Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, August 19, 2014

After leaving a Justice for Michael Brown march on Sunday, Joshua Hampton of Ferguson, Missouri, was sitting in his car smoking in his grandmother's driveway at 2 a.m. with two of his friends when they were surrounded and arrested by police for breaking the midnight curfew. An officer by his window had a gun pointed at his chest, Hampton said. "They kept telling me to get out of the car, but I didn't want to make any kind of movement," Hampton told the Washington Post. "I just kept asking, 'Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt's driveway?'"

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

rcade

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I can't wait to read the police report.

If he was in his grandma's driveway.....

Do curfews require people to be in a residence or just on a residential property?

#1 | Posted by Tor at 2014-08-19 08:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm really tired of this:

Hampton was sitting in his own car, smoking a cigarette in his aunt's driveway. He thought he was obeying the law.

But the truck stopped and suddenly, Hampton says, his car was surrounded by police. "Put your [expletive] hands up!" he says they told him. "They kept telling me to get out of the car, but I didn't want to make any kind of movement," Hampton, 30, told The Post in a phone interview Sunday.

The officer by his window had a gun pointed at his chest, says Hampton, who provided a copy of his arrest report to the Washington Post. He wanted to make sure the police could see his hands at all times, and he was afraid to reach down for the door lock. Finally, the officer reached in through the open window and opened the door himself.


There is simply no need for this type of encounter to start the way it did. 30 seconds worth of observation would have shown the officers what was going on. I just don't see where the police should perceive this as a threat. They would be justified in arresting these people because they were violating the letter of the curfew, but does anyone actually think things like this happen to people other than those in poorer communities?

#2 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-19 09:04 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1


Obviously this thug had no respect for the law.

Should have been executed on the spot.

#3 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-19 09:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obviously this thug had no respect for the law.

Should have been executed on the spot.

You channeling 101 Donner, ... or drinking 151? ;^)

#4 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-19 09:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oh thanks Tony! I don't know what came over me!

I am sure it was a Demonic Possession.

#5 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-19 09:21 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

He shouldn't have been arrested. They should've ran his ID and told him to move to the house. It's a shame they had to be prisoners in their own house, but that's how curfew works. A 30 year old man should've been smarter that that.

#6 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2014-08-19 09:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

A 30 year old man should've been smarter that that.

He was smart enough not to move so that the officers couldn't accuse him of some 'threatening' motion which might've ended his life on the spot.

And MOST people don't understand curfew laws beyond those where the police catch teenagers and drop them off at their parents with a stern warning. I didn't know it meant that standing outside on my own property (or sitting in my car and smoking) exposed me to immediate arrest because of a street curfew and the vast majority of Americans don't know this either.

#7 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-19 09:39 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

This is --------. On private property, 30 years old.

#8 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-19 10:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is --------. On private property, 30 years old.

Amen, brother!

#9 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-08-19 10:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

He has plenty grounds for draining the local police funds with a lawsuit. If local taxes have to increase to cover the stupidity of the police then things may change.

Where are the Libertarian / Tea Party folks on this one? Even us Liberals think it is outrageous.

#10 | Posted by TenMile at 2014-08-19 10:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do curfews require people to be in a residence or just on a residential property?

That would depend on the wording of the curfew. Too bad the journalist failed to provide that vital bit of information.

Once again, never rely on the media to accurately report on legal matters.

#11 | Posted by et_al at 2014-08-19 11:08 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Serious problem when rules meant to stop looting turn into this.

#12 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-19 11:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

#11 | POSTED BY ET_AL AT 2014-08-19 11:08 PM | FLAG:

Bow down and respect your master.

#13 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-20 12:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

Where are the Libertarian / Tea Party folks on this one?

In Nevada with the patriots, keeping an eye (and scope)on those evil big gummint types. You know, the ones that bother white folks.

#14 | Posted by northguy3 at 2014-08-20 12:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

#13

What led to that sputum?

#15 | Posted by et_al at 2014-08-20 12:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

That would depend on the wording of the curfew.

I find it absurd that this can even be said.

If you're on your own property I can't see how they can force you to be inside specifically.

In any case, it's just the 1,439,098,328th example of these shriveled ball wannabes playing out their GI Joe fantasies. What good is it getting all dressed up and running the 1 mpg APC around town if you don't get to at least curse someone out for nothing and point your gun at them. I'll bet they sniggered like little girls and gave high fives and ass pats over how awesome and bad ass they were.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2014-08-20 02:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

I find it absurd that this can even be said.

That's nice. I provided a ramp for your rant.

The answer to the question stands. Absurd it is to absurdity.

#17 | Posted by et_al at 2014-08-20 03:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's nice. I provided a ramp for your rant.

Don't flatter yourself.

I was just too lazy to break it up into two posts.

The answer to the question stands.

Never claimed it didn't.

I'm just sometimes still shocked (naive, I know) at the extent the law can control a non-incarcerated person's life, even for brief periods of time.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2014-08-20 03:24 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

If the curfew order requires you to be inside your home, how do the homeless comply...

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 04:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

If the curfew order requires you to be inside your home, how do the homeless comply...

Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 04:16 AM | Reply

Picnic table tent living.

#20 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-20 04:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

And MOST people don't understand curfew laws beyond those where the police catch teenagers and drop them off at their parents with a stern warning. I didn't know it meant that standing outside on my own property (or sitting in my car and smoking) exposed me to immediate arrest because of a street curfew and the vast majority of Americans don't know this either.

I agree, I would have thought nothing of sitting in my car on my property smoking during a curfew. Maybe if it was published in the news paper on the town website and on the radio with specifics I might have caught that being illegal and changed my behavior but I might not have as well, just not the kind of thing that would cross my mind.

