Oriana Farrell vs NM State Police | Who is at fault?

Another embarrassing moment for New Mexico.  We made national news over something that really should have never been an issue.  A woman, Oriana Farrell (a mom of five children) was pulled over on October 28, 2013 because she had been speeding.  According to the video, Farrell was driving 77 mph in a 55mph zone.  Sounds simple, right? Not so much…….

oriana farrell

The officer gave her the option to either (a) pay the fine of $126 or (b) see a judge at Taos Magistrate Court.  Okay, so that’s a simple option.  Being that Farrell was from out of town, it would make sense to make the payment.  Yes, it sucks, but you have 30 days to figure it out.  Well, she didn’t choose either option, she decided to argue and fight with the officer.  When the officer told her time and time again to make a choice, she refused…then drove off!  


She had all of her children in the vehicle with her and she DROVE AWAY while the officer was calling dispatch.  Eventually she pulls back over, but drives away….again.  An officer that just got on scene pulls out his gun to try and shoot out the tires.  Not sure if he knew there were kids in the car or not, but he did shoot at the vehicle to try and stop them.  I get that.

Eventually the mom and son were arrested.

See the FULL video here:

Who was in the wrong?  The police department for shooting at her tires or her for being…well….crazy.  I keep seeing it on the national news and everyone says the police were wrong.  I don’t think they were.  They are human.  They felt threatened, obviously and acted on that.  They needed to stop her.  What would have happened if she would have ran into someone going 100mph with those kids in the car.  She was even driving in wrong-way traffic!  Seems like she really cares about her kids to put them in that kind of danger.

What do you think after watching the FULL video?  



  1. says

    After watching that entire video I am shocked that a mom would put her kids through that. He gave her every chance and was being nice. That was scary to watch.

    • panemon187 says

      I can’t believe a police officer lost their job because of this. She wrong a long statement posted on a news paper article on how she was the victim the entire time. People like this really make me lose my cool. She was probably on Welfare, had 5 kids who were clearly out of control. She breaks the law, refuses lawful orders, drives away after she had been verbally detained, then proceeds to evade arrest. She then speeds away putting her kids at risk on a high speed chase. What a responsible mother. Liberal media portrayed the narrative of an innocent african american woman with her kids in her vehicle getting shot at, as if she was actually innocent. I kinda wish the vehicle rolled over and took them all out, because the kids appear to be just as criminally inclined as she was.

    • Laura Brennan says

      She surely did not think the cops would start shooting. She’s a nut and should have complied with the first cop’s instructions. However, shooting at an unarmed suspect is unjustified, illegal and unconstitutional

  2. says

    This mom was definitely in the wrong. As I saw someone else mention on a different article about this, you never know, and she could have been trafficking those kids. Hello! You don’t drive away from an officer until they give you the clear.

      • says

        Honestly she could have been anyone..or anything….I mean, how are they supposed to know. All they knew was a) she was speeding b) she refused to accept the ticket c) she drove off c) her kid got out of the car and attacked the officer d) she drove off AGAIN

        • Laura Brennan says

          Amber, that’s not completely accurate. She provided her license during the first stop. You don’t actually see it, but when the video starts, the cop is handing it back to her and mentions the fact that her license is expired. He would have already run her license and her tags and determined her identity. He would have known known if she had warrants or whether the car was stolen. Professional criminals aren’t driving around in broad daylight with a van load of kids. And if they were, they wouldn’t be driving on an expired license or speeding. With all that said, she was a total idiot and deserves to be prosecuted for fleeing, at the very least. But her crazy behavior does not justify the shooting or the chase. They should have let her drive off, then get arrest warrants and put out an APB and/or roadblocks.

          Yes, she was wrong and committed criminal acts. But cops are highly trained and held to a higher standard. They are not permitted to shoot at fleeing, unarmed suspects.

          • bartlebyx says

            Actually, the police CAN use deadly force against an unarmed fleeing felon. Since assaulting an officer is a felony in New Mexico (and that happened in the video), and since they were in flight, that’s a fleeing felon.

            Now, according to Tennessee v. Garner, one may use deadly force on a fleeing felon when it is reasonably believed doing so is, “…necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”

            She is driving off at a high rate of speed after she and/or someone in the vehicle has assaulted a police officer.

