Sunday, September 24, 2023

The “Black” Woman’s Mouth and Sandra Bland.

July 24, 2015 by  
Filed under News, Opinion, Relationships, Sista Talk, Weekly Columns

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

( First of all, let me say the recent death of Sandra Bland in Texas was a tragedy that did not need to happen and my prayers are with her family. That being said, as a former detective, I have viewed the video confrontation between Bland and the Texas State Trooper. Here are the facts. Bland was irate and confrontational with the State Trooper when he was only about to give her a warning for failure to put on her signal before a lane change. Bland was non-compliant, even though she was asked to comply several times. This time, unfortunately, an African American woman had too much mouth with the wrong person and at the wrong time. I probably would have pepper sprayed her when she failed to comply with the instructions or done just as the State Trooper did. This time we cannot blame the Texas State Trooper. The incident was caught on video and can be seen at the link below:   

Now more information has come out so let me put the pieces together based on my experience. First of all, I have seen the 52 minute unaltered video and the other video made by an African American young man which shows what did not appear on the trooper’s dashcam. Sandra Bland continued to run her mouth with profane, repulsive language even after the female officer arrived. Then she continued to be obscene as she was placed in the female officer’s patrol car. Bland may not have known that each use of profane or obscene language was grounds for which she could be arrested. Below is the law in Texas. It may be harsh, but it’s the law. And while Bland thought she knew her rights, she didn’t. Violation of the code below is a Class C misdemeanor, therefore in Texas it is a crime.




Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:

(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

Here is the law in Texas for resisting arrest. Notice below in section (a) that Texas law does in fact allow the officer to arrest or search a person. Saying you know your rights does not stop the officer if he/she has found probable cause (including smelling an unlawful substance).If the officer finds “probable cause”, he/she does not sandra_bland-2015need a warrant in order to take action. Sandra Bland was told to get out of her car over 7 times. She did not comply, she fought with the officer and therefore she resisted under Texas law. We may not think it is fair, but it is the law in Texas. And as shown in section B below, in Texas, the citizen cannot resist even if the search or arrest is unlawful. Wow. See the Texas code below.

TEX PE. CODE ANN. § 38.03 : Texas Statutes – Section 38.03: RESISTING ARREST, SEARCH, OR TRANSPORTATION                  

Note: underlined sections are by me

(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer’s presence and at his direction from effecting an arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using force against the peace officer or another.(b) It is no defense to prosecution under this section that the arrest or search was unlawful.(c) Except as provided in Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.(d) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the actor uses a deadly weapon to resist the arrest or search. – See more at:

What about the cigarette and can you smoke in your car? It goes deeper than that. The toxicology report shows Sandra Bland had marijuana in her system. And if it was street weed, it was likely laced with rat poison (arsenic), embalming fluid and a number of other lethal ingredients. That might account for the odd behavior from Bland which was referenced by the trooper when he went to the passenger side window and again when he went to the driver side window. If she had just smoked marijuana, that would explain why she did want to put out her cigarette. She would have been masking the scent of the marijuana. I have a hunch that the trooper got a whiff of the marijuana smell and thus asked her politely to put out her cigarette. If he smelled the masked marijuana, he would not have told her what he was doing or why.

Texas laws on marijuana are very tough. Sandra Bland had only been in town a day and she was about to start a new job a few days later. Because of Texas law, she could not afford to be arrested for marijuana. Look at the law below regarding Texas laws on marijuana. Maybe, just may, she knew that. If so, it would certainly account for her behavior which the trooper asked about twice. Even less than 2 ounces in Texas can carry a maximum penalty of 180 days in jail and a $2,000 fine.

