Police try to arrest Uber driver for recording them, man turns out to be a lawyer

[Final-Fan]

Aeolus451 said:

Final-Fan said:

They only searched his car because they called in a K-9 unit, and one of the cops (NOT the K-9 officer) then immediately entered the vehicle and began to search it, despite (according to the driver) receiving no confirmation from the K-9 officer that the dog had indicated anything of legal interest.  If I recall the video correctly, the officer who entered was the same officer as was most belligerent in the video. 

Where did you get the information that the passenger was arrested in connection with this event? 

It was in the video. The driver said that the cops were arresting his passenger while they were pulling things out of the passenger's pocket and putting the contents on the seat next to the driver. @2:20 he pans over to passenger seat, the door is open and you can see the cops searching the passenger and there's stuff on the seat they pulled from the passenger's pockets.  @3:17 the cops ask him about the contents they got off the passenger. @1:02 the driver says the passenger is getting arrested.

  The video was cut and edited because it jumps about. The vid never shows the K-9 search at all but the unit probably did show up and the car was searched because the drugs I assume that were on the seat. A K-9 unit searching your car still counts as being searched. Personally, I just let cops search my car because it's quicker that way and it defuses cops suspicions quickly. I've been with friends who wanted to a pain in the ass with cops and we spent couple of hours going through this routine.

When the driver said that at about a minute into the video, he was simply reporting what appeared to be happening at the time.  The driver never confirmed that the passenger HAD past-tense confirmed been arrested.  Additionally, that was before they searched his car.  When you said "They did search it and they ended up arresting his passenger", I figured you had heard something about him getting arrested after the search took place, subsequent to the search of the car. 

In point of fact, in a follow-up video the driver said that the search turned up nothing, the stuff on the seat wasn't "drugs", and the passenger was not arrested, but got back into the car with the driver and continued his trip home.  (He said the dog never showed signs visible to an untrained person that he was indicating a finding, and the K-9 officer never said that the dog had so indicated, but a different police officer entered the car and perfomed a search immediately after the dog started sniffing around without consulting the K-9 officer.) 

As a side note, I would personally distinguish between an "outside search" (i.e. visual inspection, dog sniffing, etc.) and an "inside search" (i.e. cop enters the vehicle and digs around), but I don't know exactly what the law has to say on that subject, although I am moderately confident that there's an important legal distinction.