6 ms·

What doesn't add up about the video? She was argumentative from the very beginning, refused to follow an order to get out the vehicle (right or wrong, you have

What doesn't add up about the video? She was argumentative from the very beginning, refused to follow an order to get out the vehicle (right or wrong, you have to if stopped in a traffic violation in Texas), and then escalates the situation to the end with physical and verbal combative behavior. And the story is that because the shitty quality video long after the main event happens has a few frames messed-up - which more than likely originates from technical issues - that this proves that there is something being covered up.

valar_m 11y ago
Wrong. The video was clearly edited: http://bennorton.com/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sandra-bland-was-edited/ http://bennorton.com/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sand...
- rarrarrarr 11y ago
  Relink in case that goes down: https://medium.com/@BenjaminNorton/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sandra-bland-was-edited-57e04744839 https://medium.com/@BenjaminNorton/dashcam-video-of-violent-...
- Pinckney 11y ago
  I watched the video too. If someone edited the video, why did they choose to make their cuts at times where cars or people are in scene? They would have gone unnoticed had they occurred a few seconds earlier. Who would be so stupid?
  - valar_m 11y ago
    I suspect it's something akin to risking a tampering with evidence charge by hiding a body.
    - Pinckney 11y ago
      I'm not asking why they might want to tamper with evidence. The motive for doing so is obvious. I'm asking why, if they did decide to tamper with evidence, did they do such a bad job of it? If they were already editing the video, why didn't they make their edits at times where they wouldn't be obvious?
      - unclebucknasty 11y ago
        That's obvious right? Perhaps the frames that needed to be edited out weren't conveniently conducive to a seamless end product. And, editing out too much wasn't an option for obvious reasons. But, as another commenter stated, we can't know the answer until we know what the original video holds. Interestingly, if they then release the full video which shows nothing, then suspicions around the overall case will presumably be calmed. That would make me wonder if it was an intentional red herring to engender more trust and reduce suspicion around her eventual death. After all, why else release obviously edited video that would raise suspicion only to later quell it with unedited footage that was always available?
        DanBC 11y ago
        > Interestingly, if they then release the full video which shows nothing, then suspicion's around the overall case will presumably be calmed. Sadly their actions have created suspicion. Further releases of video will be doubted by a wide range of people, from calm but cautious scrutineers to rabid conspiracy theorists. Truth doesn't matter at that point.
        unclebucknasty 11y ago
        Absolutely. OTOH, the far weightier suspicion is around the eventual death of Ms. Bland. An effective PR strategy might be to do something relatively ancillary that heightens the overall degree of suspicion. You then unequivocally address the ancillary issue (i.e. by rleasing the full video), which has the effect of reducing suspicion overall, including on the far weightier issue. That is, people think "Hey, maybe these guys aren't so bad. Maybe we are just jumping the gun". Not saying this is happening. But, if the full video suddenly comes out and is "all-clear", then the police department will certainly receive that benefit, whether intentional or not.
  - orclev 11y ago
    We can't really say until/unless someone can find the unedited footage. Without knowing what's contained in the missing parts of the video it's all speculation. A number of people have speculated that the parts that got clipped are when the officer is conferring on the radio to try to fabricate a plausible series of events that would justify his arresting her since up until he gives her the order to step out of the car (presumably to arrest her) he has no actual justification for arresting her (cart before the horse). You can't be arrested solely for resisting arrest, so he had to come up with some sort of charge that he could claim that occurs prior to his asking her to get out of the car. In his arrest report apparently he claimed she kicked him, which in light of the video evidence is clearly BS, but whoever edited the video was probably worried that if too much of the video goes missing some very pointed questions would be asked. A small blip is more likely to be excused as a "technical glitch" particularly if the majority of the stop was captured.