Code Section Health & Safety §481.032, et seq. Possession Under 2 oz.: Class B misdemeanor; 2-4 oz.: Class A misdemeanor; 4 oz. to 5 lbs.: State jail felony; 5-50 lbs.: 3rd degree felony; 50-2000 lbs.: 2nd degree felony; Over 2000 lbs.: Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice institution for life or 5-99 yrs. and $50,000

Unfortunately Sandra Bland could have been charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and assault on a law enforcement officer. Then, when the female officer arrived and Bland continued to be irate, the female officer could have piled on more charges just to make things ugly. The tape recorded by the bystander could have been used as evidence by a prosecutor. I do not think Sandra Bland knew all of that. If she was innocent, the case would not have been tried on the street that day, but rather in court. Meanwhile she would have set in jail. I say again, do not say you know your rights if you do not actually know them.

I use this tragedy to illustrate a point about the mouth of most African American women. Condescending, confrontational, ambivalent, vile, negative and full of animosity are words that come to mind to describe the mouth of many of our women (not all of them). Our people seem not to want to address this issue. Instead too many would rather make excuses for “why her mouth has to be that way”. But when I hear the vile and repulsive mouth of a sister who cannot control her words, I hear the same tone as the slave master putting down the African American man all the while making excuses as he does it. A vile, negative, profane and condescending mouth does nobody any good and its illegal.

Ladies we African American men are tired of a mouth that tears down instead of building up. Correction is fine but it is how you do it and the words you use that make all the difference. Ladies do you want to be heard or just to tear down the man you say you care about? Guys if you are allowing a woman to speak to you in the wrong way, stop it and get a spine. And guys, speak to her with respect, honoring her and listening to her thoughts and opinions. So ladies, as a family and relationship counselor, I must say verbal and emotional abuse are ABUSE just like physical abuse. In fact, words cut deep and leave a lasting negative impact that is not soon forgotten. The African American man has been put down enough. Correct us, yes, but by building us up – not tearing us down. And ladies, in some states like Georgia, verbal abuse is literally against the law (reference Oprobrious Language: Fighting Words).

Before some of you say that I am scarred, I need to let you know that I am married to a sister who can control her mouth. She is a strong woman who expresses her opinion on anything and I want to hear it on everything. I value her opinion, especially when she disagrees with me. She knows to speak to me the way she would like to be spoken to and so do I. Yes she may get irritable or frustrated like any woman (or man) does, but she honors me, she respects me and she reflects that in how she communicates with me. I thank God for her because I know I am blessed.

Years ago Shahrazad Ali wrote a book entitled The Blackman’s Guide to Understanding The Black woman wherein she expressed that the “black” woman was less supportive of the “black” man than any other race or group on the planet. Instead of being honest about such a claim and asking why, a great many African American women simply dismissed her claim. I agree with her generally but of course that does not describe all “black” women. Yet it does describe far too many of our women. There is no excuses for an abusive mouth. Ladies, if you say it’s the man’s fault, didn’t you choose that man? And keep in mind that I am even harder on men because we are the leaders who must set the example. Read my other articles on this site such as What’s Wrong With The African American Man and you will see that my perspective is both objective and balanced. And ladies, before you point the finger at the man, know that doing so will not absolve you of accountability for your mouth.

Guys if you are with a verbally or emotionally abusive woman, draw a line in the sand. Refuse to be treated that way or spoken to in that manner. People only do to us what we allow to be done to us. And you cannot “act the fool” with her. If you do, there are two fools and no effective communication will ever come forth to accomplish anything. Guys be the example and don’t make things worse by acting the same way. Sit down and tell her what you will not accept. Go to a counselor or mediator. Attempt to identify the source of the anger that fuels her vicious mouth. Sometimes it is bi-polar disorder, hormone imbalance or past relationships.

Ladies, find an outlet, a way to vent your anger or frustration without taking it out on the man you say you care about. No more excuses. What are you teaching your children when you use words like weapons? And sometimes the best policy is to say something nice(or at least in the right way) or not to say anything at all. I do not know if Sandra Bland committed suicide, but I can say that her irrational and unnecessary confrontational mouth made matters a whole lot worse in a traffic stop where someone was not going to accept her behavior. We all can, should and must learn from that.

