Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClTjur-9cx8Bb4MW8r0K6xw

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audittheaudit

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuditTheAudit

Submit your videos here: auditheaudit@gmail.com

Sponsorship inquiries: audit@ellify.com

Welcome to Audit the Audit, where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions. Help us grow and educate more citizens and officers on the proper officer interaction conduct by liking this video and/or subscribing.

This video is for educational purposes and is in no way intended to provoke, incite, or shock the viewer. This video was created to educate citizens on constitutionally protected activities and emphasize the importance that legal action plays in constitutional activism.

Bear in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.

FAIR USE
This video falls under fair use protection as it has been manipulated for educational purposes with the addition of commentary. This video is complementary to illustrate the educational value of the information being delivered through the commentary and has inherently changed the value, audience and intention of the original video.

Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvWmj_YgAuE

Police State: New Jersey’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr7p9ZvcS4X9yPWWwEOra7A

Sources:
N.J. Stat. § 2C:29-1- https://bit.ly/39QAuHG
State v. Crawley- https://bit.ly/3CW36Ms
State v. Williams- https://bit.ly/2ZvXzO4
Bryant v. Camden County Police Department- https://bit.ly/3ov8PVF
Brown v. Texas- https://bit.ly/3p1SKDr
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada- https://bit.ly/3nYdxIV
United States v. Sokolow- https://bit.ly/3CSabxu
N.J. Stat. § 2C:29-3- https://bit.ly/3m0N4tC
Hindering Model Jury Instructions- https://bit.ly/3CWCtXw
State v. Aad- https://bit.ly/3APGv3y
Article- https://bit.ly/3lQZxQw

source

By elboriyorker

HOSTING BY PHILLYFINESTSERVERSTAT | ANGELHOUSE © 2009 - 2024 | ALL YOUTUBE VIDEOS IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF GOOGLE INC. THE YOUTUBE CHANNELS AND BLOG FEEDS IS MANAGED BY THERE RIGHTFUL OWNERS. POST QUESTION OR INQUIRIES SEND ME AN EMAIL TO elboriyorkeratgmailcom (www.phillyfinest369.com)

40 thoughts on “Sergeant Orders Officer to RESPECT Citizen’s Rights”
  1. The officer in this video didn't seem too out of line. For the most part he was relatively courteous and professional. His problem was he was very poorly educated on the laws he was supposed to enforce which could be a problem with his ability to learn or more likely poor training provided by his department.

  2. OK right off the bat the narrator is wrong. No individual has to give up the fourth amendment rights and show ID unless they are being charged or under arrest for a crime. They committed suspicion is not a crime. I have seen the update on this video that officer was terminated from his position

  3. No question the Sergeant gets an A+. HE understood the law, defused the situation, and respected this gentleman's civil rights… That POS Gestapo cop should be fired! Not only is he ignorant of the law, he's an arrogant prick. He was so damn cocky and sure of himself, and even when corrected, acted like he was still right. He's dangerous.

  4. Judges nationwide need to start throwing out obstruction charges Police are charging it when they don't have a crime and most are spiteful over people using there rights and just use the frivolous charge

  5. If the person is not in trouble for anything at all, what point does it serve in identifying who they are??? It had been established from the start by the cop's own words that a proper investigation was not required as that person wasn't committing an offense, yet the cop still tried to instigate the steps towards identifying them….for what? Even if the cop did get the guy's name, what exactly is he going to do with that other than be able to say that specific person was not committing a crime that day? It seems to me that whenever cops do this, they're fishing for a crime to investigate because they feel as though their suspicions are always warranted, even if said-suspicions are just "I don't like what this person is doing".
    Must have been a slow day for crime.

  6. This is an example of an "auditor" that's wants cops to harass him when he's out filming. He makes no attempts to clearly explain himself and is argumentative because he hopes the cop does something illegal so he can get views on his video and file a lawsuit. He could just tell the cop exactly what he's doing right up front- that he's an "auditor" and is out there filming so that a cop will respond and he can post video of the interaction, but that would lessen the chance of a hostile interaction, so he doesn't.

  7. What makes me so mad, is these cops are literally OUT LOOKING FOR TROUBLE… So much so, that they are willing to trap you in a crime because they need something to stick.. Its so awful, i feel bad for people out there just living there life and some cop wants to be a hero.

  8. I like to believe that, since the Sergeant showed great ability to carry out his duties, that he would ensure his officer was appropriately disciplined for this affront. Though it seems like the officer escaped being fired or suspended, is hope the sergeant is as good as he seems, and found other ways to reprimand the officer.

  9. Love how so many cops are using the "we got a call" excuse to try to get around our constitutional rights. They want to pretend that in the name of public interest they can demand things otherwise disallowed. These, usually anonymous, complaints are 'hearsay'. at best.

  10. Sometimes these auditors just get needlessly snarky though. I understand that in order to audit responses they have to push the issue, but sometimes i think they do so in a way to purposely try to incite a response so they get more views.

  11. I’m 60 years old. A grandmother. I can’t believe I just caught myself sticking my tongue out at the first officer when his superior set him straight. It really felt good tho. Lol.

  12. Yes this ended well but its very clear that all the current issues that these excellent and greatly needed audits identify surely these must be addressed seriously as ongoing education, if not daily to ensure all officers who swear an oath to serve the people they need constant education on the job and these challenges to peoples rights would disappear. It must be a lot of pressure for officers of any rank to be in law enforcement its a high stress situation but if the powers that be in the industry are genuine they will take this onboard and protect all the rights of the people otherwise you just have communism very quickly, I know because here is Australia the corruption is broard and deep and our constitution has no authority against the judicial/police system. I so greatly admire America and Americans you are so blessed to have a constitution that protects you.

  13. It’s astonishing how many law enforcement officers are not aware of the statutes and rights of the population. The people training these officers need to do a better job of ensuring their officers have retained the training curriculum. We should always acknowledged all the amazing law enforcement officers doing a great job out there!

  14. I've watched a number of these videos, and it's clear that police across the country are in serious need of better training. It's scary that so many "law enforcement" have no idea what they are doing, and it's a very important job to be accurately informed for. How can a man make over 100,000 dollars a year, and not know basic constitutionally protected rights?

  15. Yeah… I bet he went to one if those "training conventions* that twll cops to break the law. The ones that New Jersey Public Safety biss said were causing the State to have to retrain EVERY cop in rhe State .. lol

  16. "I'm charging this pretend officer with violating my civil rights with malicious intent, and criminal harassment. Cuff him or your department will get racketeering charges, the settlement check will include making you sell your cars and having to ride those Old A$$ crown vics because of how broke the city's gonna be."

Comments are closed.