            Also, you think she wasn’t armed? You think two or three tons of minivan, driven in contravention of lawful orders, in an effort to evade the police isn’t a weapon? Really? Next time you see a car coming at you at 50mph, tell me it’s not a weapon.

            She created this situation by refusing to provide even basic cooperation and then fleeing the police…twice.

    • jay muray says

      the mom was wrong she should have just taken the ticket…and the police over reacted…pouting the children at risk and traumatizing them..they should be disciplined; suspended and fined..

    • Pamela says

      From my experience working with the public, I think this woman is manipulative. We can’t hear her side of the exchange very well, but it sounds to me as if she’s playing the kind of obstructive game that she hopes will end with the officer throwing up his hands in exasperation and giving her a warning only. He was clearly losing patience with her, but didn’t get give up, and good for him.
      The letter she wrote to the Taos newspaper, in my opinion, confirms this judgement. She writes about what a great mom she is, and provides names of people who will attest to her good character, and makes inflammatory accusations against the police, but at no point does she explain what she was thinking when she refused to make a choice as to how to deal with the ticket, or when she drove away the first time. Yes, she may have panicked when the officer started breaking the window, but up to that point her actions require some explanation — and explanation is exactly what she doesn’t offer.

      • says

        YES! Her letter to the paper was just a bunch of blah blah blah to me. I think that it may have gone too far, however, she needs to explain why she wouldn’t just take the ticket, why she felt the need to drive off the first time…why her son jumped out of the car twice to attack the officer. She should also explain why she had drug paraphernalia in the middle console of her vehicle, being such a good mom and all. So much was left out of the story to make her look like such a victim.

  3. says

    Interesting– well, I would have to say they both were at fault.
    She was fault for-
    not complying with the office
    leading them on a high speed chase
    her son assaulting the officer

    And why a Mother would do that is beyond me– putting your kids in danger?

    The officer did know the kids were in the car– I think when he initially came up on her like that he was totally aggressive. I can see getting aggressive towards the end, but he started out aggressive then tried to calm down. There was no reason for him to put his hands on her in the beginning.


    • Larmar says

      If you fail to obey direction from a police officer then you are subject to arrest, and arrest means the police officer will be placing his hands on you.

      Since you did not know this, then welcome to our country. I hope your immigration journey was uneventful.

  4. LoLoJo says

    I think that the officer was more than respectful and patient. The mother chose to be non-compliant from the beginning. She had two choices, the citation with a fine or go to court. She said that she couldn’t be held accountable for 30 days for what she chose. Thirty days??!!! That isn’t that long. The officer even offered her another option and told the mother to turn off the car and wait. She drives off. Then when she pulls over she says that she isn’t driving off when she already did. She is probably right because she can’t be held accountable for even 10 minutes for what she says or does.
    The police officers in this case did the right thing. The mother endangered her children and others lives over $126. She endangered her children’s lives more than the shots the officers fired at the tires. Officers that were not aware that there were children in the vehicle at the time.

  5. Mark Rowe says

    The mother put her own children at risk. She could have simply accepted a ticket and that would have been it. Instead she specs off, and then her children attacked the officer. She claims to be a good mother, but from this short video it doesn’t appear that she is a very good role model. The mother and her family escalated the incident needlessly. I hold police to a high standard, and am happy to call police out for misconduct. Perhaps firing shots was misconduct, but in this situation, the mother is absolutely wrong, and the officer was right.

    • says

      I completely agree! I think shooting was over the top, however, she escalated it to that point. I hope that she gets what she deserves and those children are put into a SAFE place with someone to show them how to do the right thing.

  6. Blue Stater says

    I find the comments here hugely depressing. The cop who fired violated any conceivable deadly-force guidelines, something with which, as a former newspaper reporter who covered police, I have familiarity. The woman’s children were in the van, something the arresting officer knew and the officer who fired (who I believe was not the arresting officer) should have assumed. There was no threat to the police from her leaving the scene, and no threat to the public other than what the encounter must have done to the woman’s nerves and hence her ability to drive safely. She drove to a public place where she could reasonably expect that the behavior of the police would not be as crazy as it was on the open road (an expectation not fulfilled, in the end). We have only the officers’ word that she did so at 100 mph; frankly, I doubt it.

    The first job of police in a situation like that is to keep things cool, or, if they’re already hot, to cool them down. Those three state troopers failed in that duty. They violated their own deadly-force guidelines. They behaved like a bunch of hick deputy sheriffs in darkest Mississippi 50 years ago. She committed at most three offenses: speeding (maybe) and two counts of evading arrest (and it must be said, not trying terribly hard to evade). Neither of those offenses is capital, and neither remotely justifies deadly force to effect an arrest even if the children hadn’t been present. The commanding officer at the scene and the officer who fired the shots should be dismissed from the force; the arresting officer, I believe, should not, but he needs training in anger management. Police officers are paid to have and exercise good judgment. These troopers did not, and should suffer the consequences. The woman should be fined $126 for speeding (assuming there is adequate proof); other charges should be dismissed in the interests of justice.

    • Melw says

      Blue slater it couldn’t agree with you more! What about this gives the police the right to point their gun at a CHILD scared for his mothers life! It is never ok for a cop to fire at a vehicle full of kids. It makes me so sad reading the comments from mothers who think this mom deserved this. I hope everyone who thought it was the moms fault deserves to be harrassed and scared for your life by an officer who busts out your vehicle window onto your children! Driving to a populated area was the smartest thing this mother did. Cops have no limits in this country and they can’t be trusted to value your life! The shooting cop could have killed an entire family all because his fellow officer didn’t get the verbal response he wanted from an out of town tourist.

      • says

        I wouldn’t have an officer treat me like that because I wouldn’t evade an officer. I would have accepted my ticket and been on my way. I’d never run away, I’d never tell an officer I didn’t do something wrong..If you truly think you didn’t do anything wrong, go to court, that is what it is for. Arguing and running won’t do anything but cause more problems. SHE was at fault.

    • says

      How can you say there was no threat to the public when she was driving over 100mph and on the wrong side of the road?! She should have taken her ticket and went on from the beginning. I’m not saying I agree that shooting at her tires was right, and I don’t think that breaking out the window was necessary. The arresting officer had kept his calm and the other two officers walked up into a scene of chaos. I don’t know if those two knew of the other children, but they were there to stop the chaos. Simply put, she evaded police…if she would have taken her ticket and not drove off, then refused to talk to the officer who was trying to get her away from her children to discuss it….none of this would have happened. She needs to take responsibility for her part in the entire situation.

      • Blue Stater says

        I didn’t see anything on that tape consistent with the woman’s driving 100 mph on the wrong side of the road. We have only the cops’ word (and they always, always exaggerate speed) for that. And even if she did, the cop fired at her as she was leaving the scene; at the time of the shots her speed can’t have been over 20 mph. To repeat, at the time the shots were fired, there was no threat to the public. One of the standards (not the only one) for use of deadly force is the existence of a threat to the public. As Pamela points out, the cops who arrived as backup should have blocked her vehicle — that, too, is elementary police work. It is the cops first, not members of the public, who need to take responsibility for an orderly resolution of a problem like this. Once the woman refused to sign the ticket (a great many people do not understand that that requirement is only a promise to appear or otherwise dispose of the charge, not an admission of guilt), the arresting officer should simply have stepped back and stood by — he had her license and registration in his possession, after all — and waited for backup to appear. If she took off, it would have been child’s play to pursue her and keep her in view. Too many people (and too many cops) in this country think that disobeying a police officer is justification for deadly force. It is not. It never is. This was a woman in a state of panic with her kids in the car. If she went to jury trial and I were on the jury, I would vote to acquit her of everything except speeding. Her other offenses were created by bad police work.

    • Fred says

      @Blue Stater:

      Your arguments are flawed. Several instances where you incorrectly challenge the facts:
      – You state she wasn’t trying very hard at evading the police as indication she was not evading. The mere act of driving off, whether at 5 mph or 50 mph while pulled over, is evading – it’s that clear cut.
      – You doubt the mother fled at speeds of 100 mph. If you watched the full video, you would see the dashboard camera registers occasionally flashes the police vehicle’s current speed. At one point in the video, it shows the police in pursuit at 100 mph but only keeping pace with the mother – which means she was also driving at 100 mph.
      – Officers were not calm. If you watched the video, the officer in the first stop tried to cut her a deal on not charging her for driving with an expired license. The officer made the offer for her to either pay the fine or plead her case to a judge at least 8 times. No threatening arrest or other escalating language was used; the cop was pretty neutral toned. Only after her evasion was the cop loud – but at that point, she was fleeing and had legally committed a crime.