If the police ask you to do something, even if you feel they are wrong, just do your best to comply and handle it legally later. You will not likely be able to overcome the officer (even if he/she is wrong). And you may incur more charges or injury by fighting or resisting (even if the officer is wrong). When stopped by an officer (a good or bad one), your objective MUST always be to walk out of the encounter with little or no charges and with no injuries. Never forget that, regardless of your feelings, ego or hormones, and it will guide your actions in the encounter.

Staff Writer; Marque-Anthony 



122 Responses to “The “Black” Woman’s Mouth and Sandra Bland.”
  1. Marque Anthony says:

    To Victoria,

    I gave a dozen facts or more yet you pick one element and try to discredit all the laws I cited, the evidence and the facts. Even if I gave you the point about marijuana, which I don’t, that does not change anything, You must be a marijuana smoker. I suggest you read my article on the truth about marijuana because you are being deceived and there is a ton of proof about marijuana dangers.

    Plus who smokes marijuana in a racist jail with a racist sheriff? Who smokes marijuana when she is expecting to get out and start a job at a University only a short time later? A school that has a drug policy? Wake up

  2. Marque Anthony says:

    To Timara,

    I said nothing in my writings that states Sandra should have been killed. The fact is the county autopsy showed it was suicide. And even though the family had an independent autopsy done, the findings have not yet been released. Curious because it was completed a while ago. If the independent autopsy had found proof of murder, you and I know Sandra’s family would be all over the news by now.

    Apparently you did not read my article closely. Sandra was on Keppra, a drug the FDA said causes thought of suicide. She admitted on her Facebook page that she suffered from PTSD and depression. PTSD is thee cause of dozens of suicides every week.

    ARE YOU LSTENING TO FACTS OR JUST FOLLOWING THE CROWD? Sandra Bland’s sister, on national TV, verified Sandra had just had a miscarriage. Sandra, in the jail interview, stated that was why she tried to commit suicide within the last year using pills.

    Unfortunately no proof of murder has been presented.
    And if you read closer, you will see I said the jail should be held accountable and gave several reasons why.

    Stop agreeing with the emotional, uninformed crowd and look at the facts.

  3. Marque Anthony says:

    To Adrienne,
    Do use realize in several states profane language is a crime for which you can be arrested? Don’t make excuses for someone acting ignorant. That is simple denial. If you don’t believe me, try that with the wrong officer on the wrong day – black or white, male or female – and see what happens.

    Profane language, hate speech, threats etc are not covered by the First Amendment. And you do not know what the law is regarding “abuse of power” in Texas obviously. As for the Senator again, guess what? Senators do not interpret laws, the court does. And guess where Sandra Bland was headed? To court in front of a judge – not in front of a Senator. These are the facts.

  4. Marque Anthony says:

    To Adrienne,

    If you did not eve have thee attention span to read the entire article, you don’t even have the entire context of my assertions. This means you are making a comment with limited and partial knowledge. Sandra Bland also had partial knowledge. She thought she knew her rights but she did not. Look at the Texas laws cited above – fact, like it or not.

    Read closely and you will see that I make it clear accountability is for everybody. But we are responsible for what our mouths and attitudes escalate. A Texas Senator is not a police officer on the street and you seem to want to ignore what laws she broke. READ THE LAWS CITED IN THE ARTICLE.

    You, like many others, have a slanted and biased perspective because you do not understand the law. I do not agree with many laws but they are in place. Wisdom says if you are just getting a warning, the primary concern should be survival, not your right to smoke. Give me a break.

  5. Marque Anthony says:

    To Victoria,
    Read my article more closely. I acknowledge he could have let her go but she also could have put the cigarette out and kept her mouth closed. There are two sides to every coin, not just one. And if you are fair and balanced, you must acknowledge that BOTH people could have handled the matter better than they did.

    My point is still the same. She picked a fight with the wrong person and it was his lawful authority that she challenged. The 1997 Supreme court decision says he had the authority to get her out of the car. Facts are facts, like them or not.

