Female Cop Gets FIRED And SUED

If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: http://www.forthepeople.com/AuditTheAudit

Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClTjur-9cx8Bb4MW8r0K6xw

Spotify: https://spoti.fi/439TpHT

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audittheaudit

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuditTheAudit

Submit your videos here: auditheaudit@gmail.com

Sponsorship inquiries: audit@ellify.com

Welcome to Audit the Audit, where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions. Help us grow and educate more citizens and officers on the proper officer interaction conduct by liking this video and/or subscribing.

This video is for educational purposes and is in no way intended to provoke, incite, or shock the viewer. This video was created to educate citizens on constitutionally protected activities and emphasize the importance that legal action plays in constitutional activism.

Bear in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.

FAIR USE
This video falls under fair use protection as it has been manipulated for educational purposes with the addition of commentary. This video is complementary to illustrate the educational value of the information being delivered through the commentary and has inherently changed the value, audience and intention of the original video.

Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjCCNMzPP4Q

Lackluster’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/@LackLusterMedia

Sources:

Articles-
https://bit.ly/482Vnvx
https://bit.ly/3Reg5BH
https://bit.ly/3Rbkrd4

Lawsuit complaint- https://bit.ly/3Rf7z5u

State v. Hughes- https://bit.ly/3GxNgLL

State v. Hampton- https://bit.ly/3t72MuZ

New York v. Class- https://bit.ly/3NBMxgM

U. S. v. Ellison- https://bit.ly/481sksa

Graham v. Connor- https://bit.ly/3vk7YaX

Tenn. Code § 39-17-305- https://bit.ly/4a6u5Gl

Tenn. Code § 39-16-602- https://bit.ly/3uNV5dH

Tenn. Code § 39-11-106- https://bit.ly/3RgbKh4

State v. Isibor- https://bit.ly/41asACU

Tenn. Code § 39-11-611- https://bit.ly/41aBfFo

Roberts v. Anderson- https://bit.ly/41espXb

Welcome to audit the audit where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions this episode covers vehicle searches excessive force and resisting and is brought To Us by lackluster Channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they

Deserve before we dive into the interaction I want to give a big thanks to the sponsor of this episode Morgan and Morgan in December of 2022 there were over 284 million Vehicles operating across the country and in 2020 alone there were over 5 million car accidents

In the US with over 1 and A2 million of those accidents resulting in injuries and over 3.6 million resulting in property damage this means that the average driver in the US will experience three to four car accidents in their lifetime many of these accidents will involve insurance claims lawsuits and

Tons of paperwork luckily Morgan and Morgan is here to help in these difficult situations not only is Morgan and Morgan America’s largest injury law firm with over 900 attorneys operating in over 100 offices across the entire country but they have developed the simplest and most intuitive way to seek

The compensation you deserve many people have the impression that hiring an attorney is a daunting task full of endless paperwork meetings and research but the legal experts at Morgan and Morgan have modernized the injury law process so you can submit a claim and communicate with your legal Team all

From your phone with Morgan and Morgan there’s no need for you to visit law offices and sit through long consultations you can submit a claim and have a lawyer review your case with only eight clicks on your phone and the best part is you only pay if they win there

Are no upfront costs signup fees or hidden invoices if they don’t win your case you pay nothing over 3 million people trust Morgan and Morgan to help in their time of need every year and with over 4,000 support staff available at any hour to help with your case you

Can submit a claim anytime if you’re ever injured in an accident you can submit a claim at www. forthepeople.com audit the audit or by dialing pound law that’s pound 529 on your phone thanks again to Morgan and Morgan for sponsoring today’s episode in the late evening of December 3rd 2021 officer

Teddy Dyer officer Candace Miller and Sergeant David Myrick of the East Ridge Police Department in Tennessee responded to a call for a wellchild check at the residence of Haley sherard when they arrived at the home they found Haley’s mother Ang sherard along with her son

Devon in a vehicle in front of the house officer Dyer approached the vehicle from the right passenger side and the encounter that followed was captured on his body camera hello hey what’s up hey do you live here um my daughter’s living here is she and in this is that 893 yeah

It is hang on one second for me okay something wrong well we got called to check on a child what child I don’t know they didn’t tell us as you said do a welfare check from when like what do they say I don’t know we go up and knock is that your

Daughter coming now [ __ ] what’s her name he going up to the door well how old to 2 years old is there a 2-year-old that lives here okay I bet it was um four Mike three seven golf 4 why you running my tag cuz I smell marijuana you smell marijuana yes

Because you smell Mar wanted that gives you the right to run my tag not only that I’m going to search a car you’re not going to search anything yes ma’am no you’re not I promise you you are not going to break my rights right now you’re about to get your rights in the

Back of my car well it’s that’s what you want to do because you’re you do because I haven’t done anything I haven’t or anything you just sit there and talk to me and and you’re going to sech my car I am going to search your

