foreign [Music] welcome to audit the audits where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions this episode covers seat belt laws interference and traffic stops and is brought To Us by Ras binghai trufaya's Channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserve before we dive into the interaction I want to give a big thanks to the sponsor of this episode surf shark we all know surf shark is a premier VPN service that offers its users security privacy and peace of mind at a fraction of the price of competing Brands but did you know that a surf shark subscription also includes a host of other features designed to enhance your browsing experience one of the many perks of a surf shark membership is that it allows its users to bypass region restrictions on popular platforms like YouTube and Netflix and view content that's not normally available in your country thanks to Surf shark I can browse all the shows on my favorite streaming apps even if they were removed from the US catalog right now surf shark is offering the ATA Community an 83 discount with an additional three months completely free when you use code audit with 24-hour customer service and a 30-day money-back guarantee you have absolutely nothing to lose so click the link in the description to claim your exclusive offer now thanks again to surfshark for sponsoring this episode in a video posted on December 23 2019 an officer pulled over a vehicle being driven by the daughter of the owner of the Ross binghai trufia YouTube channel who we will refer to as Mr trufia very little additional information is available about this interaction but we do know that it occurred somewhere in Texas after the officer stopped the vehicle he approached Mr trufaya's passenger side window and Mr trufia's daughter recorded the encounter from the driver's seat do you suspect me of a crime sir I'm telling you you suspect me do not have your seatbelt on from what I observed that's why I made the traffic stop in the state of Texas okay you have to have every passenger has to have a seatbelt on and I have a seat belt on as the anybody in the video may now sir didn't see it sir what I think is happening here is your baby you're looking at me and you're you're judging me by appearance and I would rather a supervisor be on here because I know my rights there's no supervisor no I don't have a supervisor okay well we're live on footage here and I do know at this point that unless I'm suspected of a crime a judge needs to sign a warrant for you to go any further than where you're going what time am I telling you am I suspected of a crime seat belt on you that's not a crime which is a is a offense under the Texas driver's code you must have a seat belt on everybody in the vehicle must have one on I get that that's not the issue here the issue is here you have no right to ask me for my ID see it you said he had to have it on if you did you were behind us you pulled up you peeked in to look at me and then you pulled this up I'm sorry no disrespect to you sir I'm telling you that's really proper in front of your kids sir okay good try the issue is you're not being honest so I'm gonna call you on it sir someone your father is that what he said that's the right that's right if you could convince him to just give me that information it'd be so much easier for you guys we'll get you on down the highway sir who didn't even ask the driver once for her license you didn't ask for registration she tried to give it to you you need mine because you looked at me sir that is looking at me by discrimination on camera you just admitted anything that you're doing right now for what for what crime you're gonna detain me for not wearing a seat belt I can actually take you to jail for it I keep confusing the issue this is looking at me and discriminating against me and pulling us over for no other reason that's unfortunate there's no way that you can say otherwise we watched you pull up it's all on camera you were in front of us there's no way you didn't see the seat belt on me because it was on me sir this is all this is all an excuse this is discrimination it was laying way down the seat belt was not coming across it was laying down number this way it's okay the officer claims that he pulled Mr trufia's family over because it did not appear that Mr trufaya was wearing a seatbelt despite the fact that he was fully buckled by the time the officer approached the vehicle with the exception of New Hampshire every state in the United States has some sort of seat belt law the majority of these laws including the seat belt law in Texas are so-called primary enforcement laws that allow Law Enforcement Officers to stop Vehicles solely due to an observed seat belt violation however as of the date of this episode 15 states have so-called secondary enforcement seat belt laws in effect that prohibit a police officer from stopping a vehicle exclusively on the basis of a driver or Passenger not wearing their seatbelt in these states officers can only write tickets for seat belt violations if they have lawfully pulled the vehicle over for another traffic offense for instance section 4513.263 of the Ohio Revised Code which is the state statute requiring drivers and front seat passengers to wear seat belts states that quote no law enforcement officer shall cause an operator of an automobile being operated on any Street or highway to stop the automobile for the sole purpose of determining whether a violation of this section has been or is being committed or for the sole purpose of issuing a ticket citation or summons for a violation of that nature or causing the arrest of or commencing a prosecution of a person for a violation of that nature and no law enforcement officer shall view the interior or visually inspect any automobile being operated on any Street or Highway for the sole purpose of determining whether a violation of that nature has been or is being committed according to section 545.413 of the Texas Transportation code quote a person commits an offense if the person is at least 15 years of age is riding in a passenger vehicle while the vehicle is being operated is occupying a seat that is equipped with a safety belt and is not secured by a safety belt because Texas is a primary enforcement state courts have consistently held that officers can initiate traffic stops because a driver or a