    Would I have let her go? Maybe. But I have spoken to several black female officers who would not have. Sandra Bland did not use wisdom and challenged the wrong person at the wrong time.

  6. Marque Anthony says:

    To Bobbi,

    The invitation to disrespect us was not extended by me. It was extended by the strip clubs, the liquor stores in our communities, the drug dealers who sell our children poison, the weed addicts who defend what they do, the parents who won’t participate at their child’s schools, the black on black crime (over 90% of crimes committed against blacks are by blacks).

    I brought to the surface an issue we need to address with honesty, not denial. Our people know this is true and being offended does not change the facts. You should read my other articles that life our people up before you think you know my intent. The right people responded to this article because they heard and recognized the truth. Denial accomplished nothing

  7. Adrienne says:

    Although I didn’t read your entire article I have to disagree on several things. It’ seems like you’re blaming Sandra Bland only for the outcome and justifying the cops actions, even claiming you would have done the same thing as this officer and even pepper sprayed if her she didn’t do what you wanted when you told her to. Then you would have been just as guilty as this cop in abusing your power and deserved the same fate as the cop which was being taken of the street and put on administrative duty. Also I would like to mention a few known facts. First, Officer Brian Encinia was the one who make and U turn and followed her and she simply changed lanes without turning on her signal to get out of his way all before he pulled her over. Although Ms. Bland was irritated which she admitted to when asked but she was quite cooperative insisting the officer give her the warning already. He requested she put out her cigarette, she refused since she was sitting in her car. From what I’ve learned it is legal to smoke in a cigarette in your own car.

    That’s when he told to get out of her car which she refused since she didn’t feel he had probable cause and he was the one that became irate and abusive, telling her suddenly she was under arrest and refusing to answer her repeated questions on why she was being arrested, attempting to yank out of the car through the car window and threatening to use a taser on her. When she was out of camera shot we don’t know what is going on and have only his say that she kicked him, all we know he could’ve been lying or omitting a few things. Maybe she kicked him in self defense for all we know. Bottom line he had no grounds to arrest her in the first place nor had any business asking her to get out of her car since he was already writing the warning. If he just stuck to writing her the ticket and ignoring her attitude this could have all been avoided. I also like to add that even the director of the Texas Department of Safety Steven McCraw criticized his actions of violating policy of courtesy and safety procedures.

    Texas Senator Royce West also declared that Ms. Bland should never have been arrested. Many different people who appeared on the news both black and white who had watched the video criticized Officer Encinia’s behavior accusing him of escalating the matter by using his authority to engage Ms. Bland, enforce some control simply because she dared challenge him. I’ve even read comments from fellow police officers who felt he should have just kept to writing the ticket and left it at that. Since this incident thousands of people want the DA to arrest Officer Encinia including 40,000 who signed an online petition. As for the comments about black women being mouthy I don’t know why you chose to single black women out.

    I’ve seen plenty of mouthy and verbally abusive people shown on video footage being black males and females and people of different races. Some are even physically abusive. I don’t care for all this racial stereotyping. As for Ms. Bland I agree she probably should have just stepped out of the car even if she felt it was unfair and if he did violate her rights she could have filed a complaint a lawsuit later. But I like many others find most of the fault lies with Officer Encinia since he was in a position of authority.

  8. Victoria says:

    1) traffic stop ended! Warning was already written
    Her signature was needed. which she was doing while she smoked her cigarette. He could have
    Let her go.
    2) The autopsy report concluded that she inhaled marijuana
    5hours before her demise. Hence: while she was in jail
    HOW DARE U TRY TO USE THAT. Your turning
    This thing all the way around. Twisting facts &
    Everything just to get your point across smh

  9. Timara Ham says:

    I believe that no matter what she should not have been killed!!! They are covering up what they did by saying she committed suicide. I DON’T BELIEVE THAT ONE BIT!! If you look at her mugshot photos, her eyes are rolled back and looks as if she’s laying on the floor. So you can say that she deserved to be arrested all you want but she did not deserve to be murdered!! For a black man to write something so disrespectful about a black woman who was murdered by police and to say the things you said about black women having too much mouth. I can tell you have no respect what so ever for black women.

