not bothersome? it certainly is to me.

Originally posted by PVS
correct. HOWEVER, when you sign the same page, you become part of the "undersigned". its understood that they cant turn around and say that the signature was a guilty plea, but i can clearly see cause for confusion.

but thats superficial. people are being forced, under penalty of arrest, to sign a contract. this is not bothersome? it certainly is to me.

whether or not its "right" it is currently the law isn't it? So she was required to sign it.
Yeah it is pretty confusing now that Im looking at the ticket they need to fix that.

Originally posted by Hegemon875
whether or not its "right" it is currently the law isn't it? So she was required to sign it.

since when has the concept of right become so trivial that it can be secondary to law.

Originally posted by PVS
since when has the concept of right become so trivial that it can be secondary to law.

Since the law has a tazer.

If she wanted to argue whether or not it was right she should have done it afterwards through a due process, not by arguing with the police officers.

i'll agree there. a true civil disobedient argues with the court and not the officer. if i was in her place and i felt the need to refuse to sign (difficult to say if i would...since i was never in that situation) i would have gotten out of the car and let them arrest me. but that does not justify the use of a taser on an obviously pregnant woman. and yes, they frikin knew she was pregnant. i once submitted to the possibility that she could have been some 400 pound behemoth, but upon seeing her photo, and the healthy size of her baby, i think its safe to say she was gigantic in the midsection, clearly disproportionate to the rest of her body.

and last, do you honestly believe this would happen to a white woman?
funny that i have never seen a single article about a white woman being tasered in a routine traffic stop 😬 nevermind a pregnant one. when does the technicality of the law stop and the good judgement of a police officer start?

Originally posted by PVS
i'll agree there. a true civil disobedient argues with the court and not the officer. if i was in her place and i felt the need to refuse to sign (difficult to say if i would...since i was never in that situation) i would have gotten out of the car and let them arrest me. but that does not justify the use of a taser on an obviously pregnant woman. and yes, they frikin knew she was pregnant. i once submitted to the possibility that she could have been some 400 pound behemoth, but upon seeing her photo, and the healthy size of her baby, i think its safe to say she was gigantic in the midsection, clearly disproportionate to the rest of her body.

and last, do you honestly believe this would happen to a white woman?
funny that i have never seen a single article about a white woman being tasered in a routine traffic stop 😬 nevermind a pregnant one. when does the technicality of the law stop and the good judgement of a police officer start?

In that case I definately agree that the officers should not have tazered her, being pregnant and all, but didn't they warn her several times that they were going to tazer her? Not saying what they did was ok but you'd think a woman would do anything to protect her child, even sign a traffic ticket!

Originally posted by PVS
funny that i have never seen a single article about a white woman being tasered in a routine traffic stop erm nevermind a pregnant one. when does the technicality of the law stop and the good judgement of a police officer start?

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2005/05/29/a16a_taser_vig1_0529.html

Originally posted by FeceMan
You mean 'no thanks to the quick-thinking officer who stopped her from committing a serious felony and protecting himself from what was clearly a dangerous situation'. He's a real hero, I tell you.

She should have just signed the damn ticket. And this thread is rather old.

Originally posted by PVS
yeah a real hero 🙄

"And this thread is rather old."

you are quite the wet diaper today aren't you?

as for your complaints of the thread,
its still going, people are interested, so why dont you just
sit back and have a nice big glass of stfu 🙂

Ticket or no tisket the cop was wrong to do that.And the woman should not had refudged the ticket. So they are both wrong. jm

Originally posted by Jackie Malfoy
Ticket or no tisket the cop was wrong to do that.And the woman should not had refudged the ticket. So they are both wrong. jm

😂 absolutely. its really a stupid move to refudge a tisket 😂

btw, she didnt refuse the ticket. she refused to sign it....oh ffs nevermind 😖

What does ffs mean?

Anyways....I didn't real the whole thread but did she like attack or behave violent..if not the Officer shouldn't have tasered her anyways....second question would be did he notice that she was pregnant.....and third maybe electrocuting babies is good for them....🤨

Originally posted by Bardock42
What does ffs mean?

for f**k's sake

and there is an article a few posts up. in that article is a video of an officer tasing another black woman. (surprise surprise) you can clearly see that although she was being quite the stupid b!tch, she was putting nobody at risk, and that was quite obvious. they attacked her because she didnt obey.

Originally posted by PVS
you can clearly see that although she was being quite the stupid b!tch,

Ask any woman if this is reason enough to attack another female, and you will find an overwhelmingly one-sided response.

Originally posted by botankus
Ask any woman if this is reason enough to attack another female, and you will find an overwhelmingly one-sided response.

i wasnt justifying the attack, just pointing that out so its clear.
if being stupid was punishable by 50,000 volts, we would be in for a
nation wide power outage.

I know, dude. I've ignored this thread so I just wanted to pull a Jackie.