passenger is not wearing their seat belts for instance in the 2019 case of United States versus Perez the United States district court in the Western District of Texas El Paso division held that an officer quote had Reasonable Suspicion to perform a traffic stop for the seat belt violation when he quote saw a passenger in her vehicle not wearing a safety belt in violation of Texas Transportation code section 545.413 likewise in the 2014 case of galbots versus State the 9th District Court of Appeals of Texas upheld the reasonableness of a traffic stop where the officer quote personally observed that the passenger riding in the back seat was leaning forward and it appeared he was not wearing a seat belt in violation of Texas Transportation code section 545.413 because quote a violation of the vehicle safety laws is sufficient Authority for an officer to stop a vehicle and quote it was not necessary to show that the passenger was not actually wearing a seat belt but simply that the trooper reasonably believed that the passenger was not wearing a seatbelt in this situation if a court accepted the officer's testimony that he did not think that Mr trufia was wearing a seat belt it is highly likely that it would conclude that the traffic stop was constitutionally justifiable and because it is possible that Mr trufaya buckled his seat belt after the initiation of the traffic stop a court could also determine that the continued Detention of the family to write a citation or warning was also legally permissible and that's what's good about for you you do get the ride if I write you a citation you do have the right to go to the court that's a waste of time you have the right to refuse yes okay you're and what you're doing at this point is refusing to to give me the information that's necessary to check you out to give you a citation or to give you a warning for what's occurred I think that's it why wouldn't you just do that can you just do that then but that works no I don't need your ID if you give me your name numbers it is your fault sir there's no reason what I was doing you're saying I was hiding from you were putting my seat back you said that I had my seat back all I was doing is making sure he stayed in a seat belt I'm talking about I'm talking about in the car as well that is not true I don't roll ever without a seat belt so you're making up stories sir if that's all you're doing this is your discretion right now sir it is your discretion and you have the right to let me get home to my family it's my discretion to write your citation or not how can you write a person that's not driving a citation because you're traveling down a public Highway that's the that's the law it's okay because I'm asking you to step out if you don't want to step out I don't have a problem you not stepping out if you'll give me the information but if you're going to continue arguing with me then you need to step out here so we can have a conversation out here I don't trust my hands are right here everything's on video and you're the one violating the Constitution sir sit here for a moment you're not free to go by the way I I would really like to so you're saying no you're not going to do it I'm telling you that there is no you don't want me to pull you out of the car and arrest you is that what you want for what grounds what have I done selling to ID yourself that isn't it that isn't a crime sir the officer threatens to arrest Mr trufia for refusing to identify himself and Mr trufaya argues that it is not a crime for him to do so under section 38.02 of the Texas Penal Code quote a person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name residence address or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information the statute also states that quote a person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name residence address or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person lawfully detained the person or requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense therefore the Texas stop and identify statute does not criminalize an individual's refusal to identify themselves when they have been lawfully detained only when they have been lawfully arrested Additionally the state's interference statute does not prohibit the mere refusal to identify according to section 38.15 of the Texas Penal Code quote a person commits an offense if the person with criminal negligence interrupts disrupts impedes or otherwise interferes with a peace officer while the peace officer is performing a Duty or exercising Authority imposed or granted by law nonetheless the statute explicitly states that quote it is a defense to prosecution under this section that the interruption disruption impediment or interference alleged consisted of speech only and as the fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which has jurisdiction over Texas explained in the 2020 case of Vos versus good quote merely arguing with police officers about the propriety of their conduct Falls within the speech exception to section 38.15 and thus does not constitute probable cause to arrest someone for interference the court then went on to clarify that quote failing to comply with an officer's instruction made within the scope of the officer's official Duty and pertaining to physical conduct rather than speech can also constitute interference as well as quote actions such as making physical contact with any of the officers or physically obstructing them from performing their legally authorized duties because the officers order that Mr trufaya identify himself was an instruction pertaining to speech rather than physical conduct a court would likely conclude that Mr trufaya did not violate the interference statute for refusing to provide his name and date of birth to the officer however as we have discussed many times here on ATA the Supreme Court determined in the 1997 case of Marilyn vs Wilson that an officer May lawfully order a passenger to exit the vehicle during a traffic stop and because the officers order that Mr trafia step outside of the car was quote pertaining to physical conduct rather than speech a court would probably determine that Mr trufaya could be arrested for interference for refusing to exit the vehicle anything that you're thinking violation for what does it mean all for not wearing a seat belt I was wearing a seat belt not like