    Black women always being trashed talked and disrespected. I am a 26 year old black woman and I live in South Carolina. I see black men where I live giving white women the most respect and treat black women with little respect. I’m not saying that all of the black men here do but majority are. I say this because where I live there are interracial couples and black men who date both races. I see brothas passing white women around with there brothers, friends,etc. and don’t talk trash about her and care so much about her to where they will fight over her(a white girl). LET THAT Be A SISTA DOING THAT. OH it’s a war against the sista. Talking trash, calling her all kinds of names, etc.I know this because I know some of the guys and females who go through this. I’m not saying that what the females do is right I’m just stating that white females get more lead way than us sistas.

    No matter what a BLACK WOMAN will stand by a BLACK MAN but it takes a BLACK MAN to let that BLACK WOMAN stand by him. I respect and salute my brothers but I DO NOT RESPECT this article.

  10. Bobbi says:

    …..and now you have extended the invitation to other races to disrespect and disregard black women as well. .
    Eli’s question was in regards to the officers actions but, still could not help but accept your invitation to acknowledge that there are Black men who hate black women.

  11. Marque Anthony says:

    Listen to me.
    It is not about if you fight back, it is about HOW you fight back. Fighting back to make a point when you are at a huge disadvantage will land you in jail or even dead. But fighting back strategically and yet legally will help you gain ground and minimize risks to yourself, your people and your cause. Thus sometimes brute force is not the solution to brute force. Knowing when to fight, how to fight, where to fight and when not to fight will help you survive. We must stop playing into the enemy’s hands by doing what the enemy has anticipated, provoked and prepared for. Our people must learn how to recognize a trap and avoid it instead of fighting from inside of it.

  12. Marque Anthony says:

    While I neither promote nor advise illegal retaliation, I overstand it. There is a balance to the universe that plays out in reaping and sowing. A Memphis Police Officer was shot and killed during a traffic stop. The question is, does that make it harder on some of us or easier?

  13. Marque Anthony says:

    For Their Own Safety, Police Can Order People Out of Cars in Routine Stops, Court Rules
    Published: February 20, 1997

    WASHINGTON, Feb. 19— The Supreme Court ruled today that police officers may order passengers out of the cars they stop for routine traffic violations, even in the absence of any reason to suspect that the passenger has committed a crime or presents a threat to the officer’s safety.
    The 7-to-2 decision, adopting a position long advocated by police organizations, was an extension of a 1977 Supreme Court decision permitting police officers to order the driver out of the car in a routine traffic stop.

    ”On the public interest side of the balance, the same weighty interest in officer safety is present regardless of whether the occupant of the stopped car is a driver or passenger,” Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist said in the majority opinion today.

    The two dissenting Justices, John Paul Stevens and Anthony M. Kennedy, objected that the decision marked a substantial contraction of the Fourth Amendment right to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures.

    ”The Court takes the unprecedented step of authorizing seizures that are unsupported by any individualized suspicion whatsoever,” Justice Stevens said. Justice Kennedy said the result would be to place ”tens of millions of passengers at risk of arbitrary control by the police.”

    The decision overturned a 1995 ruling by a state appeals court in Maryland. State courts around the country had been split on the question. Thirty-eight states joined Maryland in asking the Justices to overturn the Maryland ruling, and the Clinton Administration showed its support by having Attorney General Janet Reno, in her first Supreme Court appearance, argue on behalf of Maryland when the case was heard two months ago.

    The Maryland court, ruling that the police need ”some individualized or particularized suspicion” before ordering a passenger out of a car, refused to permit the prosecution to introduce the crack cocaine that had fallen to the ground when a passenger, Jerry Lee Wilson, obeyed a state trooper’s order to get out of a car that was stopped for speeding on Interstate 95 near Baltimore.