Of course in Ferguson I would have been fine, when the vehicle lights reflected off my pasty self I am sure the cops would have driven on.

#21 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-08-20 07:19 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

When we first heard seven were arrested for breaking curfew that night, we weren't told three of them were sitting in a car parked at the driver's own home. The police in Ferguson don't like to tell the whole story, do they?

#22 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-20 09:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

Where are the Libertarian / Tea Party folks on this one? Even us Liberals think it is outrageous.

#10 | Posted by TenMile

Could it be that Racism runs deep for most to the right of center and they think this is justified since it isn't them and their 'kind'?

#23 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2014-08-20 09:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

Could it be that Racism runs deep for most to the right of center and they think this is justified since it isn't them and their 'kind'?

It takes an awfully bigoted person to label most of 40% of this country (polling shows that 40% in this country self-identify as conservative) as deeply racist.

#24 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-08-20 09:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

It actually seems quite impossible to find out what the rules of the Ferguson curfew were. I found the executive order calling in the national guard online. But the order pertaining to the curfew is not something that seems to be available. The official websit of Ferguson is down.

I didn't find an article saying the ACLU is saying the curfew was illegal because it failed to meet certain criteria for suspending constituational rights. So apparently the ACLU was able to get a copy at some point.

Not sure how a regular person was expected to know what was legal and what was not.

But, IMO, cops shouldn't be allowed to point a gun at anyone unless they have a real reason.

#25 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 10:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

It takes an awfully bigoted person to label most of 40% of this country (polling shows that 40% in this country self-identify as conservative) as deeply racist.
#24 | Posted by JeffJ

How about the 12% of blacks happy on the Democrat plantation, are they racist? Then we'd only need 28% of whites to fill out the ranks. This of course is overlooking Hispanics and Asians.

40% might be high. But it doesn't matter. The results of systemic racism are all around us. But if it's more important to you to question the magnitude of the problem by quibbling about the number of individuals who harbor racist sentiments -- regardless of their capacity to perpetuate or promulgate racist policies -- you aren't concerned about the impacts of racism in society.

In your zeal to count the number of trees you've overlooked the forest.

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

It actually seems quite impossible to find out what the rules of the Ferguson curfew were.
#25 | Posted by Sully

I noticed that too. I went looking for it last night and couldn't find anything beyond what you did. Seems like something so simple as a curfew order, at least the local media would reprint it verbatim. Seems like this curfew order was more of a "free fire of less than lethal weapons between midnight and 5AM" order.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ferguson is trying to portray this event as the city being under siege when it is actually the People who are under siege.

Optics are all that matter to race baiters (or Israeli's).

#28 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2014-08-20 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

was anyone caught sitting on their porch? standing in the front yard with a leashed dog? anyone checking their mailbox after working the swing shift?

I can't imagine an entire town locked down and forced indoors or face arrest.... just crazy

#29 | Posted by DeadSpin at 2014-08-20 04:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Was he smoking in his grandmothers driveway or in his aunts driveway? Either way, its time for that 30 year old to cut the apron strings.

2am? He must have had off from his job. His friends too. I'll bet those smokes came from the looted quickie mart...

#30 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-20 05:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

When we first heard seven were arrested for breaking curfew that night, we weren't told three of them were sitting in a car parked at the driver's own home. The police in Ferguson don't like to tell the whole story, do they?
Rcade

Oh, let me help clear something up...it wasn't his own home, it was his aunt grandma's.

#31 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-20 05:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Is it his grandmother's driveway or his aunt's? If he lvies somewhere else, why are they calling this his "home"?

#32 | Posted by soheifox at 2014-08-20 05:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

When we first heard seven were arrested for breaking curfew that night, we weren't told three of them were sitting in a car parked at the driver's own home. The police in Ferguson don't like to tell the whole story, do they?

#22 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2014-08-20 09:29 AM | REPLY | FLAG

That seems unlikely. Who the hell sits in their driveway, in the car, when the house and porch are right there? One I believe. Three? It seems like they're making crap up and you're eager to believe it.

#33 | Posted by soheifox at 2014-08-20 05:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

I do find it interesting that it doesn't say what they were smoking in the car.

#34 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-08-20 10:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

I do find it interesting that it doesn't say what they were smoking in the car.
#34 | Posted by TaoWarrior

Stolen cigars no doubt.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 02:04 AM | Reply | Flag:

Is it his grandmother's driveway or his aunt's? If he lvies somewhere else, why are they calling this his "home"?

#32 | Posted by soheifox at 2014-08-20 05:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was private property and he had permission to be there. What is the sense of splitting hairs over unimportant distinctions?

#36 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-21 09:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

I do find it interesting that it doesn't say what they were smoking in the car.

It was around 2 a.m. Sunday, two hours after the new curfew mandated for Ferguson, Mo., but Hampton was sitting in his own car, smoking a cigarette in his aunt's driveway. He thought he was obeying the law.

This is a repost from #2 and the first paragraph of the article.

#37 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-08-21 10:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

He was smart enough not to move so that the officers couldn't accuse him of some 'threatening' motion which might've ended his life on the spot.

I am sure the police were disappointed in that.

#38 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-21 02:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who the hell sits in their driveway, in the car, when the house and porch are right there? ... It seems like they're making crap up and you're eager to believe it.

It seems like you didn't read the story before commenting: "The three of them had gone to a Justice for Mike Brown march earlier that evening and had returned to Hampton's aunt's house, where they decided to take a cigarette break. Hampton ... says they discussed just standing in the yard but worried it might look as if they were loitering passersby. So the trio went to his car to smoke, figuring that a private car on a private lawn would not fall under the curfew."

#39 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-21 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who the hell sits in their driveway, in the car, when the house and porch are right there?

People not allowed to smoke in the house or porch.

#40 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 03:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort