Having air fresheners in your car and not answering a cops "basic questions" is suspicious

"On March 9, 2011, Kingsville Police Department Officer Mike Tamez was patrolling Highway 77 southbound when he detected a Chevy Tahoe speeding. Tamez pulled alongside the Tahoe and saw three people—two adults and a child. He also noticed air fresheners hanging throughout the car, several rosaries on the rearview mirror, and four bumper stickers showing support for D.A.R.E. and law enforcement. Tamez turned on his patrol lights and pulled over the Tahoe for speeding two miles over the limit."

imge credit: Amazon

The judges appear to be aggravated they have to decide on another Fourth Amendment case:

"This is yet another case. We must decide whether reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justified the defendant’s continued detention after the purpose of the initial traffic stop ended."

Officer Tamez ordered Nehmi Pena-Gonzalez, the driver, to step out of the vehicle after noticing her key chain had a St. Jude medal. Remember this is all because of air fresheners, bumper stickers a religious keychain and rosaries!

FYI, It’s now legal for police to pull you over for an air freshener in Wisconsin.

She told the officer in Spanish that she was driving home to the city of Mission with her husband and daughter. Officer Tamez noted that this was an "inconsistent" answer, since her insurance card said she lived in Palmview, which is a suburb of Mission. She was also unclear about whether she spent one day or two in Houston.

Numerous attorneys have told motorists to never answer ANY questions at a traffic stop, give them your license and registration, remain SILENT and request an attorney:

Click here & here to see two more great videos about never talking to police.

To reassure the driver and passenger the cop lies and says he'll let them go with a warning if they answer a few questions and let him search the vehicle!

Officer Tamez said he would let her go with a warning, but then he decided to question her husband, Ruben Pena-Gonzalez, who was a passenger and agreed to let officer Tamez search their vehicle.

Peña-Gonzalez moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that reasonable suspicion did not exist to extend the stop after Officer Tamez decided to issue a warning to Mrs. Peña. The district court denied that motion after an evidentiary hearing, but noted that it was a “close call.” The court decided that the air fresheners provided "reasonable suspicion" that the family was involved in crime.

Do we need anymore more proof our justice system sides with the government and completely IGNORES our Bill of Rights? If a cop can pull you over for going 2 miles over the speed limit as a pretext. What's to stop them from detaining anyone that the government declares 'suspicious' due to anti-government Tweets or social media comments?

When a cop pulls over a motorist our government has already given the cop your personal "Risk Assessment".

"The Automated Targeting System (ATS) compares traveler, cargo, and conveyance information against law enforcement, intelligence, and other enforcement data using risk-based targeting scenarios and assessments." 

"Each of these sub-systems or modules supports the CBP officer in determining whether or not a particular individual or cargo is higher risk than other individuals or cargo. The final module looks across the different areas to find common concerns and risks. Each sub-system uses slightly different data to conduct its risk assessment."

Police state America knows your address, friends etc., and assigns you a threat rating! Is this the Free America you want?

When a cop calls your registration into dispatch the police department checks their Real Time Crime Center (RTCC) database and gives the officer your color-coded "Threat Rating"

"The database goes through all public information for the call’s location — from arrest records to pizza deliveries — and gives the address a rating. Green means minimal threat, yellow a possible threat and red a major threat."

"The RTCC system shows officers three pieces of data: the threat level, the criminal history of anyone living at the home and a list of known friends and family members. This list sometimes includes possible phone numbers and addresses of these associates."

Back to the Appeals Court ruling:

Peña-Gonzalez moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that reasonable suspicion did not exist to extend the stop after Officer Tamez decided to issue a warning to Mrs. Peña. The district court denied that motion after an evidentiary hearing, but noted that it was a “close call.”

"We do have concerns that classifying pro-law enforcement and anti-drug stickers or certain religious imagery as indicators of criminal activity risks putting drivers in a classic 'heads I win, tails you lose' position," the appellate panel wrote in its per curiam decision. "But we need not decide whether these items alone, or in combination with one another, amount to reasonable suspicion because we find the more suspicious evidence to be the array of air fresheners and inconsistencies in the driver's responses to the officer's basic questions. We have long recognized that the presence of air fresheners, let alone four of them placed throughout an SUV, suggests a desire to mask the odor of contraband."

This ruling says if a cop asks you "BASIC QUESTIONS" and finds your answers to be suspicious that's grounds for your car to be searched! If this isn't the very definition of a POLICE STATE then I don't know what is?

Our nations prosecutors want more jails and are against sentencing reform!

“The federal criminal justice system is not broken,” Steve Cook, the association's president, said at a lightly attended event in the nation's capital. “What a huge mistake it would be,” he said, to change sentencing laws.

Rather than focus on reducing sentences, Cook said, the government should consider building more prison facilities. “Do I think it would be a good investment to build more [prisons]? Yeah, no question about it!” Cook said.

Government statistics compiled by Families Against Mandatory Minimums show only 142 of 20,757 drug cases in fiscal year 2014 – less than 1% – featured violence or threats of violence from drug offenders. The group also says only 16% of federal drug convictions that year involved a weapon.

So why would prosecutors want more jails? It's job security for them, judges, clerks, cops the entire corrupt justice system!

FYI, the U.S. has the highest number of prisoners in the world, close to 2 million! What's wrong with America?