      I tend to criticize police in such incidents. And I will say that it was absolutely unnecessary to shoot at the van, but up until the shooting I believe the cops were entirely justified in their actions, even breaking the window (since the cop had been attacked by the son at that point).

      Your one sided views and ignorance of facts that are clearly demonstrated in the video leads me to believe you did not watch the video and are dead set against the police regardless of the established and documented facts.

      • Blue Stater says

        I don’t see firing at the van as a footnote, as you seem to. Neither, apparently, did the trigger-happy cop’s superiors. At a minimum, they suspended him (Amber says he was fired; I haven’t seen any report of that). I come back to my main point: at the time the shots were fired, the woman can’t have been traveling more than 20 mph (she had started up from a dead stop). Disobeying police orders (I don’t think these facts even rise to a case of “evading arrest,” since she hadn’t yet been arrested) is not a capital offense. I’m not even sure whether it’s a felony. In those circumstances, firing on a car full of kids is a gross overreaction showing very poor judgment by the police. Her driving 100 mph, even if she did so (the dashcam footage is evidence, but not dispositive evidence), was *subsequent* to the shots being fired, an event that no doubt scared her out of her (admittedly slender) wits. The mom isn’t innocent by any means. But her alleged infractions do not remotely justify the cops’ reactions. They — all of them — need to be held to account.

      • Blue Stater says

        In response to Fred’s comment, I looked at the video again. It seems to me that the first time the mom drove off she wasn’t “evading” police in any serious sense of the term “evade” (although she could be prosecuted for it). She pulled over again after 10 seconds and 25 mph or less — hardly a spirited escape attempt. She gave the cop a reason — I couldn’t hear all of what she said, but it sounded like she didn’t want to leave her kids alone in the car. This doesn’t excuse the action, of course, but it does explain it. After the second stop the cop lost his temper and put his hands on her. Then, after she voluntarily left her car, he tried to trick her into turning around so he could cuff her. At that point her (apparently teen-age) son erupted out of the car (I may have the order wrong here but the effect is the same). That to me is the triggering event. Help was on the way. All the arresting cop had to do was sit in his cruiser and wait. At that point the situation exploded from a speeding stop and a half-baked “escape” attempt into a major confrontation. The arriving cops don’t block her forward progress, as they could easily have done, and should have. It was the arresting cop who smashed in her window, I now see. A major overreaction, topped by the gunshots, fired seconds after she started from a dead stop. So she took off, doubtless hysterical, in fear for her life. Her driving was crazy — but she went to a motel (was she staying there? Probably, is my guess). Once she was in public view she offered no resistance.

        So let’s review the bidding here. What starts as a routine traffic stop for exceeding the speed limit by 16 mph in the middle of nowhere escalates into an “escape” of maybe a couple of hundred feet and 10 seconds, into an offer of force (the cop pointing his taser), into gunfire endangering the public as well as the children in the van, into a crazed chase along increasingly crowded public roads — into a motel where the “suspect” voluntarily comes to a halt. The “suspect” has no weapons and has not offered resistance. Is the mom free of blame? Absolutely not. Did she contribute materially to this bad result? Absolutely. But police academies all over the country should use this video as a textbook lesson in bad police work.

  7. Pamela says

    The mom was at fault up to the point at which the original officer started bashing in the window, and shots were fired. She failed to comply with lawful orders from the officer. She argued and refused to cooperate. Trying to avoid a fine of $126.00, she put herself and her children in danger. However, she did not use any force against the officer, and he knew for a fact that there were children in that van. Also, knowing that she had fled the first time, officers responding should have blocked the van in so that she couldn’t drive off a second time. Those officers lost their heads and made some serious errors in judgement. Taos is right to investigate their actions. It’s also right to charge this mom with reckless endangerment, obstruction, or anything else they can find.

  8. Concerned Citizen says

    Thank you blue slater. I completely agree with everything you said. Here is a woman who was in an unfamiliar place clearly scared of these overly aggressive police officers. It’s easy to point fingers and blame when you, yourself, have probably never been treated by police officers as this mom was. Shame on those of you with such a lack of empathy. The only party trained to diffuse the situation instead of escalate it was the police officers. They should be fired and charged with a crime. I am sad for this mom and her children.