  - FireBeyond 11y ago
    I use the Rising Sun hypothesis - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_Sun_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_Sun_(novel) - release a nearly hour long video that is for the very large part boring. Continuous audio so someone can zone out and not hear anything odd - it's a lot easier to hear abrupt audio changes with low concentration than to notice a video 'flicker'. In Rising Sun there's a slightly different polemic. A security video from a murder is edited before being given to the police (albeit more sophisticated in editing), and the detective takes offense to the assumption that it wouldn't be noticed, because of a (stereotype) Japanese attention to detail and an American indifference.
jayvanguard 11y ago
A few frames messed up? Did you read the article and watch the videos? That can't happen by accident.
iandanforth 11y ago
Please watch the third video on the page. Someone edited in a loop of footage that goes on for minutes. Not "a few frames."
- powertower 11y ago
  The video that happens 30 minutes after the interaction between the officer and the women is done and over with? Sure, its looped a few times. And the update is that they are re-uploading it.
fixxer 11y ago
So, an activist dies in Texas and the video is fubar in not one, but two separate situations and that does not impress the potential for foul play on you? Combine with the fact that she was pulled over for a completely minor infraction that two white, Republican cops in my family think is complete bullshit. Like I said, it warrants further investigation. Personally, I think it was a hit, but that is besides the point of my earlier comment.
gizmo 11y ago
The police officer didn't like that the woman was belligerent and wanted to assert his dominance. He ordered her to put out her cigarette and to get out of the car simply to show her who's boss. A clear abuse of authority. Sandra Bland -- as a citizen -- has no obligation to be polite and deferential. To suggest that her attitude somehow justifies abuse against her is despicable. The police offer escalated the situation at every opportunity, even though it's his job to deescalate, to serve and protect, and to keep the peace. When dealing with a suspicious suicide of course the public is going to demand whatever raw footage is available. Not a cropped and edited version. It doesn't matter that the edits are probably innocuous. Denying the public the raw footage by itself speaks of arrogance.
- powertower 11y ago
  > He ordered her to put out her cigarette and to get out of the car simply to show her who's boss Or maybe as he was in the traffic lane, and now that she was clearly irate and argumentative, he did not want to stand there waiting to be hit by a car... while trying to explain to her that he was just issuing her a warning with no fine. > Sandra Bland -- as a citizen -- has no obligation to be polite and deferential. Except she did have an obligation to comply with the order to get out of the car. > The police offer escalated the situation at every opportunity That's a projection of what you want to see. Once someone disobeys an order, they can arrest you... And when you refuse again, their job is to arrest you. Being nasty and combative might be your right, but it in no way helps you.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    > Or maybe as he was in the traffic lane, and now that she was clearly irate and argumentative, he did not want to stand there waiting to be hit by a car... while trying to explain to her that he was just issuing her a warning with no fine. If he had said "this is just a warning, there's no fine or penalty" (as he did with the first woman) the stop would hae been very much shorter. His own actions prolonged the length of time that he was standing in the road. His own needless power-tripping prolonged the stop.
    - 11y ago