    In his opinion today, Maryland v. Wilson, No. 95-1268, Chief Justice Rehnquist said that ”in one sense” a passenger has a stronger case than a driver for not being ordered out of the car: it is the driver, and not the passenger, who has committed a traffic offense.

    But there is little difference ”as a practical matter,” the Chief Justice said, because all occupants of the car have already been stopped ”by virtue of the stop of the vehicle.

    ” If there is evidence inside the vehicle of a more serious crime, he said, ”the motivation of a passenger to employ violence to prevent apprehension of such a crime is every bit as great as that of the driver.”
    Chief Justice Rehnquist cited Federal statistics showing that in 1994, 5,762 police officers were assaulted and 11 were killed during traffic pursuits and stops.

    Justice Stevens, in dissent, objected that these statistics gave no indication of how many of the incidents involved passengers; whether the passengers were inside or outside of the cars; or whether the violence would have been prevented had the passengers been ordered out.

    In response, Chief Justice Rehnquist said, ”It is, indeed, regrettable that the empirical data on a subject such as this are sparse, but we need not ignore the data which do exist simply because further refinement would be even more helpful.”

    When the case was argued in December, the Maryland Attorney General, J. Joseph Curran, appeared to startle most of the Justices by making the sweeping argument that not only could police officers order passengers out of the car, but they could also prevent passengers not suspected of any crime from leaving the scene — to hail a taxi, for example.

    Chief Justice Rehnquist said today that this issue ”is not presented by this case, and we express no opinion upon it.”

  14. Marque Anthony says:

    To Eli,

    Sandra was asked to present her license and registration while the Trooper was on the PASSENGER side.

    Please pardon the typographical errors because my keys were sticking.

    Cross Reference:
    Please cross reference Sandra’s behavior with the 3 citations of Texas Penal Code in my article. You will find that she violated all 3.

    Talking Point:
    Those like Bobbi and others who walk in denial will never help black people to fix our problems because he/she will never face our problems. Scapegoating can only go so far and then it’s time to grow up and take personal responsibility for our actions. We need a balanced view that looks at all sides, not a view that takes up for one side and ignores our own accountability.

    Talking Point:
    Those who do not know or understand the law (again Bobbi as an example) are a danger to those of us who do or those who are trying to follow it or even those who are trying to change it.

  15. Marque Anthony says:

    To Eli,

    I simply state the facts, the law and the evidence. It was neither smart nor wise nor necessary for the Trooper to handle things as he did and by now, I am sure he himself realizes that. I listened to the entire 52 minute unedited tape at the scene. I have a copy of the police report, the autopsy report and the unedited video taken by the bystander on the grass.

    I have reviewed all of the evidence presented thus far and analyzed the video frame by frame. I have also looked up Texas Penal Code regarding profane or obscene language, traffic stops and resisting arrest – as it shows in my article above.

    Once the Trooper realize how far the encounter was going, he attempted to de-escalate thee encounter. I have spoke with several black female police officer, detectives and internal affairs officers who all agree they would have arrested Sandra Bland. Also notice a black female officer (not a State Trooper) assisted in the arrest, transported Sandra, searched her vehicle and handled part of her processing in the jail.

    As for confronting Sandra, she would not make eye contact. She did not give the Trooper her license the first time he asked from the driver side. She would not comply after being asked to step out of the car. The 1997 Supreme Court decision (posted after this comment) authorizes the Trooper to remove her from the car. She though he did not have the right. She was incorrect.

    As for retaliation maybe. But that is something that may be used to get the matter thrown out of court after the hassle of being arrested, booked, processed, seeing a judge for a bond hearing, bonding out and returning for her day in court. All of which was unnecessary if she simply put the cigarette out and signed the WARNING!

    As a family and relationship counselor, I can see clearly that Sandra lost if and it was not just over a cigarette. According to her Facebook page at the time, she said she was suffering from PTSD and depression. In the jail she said she had tried to commit suicide in the last year using pills because of a miscarriage. Her sister Sharon Cooper verified on live TV that Sandra had a miscarriage. Sandra had a lot of THC from marijuana in her system. Plus she was on Kepra, a drug the FDA says increases thoughts of suicide.