    • says

      The officer was extremely nice at first..he kept giving her options and she refused and refused and refused. He went to tell dispatch that she was refusing and she drove off…there was NOTHING to be scared of. He wasn’t mistreating her in any way…..SHE left. As I’ve said before, I think the officer that shot went a little overboard….even breaking the window…but they walked into a chaotic scene. The officer that shot has recently been suspended for investigation. SHE shouldn’t have driven off in the first place. She caused this to happen, the officer was just going to give her a ticket and be on their way but she drove off.

      • Blue Stater says

        Folks, I have yet to see any mention here of a salient fact — as I think about it, maybe THE salient fact — in this matter. This woman is AFRICAN-AMERICAN. African-American people, particularly middle-class African American people (as she appears to be), are, with very good reason, scared to death of the police (I say this as an old middle-class white guy). It was within the arresting trooper’s power to just step back, summon help, and wait for her to calm down. She wasn’t going anywhere without her license and registration (which, if the trooper was well trained, he wouldn’t have returned to her until the encounter was over), and if she tried, pursuing her would have been simple (as indeed it turned out to be, twice). But noooooo — the cop obsessed (and the arriving cavalry obsessed worse) because she Wouldn’t Follow Orders. So, instead of the incident being framed in terms of cooling things down, it was framed in terms of Forcing Compliance With Police Orders. It would have been bad even if the other cop hadn’t fired at the van full of kids. That’s not going “a little overboard.” It is attempted murder. I’m glad he got suspended — he’s as entitled to due process as she is (can’t get much due process out of the barrel of a gun, I gotta say) — but I hope there is swift, sharp, and exemplary punishment for the trooper who fired his weapon and his supervising officer. Police must *not* be allowed to get away clean with this sort of thing where, as here, the evidence is so clear of grave police misconduct.

        • says

          This has nothing to do with her being black, brown, green, purple, orange…..she left the scene and that’s when things escalated. The officer has now been fired….I do think she needs to be held responsible for her part in this. She left. She drove off. She’s guilty of that.

          • Blue Stater says

            Yes, a judge or jury probably will convict her of driving off (I would vote to acquit). But driving off, even twice, isn’t remotely as serious as a sworn police officer firing at a van full of kids (and another one smashing in a window on those kids, something that seems to have been set aside). I’ve yet to see any report that the officer has been fired; if so, good, but that’s not enough. He needs to be prosecuted for, at a minimum, reckless endangerment with a firearm, which will get him some jail time. The state of New Mexico needs to make an example of officers who abuse their authority in this way. It’s the only way to stop this kind of misconduct.

        • Steve says

          The officer was more than patient with her, he was not overly aggressive and she wasn’t scared she was just trying to get out of a ticket. I believe the officer who shot at the tires was wrong but I think they were justified in busting the window out and her son is guilty of assaulting an officer. If you paid attention to the video at one point the officer was doing 96 trying to catch the woman so she was doing close to 100 and driving on the wrong side of the road. I have no sympathy for this woman and she should be held accountable for her actions.

          • says

            I completely agree! :) She’s playing this “I was scared for my kids” card and that’s a bunch of bull…he was so nice to her up until she drove off. At that point he shouldn’t have continues to be patient with her….she was posing a threat.

          • Blue Stater says

            At the time one cop was bashing in the van window next to her kids and another fired shots at her van, this woman was no threat to anyone, as the video plainly shows.

            Our freedoms are rapidly diminishing because of the growing power of the U. S. police state. When they’re gone, and you wake up and wonder why, review this correspondence and look in the mirror.

  9. Concerned Citizen says

    Amber, it’s so easy for you to declare that this has nothing to do with race when, once again, you have likely never had the experiences that this woman has had with police and other life experiences. Certainly her actions are colored by her individual experiences. The bottom line is that that was a traffic stop in which the civilian panicked. The trained officers should have deescalated the situation rather than escalating it a situation where someone could have very well ended up dead. As Blue Stater so eloquently stated, this was all about forcing a woman to comply with police orders rather than acting in a more sane way to diffuse the situation.

    • says

      He was patient and SHE DROVE OFF. He wasn’t doing anything but asking if she wanted to either pay the ticket or see a judge…that’s it. She drove off. How could she feel threatened about that?