valar_m 11y ago

Wrong. The video was clearly edited: http://bennorton.com/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sandra-bland-was-edited/ http://bennorton.com/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sand...

rarrarrarr 11y ago
Relink in case that goes down: https://medium.com/@BenjaminNorton/dashcam-video-of-violent-arrest-of-sandra-bland-was-edited-57e04744839 https://medium.com/@BenjaminNorton/dashcam-video-of-violent-...
Pinckney 11y ago
I watched the video too. If someone edited the video, why did they choose to make their cuts at times where cars or people are in scene? They would have gone unnoticed had they occurred a few seconds earlier. Who would be so stupid?
- valar_m 11y ago
  I suspect it's something akin to risking a tampering with evidence charge by hiding a body.
  - Pinckney 11y ago
    I'm not asking why they might want to tamper with evidence. The motive for doing so is obvious. I'm asking why, if they did decide to tamper with evidence, did they do such a bad job of it? If they were already editing the video, why didn't they make their edits at times where they wouldn't be obvious?
    - unclebucknasty 11y ago
      That's obvious right? Perhaps the frames that needed to be edited out weren't conveniently conducive to a seamless end product. And, editing out too much wasn't an option for obvious reasons. But, as another commenter stated, we can't know the answer until we know what the original video holds. Interestingly, if they then release the full video which shows nothing, then suspicions around the overall case will presumably be calmed. That would make me wonder if it was an intentional red herring to engender more trust and reduce suspicion around her eventual death. After all, why else release obviously edited video that would raise suspicion only to later quell it with unedited footage that was always available?
      - DanBC 11y ago
        > Interestingly, if they then release the full video which shows nothing, then suspicion's around the overall case will presumably be calmed. Sadly their actions have created suspicion. Further releases of video will be doubted by a wide range of people, from calm but cautious scrutineers to rabid conspiracy theorists. Truth doesn't matter at that point.
        unclebucknasty 11y ago
        Absolutely. OTOH, the far weightier suspicion is around the eventual death of Ms. Bland. An effective PR strategy might be to do something relatively ancillary that heightens the overall degree of suspicion. You then unequivocally address the ancillary issue (i.e. by rleasing the full video), which has the effect of reducing suspicion overall, including on the far weightier issue. That is, people think "Hey, maybe these guys aren't so bad. Maybe we are just jumping the gun". Not saying this is happening. But, if the full video suddenly comes out and is "all-clear", then the police department will certainly receive that benefit, whether intentional or not.
- orclev 11y ago
  We can't really say until/unless someone can find the unedited footage. Without knowing what's contained in the missing parts of the video it's all speculation. A number of people have speculated that the parts that got clipped are when the officer is conferring on the radio to try to fabricate a plausible series of events that would justify his arresting her since up until he gives her the order to step out of the car (presumably to arrest her) he has no actual justification for arresting her (cart before the horse). You can't be arrested solely for resisting arrest, so he had to come up with some sort of charge that he could claim that occurs prior to his asking her to get out of the car. In his arrest report apparently he claimed she kicked him, which in light of the video evidence is clearly BS, but whoever edited the video was probably worried that if too much of the video goes missing some very pointed questions would be asked. A small blip is more likely to be excused as a "technical glitch" particularly if the majority of the stop was captured.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  I use the Rising Sun hypothesis - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_Sun_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_Sun_(novel) - release a nearly hour long video that is for the very large part boring. Continuous audio so someone can zone out and not hear anything odd - it's a lot easier to hear abrupt audio changes with low concentration than to notice a video 'flicker'. In Rising Sun there's a slightly different polemic. A security video from a murder is edited before being given to the police (albeit more sophisticated in editing), and the detective takes offense to the assumption that it wouldn't be noticed, because of a (stereotype) Japanese attention to detail and an American indifference.

jayvanguard 11y ago

A few frames messed up? Did you read the article and watch the videos? That can't happen by accident.

iandanforth 11y ago

Please watch the third video on the page. Someone edited in a loop of footage that goes on for minutes. Not "a few frames."

powertower 11y ago
The video that happens 30 minutes after the interaction between the officer and the women is done and over with? Sure, its looped a few times. And the update is that they are re-uploading it.

fixxer 11y ago

So, an activist dies in Texas and the video is fubar in not one, but two separate situations and that does not impress the potential for foul play on you? Combine with the fact that she was pulled over for a completely minor infraction that two white, Republican cops in my family think is complete bullshit. Like I said, it warrants further investigation. Personally, I think it was a hit, but that is besides the point of my earlier comment.

gizmo 11y ago

The police officer didn't like that the woman was belligerent and wanted to assert his dominance. He ordered her to put out her cigarette and to get out of the car simply to show her who's boss. A clear abuse of authority. Sandra Bland -- as a citizen -- has no obligation to be polite and deferential. To suggest that her attitude somehow justifies abuse against her is despicable. The police offer escalated the situation at every opportunity, even though it's his job to deescalate, to serve and protect, and to keep the peace. When dealing with a suspicious suicide of course the public is going to demand whatever raw footage is available. Not a cropped and edited version. It doesn't matter that the edits are probably innocuous. Denying the public the raw footage by itself speaks of arrogance.

powertower 11y ago
> He ordered her to put out her cigarette and to get out of the car simply to show her who's boss Or maybe as he was in the traffic lane, and now that she was clearly irate and argumentative, he did not want to stand there waiting to be hit by a car... while trying to explain to her that he was just issuing her a warning with no fine. > Sandra Bland -- as a citizen -- has no obligation to be polite and deferential. Except she did have an obligation to comply with the order to get out of the car. > The police offer escalated the situation at every opportunity That's a projection of what you want to see. Once someone disobeys an order, they can arrest you... And when you refuse again, their job is to arrest you. Being nasty and combative might be your right, but it in no way helps you.
- DanBC 11y ago
  > Or maybe as he was in the traffic lane, and now that she was clearly irate and argumentative, he did not want to stand there waiting to be hit by a car... while trying to explain to her that he was just issuing her a warning with no fine. If he had said "this is just a warning, there's no fine or penalty" (as he did with the first woman) the stop would hae been very much shorter. His own actions prolonged the length of time that he was standing in the road. His own needless power-tripping prolonged the stop.
  - 11y ago