and I told you I'm not even going to write you a scientification sir I know what you're doing I don't care about that I know you're looking at me educate me we haven't committed a crime you're not saying you suspect us of a crime whatsoever and yet you're holding us on the side of the road for no reason with a toddler sir absolutely I'm begging you to please let us go I'm starting to lose my patience with you sir because you're not following adults I am sir you're abusing bully tactics sir to try to get me to violate my rights pulling you out of the car and taking you under arrest and I wonder what grounds I'll happily take you in front of a judge when you sign the citation it makes it very clear I'm happy to sign a citation to show up in court sir okay awesome I gotta have your information though no you don't how are you gonna how do I know I'm not driving okay so you want me to take your daughter's information I'll take her driver's license then if that's if that's how it's going to work you're violating my life all I'm trying to do is I'm shaking so bad you don't even have the right to ask her dude so now now give that to him I'm not giving it to you and it's not good she's giving you her license sir oh okay I was just I'm just curious now I'm doing what you asked me to do and that's a problem I didn't say I had a problem you're still talking oh Mouse Moving the officer takes Mr trufaya's daughter's driver's license so he can issue a warning to her for the alleged seat belt violation and Mr trufia argues that the officer does not have the authority to check her driver's license either under section 521.025 of the Texas Transportation code quote a person required to hold a license shall have in the person's possession while operating a motor vehicle the class of driver's license appropriate for the type of vehicle operated and display the license on the demand of a peace officer as the Supreme Court summarized in the 2015 case of Rodriguez versus United States quote Beyond determining whether to issue a traffic ticket an officer's Mission includes ordinary inquiries incident to the traffic stop typically such inquiries involve checking the driver's license determining whether there are outstanding warrants against the driver and inspecting the automobiles registration and proof of insurance courts have long held that these additional inquiries are constitutional during a valid traffic stop because quote these checks serve the same objective as enforcement of the traffic code ensuring that vehicles on the road are operated safely and responsibly given this precedent it seems likely that a court would conclude that the officer could constitutionally require Mr trufia's daughter to display her driver's license even though the traffic stop was initiated based on Mr trufia's alleged seat belt violation however it should be noted that courts have consistently held that it is constitutional for an officer to request that someone identify themselves whether they are lawfully detained or simply walking down the street Oklahoma where are you guys coming from we just came from Dallas from Dallas back to Oklahoma yes I'm sorry ma'am back to Oklahoma is there family in Dallas that you were visiting we had family friends okay you know I really appreciate you working with me that's all you've got to do so man what I'm going to do is I'm going to go back here and I'm gonna sit my vehicle and I'm gonna write you out a warning okay and I'm gonna specifically State on there that it was actually the passenger that was that that is would be receiving this warning but unfortunately he's not complying and then that you were very um polite and went ahead and applied and gave me the information so I'll be right back with you man thank you for any reason you'd like to call or if this gentleman would like to make a complaint there's the phone number right there you can contact there you are ma'am thank you I appreciate your cooperation and Kirsty ma'am okay you're free to go after issuing a warning to Mr trufia's daughter for Mr trufaya's alleged seat belt violation the officer allows the family to leave it is unknown whether Mr trafia filed a complaint or pursued any legal action following the interaction overall the officer gets a b-plus for threatening to arrest Mr trufia for refusing to identify himself without the legal authority to do so and wasting valuable law enforcement resources on a non-existent or already corrected seat belt violation this encounter demonstrates the broad authority to detain and question individuals bestowed upon officers by primary enforcement seat belt laws and the way courts have interpreted the fourth amendment's prohibition against so-called unreasonable seizures although it appears probable that Mr trafia was actually wearing a seat belt at the time the officer stopped the vehicle a Texas Court would likely uphold the constitutionality of the traffic stop based on the officer's testimony that it quote looked like Mr trafia was not wearing a seatbelt that being said what is re reasonable for constitutional purposes often does not equate with what is reasonable in the everyday sense of the word and in my opinion it was neither reasonable nor an effective use of police resources for the officer to continue to detain Mr trufia's family once he discovered that he was in fact wearing a seat belt at least by the time he approached the window of the vehicle Mr trufaya also gets a b-plus because although he demonstrated some confusion regarding the nuances of the Constitutional limitations on traffic stops and refused the officer's lawful order to exit the vehicle he confronted the officer about his irrational behavior and refused to identify himself when he was not legally required to do so I commend Mr trufia for his courage and although he may have refused a lawful order in the process he firmly defended his constitutional rights and did not waver even under threat of arrest although Mr trufaya is not an auditor he clearly has an interest in the Constitution and defending his rights against police overreach and I would encourage him to continue to learn more about the U.S legal system and what courts have said officers can and cannot do during a traffic stop let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to check out my second channel for even more police interaction content [Music] thank you