      • Blue Stater says

        Amber, you seem incapable of putting yourself in that woman’s position. I’ve lived in a majority-black neighborhood (in NYC) and I know how much my relentlessly middle-class African-American neighbors (you’ll never get better ones, BTW) feared even the relatively benign NYPD. To repeat: she was African-American, she was a woman, she was alone with her kids in the car. I listened to what the cop told her about her options. What the cop said was confusing even to me, and I know the drill for a traffic stop (having been stopped — usually fairly — a few times, including once in New Mexico!). When she panicked, he got authoritarian and overbearing. Black folks are more terrified of that than middle-class old white guys like me who know about taking badge and cruiser numbers, writing down times and locations, filing official complaints, and calling the local newspapers if a police officer gets out of line. Having now seen the video several times, I think this needless escalation occurred primarily because one police officer lost his cool and because for another, use of deadly force was a first resort rather than a final resort.

        • says

          When I was in my late teens I drove a car that made me a target…it was a Monte Carlo with dark tinted windows. Every time I left the house I was pulled over. Because police couldn’t see who was driving, they believed it was a thug…I could tell by the way they aggressively walked up…every.single.time. I could have became resentful and I could have argued with them…I could have escalated those situations. I could have done a lot of things, but I didn’t. I answered their questions, I listened to them and when I got a ticket, even if I didn’t agree with it, I signed and took it. I grew up in some of the worst areas of town and saw police overly aggressive with a lot of my friends, but I never pushed them to make them do that to me.

          • Blue Stater says

            Well, all i can say to that, Amber, is “lucky you.” But the world is made up of different folks who have different responses to encounters with the police. If what happened to you had happened to me, for example, after about the third instance of this (assuming that dark-tinted windows were legal in my jurisdiction, which they aren’t), I would have rather conspicuously taken the officer’s shield and cruiser numbers and let him know why. If it happened yet again I would file a complaint with the chief of police. If it continued, I would file a complaint with my city councilor or equivalent and go to the newspapers. And if that didn’t stop this conduct I’d get a lawyer and sue for harassment. I wouldn’t panic, but I don’t panic when I’m stopped by the police because I know that if they cross the line with me I can and will do something about it. People have different views about what they have to tolerate from the police.

            The question in Oriana Farrell’s case, for me, anyway, is to what extent her infractions (beyond the speeding that led to the first stop) are mitigated by the police behavior she encountered. I would say that they are to a considerable extent, but not entirely. I think it would be reasonable to charge her with the first “evasion,” even though as a juror I would vote to acquit her of this charge (under the old legal principle of de minimis non curat lex, the law does not concern itself with trifles). But the second one was born of panic and fear for her and her children’s lives: she had her car window smashed in, her son was threatened with a weapon (which she could reasonably have thought was a gun), and after she started away she was fired on.

            The question for the incident in general is whether this kind of police conduct is justified in these circumstances, and if it isn’t, what the consequences should be. I think the conduct *wasn’t* justified and that the consequences should be severe and exemplary, to reduce the likelihood that this sort of thing could happen again with potentially tragic results.

  10. Concerned Citizen says

    Your experience with driving a Monte Carlo is not the same as that of a black person driving a Monte Carlo or a Buick or a Subaru. The point is, instead of declaring your truth to be everyone else’s truth, try to have a little empathy. I think everyone would agree that the mom made mistakes and did not do the smartest thing, but once again, it is not a deadly crime for a citizen to panic in such situations. Police are trained to defuse tensions not escalate them into potential fatal encounters.

  11. Steve says

    I don’t have any empathy for the woman and the officer tried his best to be patient with her and was even giving her a break on her expired license, but lets just give her a pass because she is an African American. Give me a break,
    I don’t care what color you are if you are as uncooperative as she was with the police you are going to find yourself in trouble.

  12. Concerned Citizen says

    When you start talking about purple, stripped and polka dotted people, you lose credibility. It shows an inability to address the REAL issues of race in America.

    And it is abundantly clear that many do not have empathy or concern for the plight of people dissimilar to themselves, which is nothing to be proud of.

    What it has and will continue to result in though is an ever increasing police state where everyone will know what it is like to be fearful of the police. Congrats!

    This mother made a mistake likely out of fear, confusion and panic. These police who are TRAINED and PAID public servants put a number of lives at stake over a speeding infraction.

