hfbj
Region: US
Monday 31 August 2026 07:17:54 GMT
71396
2262
796
38
Music
Download
Comments
FaddyDaddy :
Turner v Driver💯
2026-08-31 19:54:43
26
Sam :
Texas penal code 38.02 says he is wrong. ID is only required once you are lawfully arrested.
2026-08-31 15:17:47
524
Millz :
42yrs of life and I have never seen a good cop
2026-08-31 18:55:05
221
Goatous :
Cop admits he’s been breaking the law, for years. Why hasn’t he been arrested?
2026-08-31 18:55:02
178
SKRVTCH :
Being suspicious, does not articulate a crime. Refuse to identify and file that lawsuit on.
2026-08-31 21:52:22
12
SnidleyWhiplash23 :
He has filed suit, it’s public info. The cop is in deep shit!
2026-08-31 14:10:20
211
J :
"I'm not going to argue with you" means they don't want to answer any questions that may incriminate themselves.
2026-08-31 12:43:24
104
JOSE JORDAN 🖤 :
He admits that he is aware of the educational videos from auditors yet he fails to learn from them.
2026-08-31 23:32:08
17
Curtis Dodson :
Turner v. Driver is a significant 2017 federal court case that confirmed the public's First Amendment right to record police officers in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (which covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi). Key Details of the Case: • The Incident: In 2015, Phillip Turner was video recording a Fort Worth, Texas police station from a public sidewalk across the street. Officers approached him, asked for identification, and when he refused, they handcuffed him and placed him in a patrol car before releasing him. • The Ruling: The Fifth Circuit ruled that the public has a First Amendment right to record police activity, subject only to "reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions". • A Complex Outcome: While the court established the right to record for future cases, it ruled that the right wasn't clearly established at the time of Turner's detention. This meant the officers were protected by qualified immunity for his First Amendment claims. However, the court also found that Turner's detention without probable cause violated his Fourth Amendment rights, allowing that claim to proceed. Why It Matters: The decision is a key legal victory for police accountability, as it reinforces the public's right to document law enforcement actions. It's often cited in discussions about constitutional rights and challenges to laws that attempt to restrict recording police.
2026-08-31 14:38:06
7
HueyTalks :
cops just giving away taxpayer money
2026-08-31 14:40:03
288
CPT-Rocko :
Turner v. Driver.
2026-08-31 12:59:13
32
The remodeler :
Suspicion is not a crime
2026-08-31 22:15:25
33
JVPGH13 :
The man made his own case law. *Turner vs Driver* he’s a legend. The Copsplaining in the beginning is hilarious knowing how it ends up.
2026-08-31 13:20:04
79
Ryan Viator :
So he has been breaking laws attacking citizens for a long time.
2026-08-31 15:46:23
18
cookshere :
That cop couldn’t be more wrong. Sue their asses.
2026-08-31 10:00:17
40
amricnredeye :
The arrogance of the cops are just amazing
2026-08-31 15:50:14
8
brofessorbrolaf :
so he's been violating the law for longer than that guy has been recording.
2026-08-31 19:50:38
24
WildVariant :
They love talking over you…
2026-08-31 11:17:41
17
bigdog94 :
so the cop has been breaking the law for along time
2026-09-01 13:51:55
8
Darren f dd :
No crime means they have no authority
2026-08-31 14:49:08
10
tiktoktookmyname4 :
he sued and won. free money out here...lol
2026-08-31 16:14:09
13
justme :
handcuffs as a intimidation is a 2nd breach
2026-08-31 12:36:06
15
Keondadawnofficial :
Suspicion is not a crime
2026-08-31 19:42:52
9
Joel Haro :
A lot of these officers are beginning to make their own rules and laws of the land
2026-08-31 19:50:22
12
Castle77 :
They cannot arrest you for that because they cannot book you on suspicion. If they can’t book you they don’t have any right for your ID.
2026-08-31 20:28:25
11
To see more videos from user @hfbj11, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