    As for the retaliation of the Trooper, we can speculate and even make that argument in court – but that’s once it gets to court. We are not privy to what he was told or pulled up on his computer when he ran her license and tag.

  16. Marque Anthony says:


    You have said absolutely nothing of value. You have repeatedly ignore Texas law, the facts and the evidence. Then when you referenced another article, it said just what I told you – the officer had a lawful right to remove Sandra Bland from her car according to the 1997 Supreme Court decision. Again you will not acknowledge that and you continue to embarrass yourself.

    As so many others have noted, including black women, Sandra Bland’s mouth got her into trouble because she went ballistic with the wrong person at the wrong time. You continue to ignore the natter of wisdom in handling such an encounter with the police. Wisdom would again dictate that we not choose battles that we are likely to lose. But you don’t understand that.

    Apparently you also do not understand that to fix a problem it is necessary to address the problem, open and honestly without denial and often without sugar coating it. Christ did not sugar coat things all the time. Muhammad did not sugar coat things all the time. Nor did Malcom X, Medgar Evers, Louis Farrakhan (The Black Woman’s Mouth is like a snake pit).

    To expose the truth is not humiliation, it is facing the facts – facts that you will not face, yet most black people know what I say is true. It’s time to grow up and face personal responsibility for our actions.

    Sandra Bland used profane and obscene language. In Texas, you can be arrested for that – like it or not. That is a crime and the First Amendment does not protect profane or obscene speech used against an officer – like it or not. Nor does it protect terroristic threats, hate speech or threats against the President.

    Instead of accepting the facts, you have tried constantly to mislead people and divert the very issues we need to face. In doing so, you do black people the worse disservice of all – you promote denial and provide deception. Black people need the truth. No other race or ethnic group is perfect either, but this site is speaking to us, not them.

  17. LSmith says:

    I wanted to add that her inability to control her belligerence and verbal abuse towards the officer could have been a side effect of taking Keppra — just google “Keppra rage”. Also, the fact that no one, neither family or any friend would bond her out of jail, especially considering she was supposed to start a new job the very next day, may have been a factor in her depression resulting in suicide. I cannot imagine my family letting me sit in jail for three days over $500.

  18. Yusuf Al-Rami says:

    I’d have to contend with the following:

    “And if it was street weed, it was likely laced with rat poison (arsenic), embalming fluid and a number of other lethal ingredients. That might account for the odd behavior”

    This seems like the sort of paranoia reminiscent of the cult film Reefer Madness. The fact is that marijuana, even the street sort, is so powerful these days — extremely high levels of THC, higher than they have ever been — that marijuana alone could easily account for abnormal behavior. There is no need to assume it must have been laced.

    The other thing I’d note is that the trooper may not have actually smelled marijuana. He may also have simply gotten a whiff of her smoke, and smoke IS a toxic substance (pretty sure if you blow smoke in an officer’s face, he could charge you with battery). Almost every establishment in the United States is now a smoke-free zone, because we now know that smoking is harmful and breathing secondhand smoke is almost as bad (if not worse) as actually smoking it yourself. So there is definitely an argument to be made that the officer was making a simple request to protect his own health.

    Anyway, good article. Never heard of this place before but it appeared in my feed.

  19. richard goad says:

    sounds like bullshit to me. the most condescending, belittling, misogynistic statement i have ever read on this subject and i have seen some doozies on the teabagger sites. your mate must love you an awful lot to put up with this stuff.i have heard black men talk on this subject and some of them must go online ( to find women who take crap like you dish out. most of these guys talk shit til the cows come home and think nothing of it, yet they insist “their women” be demure and polite and shut the hell up. its viewpoints like this that will continue to pile up body counts and the cops know it.