    That other citizens want to defend such reckless behavior is appalling and indeed a tacit endorsement of the coming police state.

    • says

      I’m not saying that racial profiling doesn’t exist. I’m saying that this officer was nice, polite and honestly I think too nice when she refused to accept the ticket or sign for a court date. I do not have empathy for her because although he explained to her over and over, she drove off. She shouldn’t have left. She should have accepted the ticket and went on her way, but she didn’t.

      How can you say she made a mistake out of fear, confusion or panic? You weren’t there. She left while the officer was very nice. There was no reason to be any of those. She was arguing with him.

      Yes, officers are trained and while I do believe they could have handled it differently….like blocking her in when the next officers showed up, they reacted over-the-top. The officer that shot has lost his job.

      My point is….SHE needs to take responsibility for what she did and ultimately putting many people in danger by speeding off. She shouldn’t have driven off in the first place and the back up wouldn’t have had to show up.

      • James Lewis says

        Yeah, Well you don’t deserve due prosses either. You should have to choose if you are going to have a girl or a boy and if it isn’t what you chose you shouldn’t be allowed to keep it. Well, you chose a boy. To bad, right. I know it’s extreme, but you actually don’t think the woman shouldn’t have been allowed time to figure out how she would handle the ticket. Your wrong or is it just black people that shouldn’t have that choice?

  13. Concerned Citizen says

    I disagree with your characterization of the original police officer. He was confusing and threatening. He basically was threatening to arrest her over a speeding ticket by stating that he would take her in front of a judge now if she didn’t choose not to contest the ticket and pay it, which is by the way a violation of due process. If that is the law in NM that a person has to IMMEDIATELY choose whether to pay a ticket or to fight it…that is a violation of due process and is a law that should be stricken as unconstitutional.

    All of that aside, the mother is not a trained and paid professional in dealing with traffic stops and the strange laws of New Mexico. She is just a civilian who definitely seemed confused and panicked. She pulled off but then pulled over again almost immediately.

    Of course she did not handle the situation the best way she possibly could have but that is of little importance compared to the much more serious infraction by the paid and trained PUBLIC SERVANTS who could have killed her, her children, or a passerby because of their reckless behavior.

    And their behavior was simply because this woman did not obey their authority over a speeding infraction.

    Really think about this. We are so brainwashed as a country that many of us think it is okay and acceptable that a situation like this escalates into an arrest, terrorized children, and someone potentially losing their lives because a citizen who committed a small, minor speeding infraction did not obey a police command.

    The police could have handled this situation many different ways including letting her go and sending her a ticket and issuing an arrest warrant later on

    This was not an escaped and dangerous criminal on the loose.

  14. Blue Stater says

    Apparently the latest wrinkle in this saga is that Trooper Montoya, who fired the shots and was fired for it (good for you, NM State Police!), now wants his job back. I got this from the opening segment of Al Sharpton’s show this evening (Thursday) but can’t find any story to that effect online. Can anyone run down this story and let us know? Thanks.

  15. Blue Stater says

    Has anyone seen the story about a local police chief (near Albuquerque, apparently but not certainly) and his men shooting and killing (from a distance) a homeless man because he was camping on public grounds? Does anyone still doubt that as long as New Mexico people continue to tolerate, if not encourage, overly aggressive conduct by its police officers, this sort of thing will continue and get closer to home? Didn’t think so.

  16. James Lewis says

    I thought you just had to sign the ticket saying you will take care of it. I did not know you had to choose how you would take care of it. Ok, WOW. Am I wrong to think she should have the chance to figure out how she was going to take care of it? This is so wack. Did anyone see that was the problem?

  17. Dora Ismon says

    In light of the some questionable killings by the police (Michael Crawford III or Tamir Rice of OH is the one I like to use) this could have turned out the same way. While I will say keeping your child safe is the most important thing that a parent can do. However, the officer’s breaking the window on children could have injured them. I have one question for you How fast would you drive if someone was shooting at your children? Stopping for the police would not ensure your child’s safety the actions of the police proved that. I do want suggest that instead of NM expecting anyone to accept blame or mandatory court appearance, they should give the option of let say 7 days to decide. She is asking if i change my mind can I then pay the ticket the officer says no. Why is it necessary to make a decision on the spot? There is none.

I love comments!