Every time memory fades on why so many find the Florida Highway Patrol distasteful, a fresh reminder erupts.
Thursday, subpoenaed to traffic court as a witness to a wreck, I walked in on a hearing presided over by Bob Pell.
Traffic court is generally mundane, this hearing was not.
The undisputed facts as I heard presented from the trooper and the defendant were these:
The trooper was working one of those beloved vehicle inspection checkpoints at a nice choked-up place on County 2300 near the dam at Deer Point Lake.
The woman was driving along minding her own business to take her young child to some sort of sporting event or function. The trooper saw the car and decided, in his experienced opinion, that the window tint on the passenger side window was too dark.
He approached the car and after receiving the woman’s papers (driver’s license and registration), told her to roll up her driver’s window so he could measure her window tint. The woman declined, believing it an invasion of her rights.
The trooper again asked her to roll up her driver’s window and she again declined.
At this point I’m thinking, “I bet that smart ol’ trooper went around to the passenger’s side window, measured the tint there, and wrote his ticket and she’s going to complain about that!”
No, on the side of the road with a mom and child - the wife and child of a police officer we would soon learn - he threatened to arrest her if she didn’t by God roll up the window he wanted to check.
That, in a nutshell, is the problem with the Florida Highway Patrol. It’s the attitude. The ticketed woman saw it with the arrest threat, hence her desire to have a hearing. The hearing officer saw it, as evidenced when he told the trooper he really ought to find a kinder, softer way to go about his business. I saw it as the trooper argued that he was within his rights to do it the way he did it.
Pell, not as easily sold, called it a good opportunity to research an interesting legal question: Did the trooper violate the woman’s Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination when he threatened her with arrest if she didn’t roll up her window?
At the end of the day, this is what we had: The FHP managed to alienate a woman who until the moment of that encounter was heavily inclined to support law enforcement. A hearing officer wondered if this might be some interesting legal ground to investigate. A witness wondered why the trooper was so adamant that because what he did was probably legal, it was therefore right, and why he didn’t just measure the window he had access to, which would’ve made the entire case moot.
And the trooper seemed to wonder why anyone was questioning what he did, as opposed to whether there was a better way to do it.