  20. Eli H. says:

    I had no idea this website existed. It just popped on my news feed. I read your article with interest. I’ll look at the site later.

    First a brief comment about my experience on the matter of the site. A buddy of mine had an interest in my sister which led to a conversation about inter-racial dating. He was black. He didn’t like black girls. I remember the conversation mostly because pointed out something I’d always noticed. He pointed out that in a crowded school hallway we always knew where the group of black girls were because of the volume and because it always sounded like they were arguing (and often were). I’ve encountered other black men through the years that preferred white women and the disposition of black women was always part of the reason they said.

    In this case, Sandra Bland, exhibited all of the behaviors the we so stereotypically think of when when many of think of black women. I agree with you that played a significant role in the confrontation with the LEO.

    From there our views tend to part ways. I’m curious about yours given your background in law enforcement. In my view, regardless of her actions,a LEO should anticipate be comfortable with a driver being angry about being stopped and cited. I think that I would have found Bland a nuisance but viewed that as her problem not mine. My problem would have being irritated with her behavior and I would have dealt with that. Not with her behavior. When the LEO returned to Bland he immediately took a different posture. He almost instantly confronted her on her disposition, asked her to put her cigarette out, and finally ordered her from the car. My perception was that he had decided that he was in fact going to control her behavior and provide some negative reinforcement. Reading the perspective of other LEO’s on Reddit almost all agree that this LEO didn’t do anything improper until he ordered her from the car. Though those LEO’s will say “it wasn’t right”, they universally say that he was legally authorized to do so. I don’t agree.

    As I read the precedents and opinion by the SCOTUS I see that the primary philosophy that they rely on is what is reasonable for the LEO to do. In as much the SCOTUS has given two primary reason for a LEO to compel a person from the vehicle. Criminal activity, as defined by reasonable suspicion or probable cause standards is naturally one. The other is officer safety. In Bland’s case I think the video is compelling evidence that this LEO’s purpose was retaliation. If that were what a judge/jury came to believe then within reason any act that Bland would have committed would have been mute. Because her bad actions were prompted or the result of bad action on the part of the State( government).

    So while she did continue to act badly after she was forced from the car against her wishes don’t you agree that those illegal actions were the result of this LEO’s improper seizure of her person? Of course LEO’s and possibly you, might reply he ordered her from the car for his safety and she might have been smoking dope. But I don’t think that those arguments would be believed by a “reasonable man” when shown in contrast to the evidence in the video.

    If you don’t agree with me, please tell me how an argument would sway my opinion other than a pie in the sky argument. If there is something that I’m missing that a LEO might see, I would certainly like to know.

    Again, good article. Thanks for writing it.

    Best Regards.

  21. Guest... says:

    Mmmhmmm, and I bet you got your KKK robe hanging in your closet all nice and dry cleaned and cry every night because you can’t wear it or go to rallies.

  22. Bobbi says:

    Those emails and any other fanfare you mentioned do not bother me but, I will let you take comfort in them.

    I have not been disrespectful to you or called you names, as you have done but, I have challenged your disrespect as well as offered the viewpoints of others TO others…..the viewpoints of those who thankfully don’t see things as you do.

    You were diligent to school yourself on the laws of Texas and proceeded to indict Sandra Bland along with an entire race of women based on your perception of our history but, stopped short to school yourself on the record and history of conduct regarding this officer as well as the county’s history as it regards their treatment of Blacks although both have legitimately been called in to question.

    A black woman was arrested and died in the hands of the criminal justice system in the county of Waller, Texas but you chose this incident to disrespectfully profile the “Black” woman’s mouth. It is abhorring.
    If you cannot see the error in that you are beyond understanding.

    Just as you are tired of the Black woman’s mouth, Black women are tired of men like you, who choose every opportunity to disrespect, dishonor and turn your head at our mistreatment, who leave us to fend for ourselves when we have stood for you, taken your slack, propped you up and rooted for you even at your lowest point.

    No other race humiliates their woman as men like you repeatedly do. We are tired of that. I can assure you.