Car and you’re running my tag I am going I’m not doing anything but sitting out here waiting for my daughter to come back don’t care your car is going to be searched and if you interfere with my search I will put you in the car I’ll

Take you to jail you go ahead and you violate my rights then okay you violate my rights put your hands on the car officer Dyer claims he is going to run the vehicle’s tags and search it because he smells marijuana Tennessee is one of the minority of states that as of the

Date of writing this episode have not legalized or decriminalized either recreational or medical marijuana although the state has legalized hemp and CBD oil accordingly in the 1976 case of State versus Hughes the Supreme Court of Tennesseee held that the odor of marijuana coming from a vehicle constitutes probable cause to believe

That the vehicle contains Contraband marijuana in the 2022 case of State versus Hampton the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee rejected an argument that with the legalization of hemp the quote unquote plain smell of marijuana no longer established probable cause for a warrantless vehicle search as the smell of marijuana is

Indistinguishable from the smell of hemp concluding that now quoting until our Supreme Court or our legisl determines otherwise the smell of marijuana continues to establish probable cause for the warrantless search of an automobile accordingly if a court believed officer dire’s assertion that he smelled marijuana it is highly likely

That it would determine he had the probable cause necessary to search m sard’s vehicle now as to the constitutionality of running M sharar’s tags courts have consistently concluded that officers do not violate the fourth amendment by searching for an individual’s license plate in a police database even when they do not have any

Reason to suspect any sort of criminality as the Supreme Court explained in the 1986 case of New York versus class quote a citizen does not surrender all the protections of the fourth amendment by entering an automobile nonetheless the state’s intrusion into a particular area whether in an automobile or elsewhere cannot

Result in a Fourth Amendment violation unless the area is one in which there is a constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy the court then held that an officer did not violate the fourth amendment by reaching into the passenger compartment of a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation to move

Move papers obscuring its vehicle identification number or V or vin reasoning that individuals do not have reasonable expectations of privacy in their vins as they are required by law to be located in a place ordinarily in plain view from the exterior of the automobile applying this and other precedents courts have generally

Concluded that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in a license plate number and that officers May therefore run tags of a vehicle in plain view without implicating the Fourth Amendment for instance in the 2006 case of US versus Ellison the sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which has jurisdiction

Over Tennessee determined that quote so long as the officer had a right to be in a position to observe the defendant’s license plate any such observation and corresponding use of the information on the plate does not violate the Fourth Amendment as such a court would almost certainly find that officer Dyer was

Within his constitutional authority to run M chard’s plates regardless of whether or not he actually smelled any marijuana yo what are you you’re going to put I said put your hands on the car arresting me for put your hand back up hey don’t you put [Applause] Your I’m sozzy right now he just B my oh my God oh my God shut up St he’s ping my get in the car get in the car oh my God I can’t I’m too hey sucks to be you get in the car I didn’t do anything

You’re a woman you’re going to treat me like this you’re going to get tased get in the car get in the car get in the car I’m getting in the car okay I’m in I’m in although it is difficult to tell exactly what happened from the body camera footage and lackluster reported

That the other officer’s body camera footage had been quote unquote purged Miss Gerard’s attorney detailed the officer’s use of force against her in a federal law lawsuit stemming from this encounter according to the complaint officer Dyer grabbed Miss Gerard slammed her face onto the partially opened window of her vehicle banged her head

Onto her vehicle and handcuffed her the lawsuit also asserts that officer Dyer then pushed her against the back of a police vehicle and jerked her head backward by grabbing her hair after she had been handcuffed a few moments later after Miss sherard was escorted to the police vehicle officer Anna Simmons

Arrived on the scene and Sergeant Myrick quote unquote Drive stunned Miss sherard with her taser as she struggled to get in the vehicle the term Drive stun refers to holding a taser device against the target without firing the projectiles which is intended to caus pain but not incapacitation despite the

Fact that Miss sherard explicitly told the officers that she did not believe she was able to get into the back of the vehicle due to her size officer Simmons chose to leave this fact out of her police report which lackluster obtained and included in his video according to officer Simmons’s narrative now quoting

Gerard was escorted to the police unit however continued her refusal of compliance and would not get in the vehicle police continued to give numerous lawful orders to get into the police unit and she did not comply police Drive stun sherard to gain compliance which was successful now as

We’ve discussed before here on ATA whether or not the use of force during an arrest or investigatory stop of a free citizen is quote unquote excessive is analyzed under the so-called reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to be secure in their persons against unreasonable seizures of the

Person as the Supreme Court explained in the Landmark 1989 case of Graham versus Connor although now quoting Fourth Amendment Juris Prudence has long recognized that the right to make an arrest or investigatory stop necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat

Thereof to affect it any use of force must be reasonable under the totality of the circumstances in the Graham case the court noted that quote the reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene rather than with the 2020

Vision of hindsight it and ultimately identified three factors that Court should consider when evaluating the constitutionality of a use of force stating that now quoting because the test of reasonableness under the fourth amendment is not capable of precise definition or mechanical application its proper application requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances

Of each particular case including the severity of the crime at issue whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight applying the three so-called Graham factors to miss Gerard’s arrest she

Would have a strong argument that the officers used excessive force in conducting the arrest and in tasing her when she struggled to get into the vehicle as it is unclear for what crime she was even arrested for in the first place and although it is possible that she struggled some against the officer’s

Use of force against her she was not actively resisting or posing a safety threat to the officers when she was tased or slammed into the vehicle additionally even if Miss Shard did struggle during her arrest she would still have a legitimate argument that pulling her hair after she was

Handcuffed and banging her head against the car was excessive shut the up before I take your to jail too get back she just got run the baby you do not to arrest her girl do not push me what is wrong with you who did it I need to know

Who did it who did what who tased my M she didn’t get tased get T then why was there a taser going off over there checking the fire I guess so then why was there a taser about you worry about you we’ll worry about your mama I don’t

Really give a y’all are violating our rights right now which one you want to act like a big girl you’re going to get treated like a big girl so I drive stun her mom to get her in the car uh other than that she’s perfectly fine just

Drive done I’m just making sure yeah no she just drives done but I did it twice I’m emotionally invested can I take her yes well we were I love it when you do this going to the hospital I’m going to come I’m talking talking I’m I’m telling

You what’s going to happen okay you’re very rude taking Mom for disorderly conduct resistance stop H Frisk officer Dyer states that he is taking Miss Gerard to jail for disorderly conduct and resisting under section 39-1 17-35 of the Tennessee code quote a person commits an offense who in a

Public place and with intent to cause public annoyance or alarm engages in fighting or in violent or threatening behavior refuses to obey an official order to disperse issued to maintain public safety and dangerous proximity to a fire hazard or other emergency or creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act that

Serves no legitimate purpose further the statute states that now quoting again a person also violates this section who makes unreasonable noise that prevents others from carrying on lawful activities in this instance Miss sherrard’s actions did not appear to rise to the level of disorderly conduct because although she spoke assertively

She did not even raise her voice at officer Dyer until right before he grabbed her and certainly did not make unreasonable noise engage in fighting violent or threatening behavior or create a hazardous or physically offensive condition in fact officer Dyer’s voice was noticeably louder and more aggressive than Miss Gerard’s was I

Promise you you’re not going to break rights right now you’re about to get your rights in the back of my car I said put your hands on the car you’re arresting me for put your hand back up he don’t you put in her police report officer Simmons summarized the encounter

Differently stating that after Miss Gerard was informed her vehicle would be searched quote Gerard became belligerent with police screaming and yelling that the police were not going to search the vehicle Gerard continued to scream and yell causing even further disorder now while the behavior described in the police report could potentially support

A disorderly conduct conviction based on the body camera footage of what actually occurred it seems unlikely that a court would find that Miss Gerard could be convicted of disorderly conduct or that her arrest was even supported by probable cause as to the resisting charge according to section 39-16 602 of

The Tennessee code quote it is an offense for a person to intentionally prevent or obstruct anyone known to the person to be a law enforcement officer from affecting a stop Frisk halt arrest or search of any person by using Force against the law enforcement officer now although the statute requires an

Individual to use Force against a law enforcement officer section 39-11 d106 of the Tennessee code states that quote Force means compulsion by the use of physical power or violence and shall be broadly construed to accomplish the purposes of this title and in the 1997 case of State versus isabor the Court of

Criminal Appeals of Tennessee determined that an individual’s actions in flailing his arms and struggling in an effort to avoid being handcuffed were sufficient to support a resisting conviction accordingly if Miss sherard physically struggled against the officer’s attempts to arrest her she could potentially be convicted of resisting however while the

Resisting statute also states that now quoting except as provided in section 39-11 d611 is it is no defense to prosecution under this section that the stop Frisk halt arrest or search was unlawful section 39-11 d611 of the Tennessee code allows individuals to use force in self-defense during an arrest

When now quoting the law enforcement officer uses greater force than necessary to make the arrest and the person using Force reasonably believes that the force is immediately necessary to protect against the law enforcement officers use of greater force than necessary in other words as the sixth Circuit Court of Appeals explained in

The 2007 case of Roberts versus Anderson quote under Tennessee law an officer’s excessive use of force is a defense to a charge of resisting or evading arrest accordingly while Tennessee allows individuals to be convicted of resisting an arrest that is not supported by probable cause Miss Gerard would be able

To attempt to defend herself against any resisting charge by arguing that the officers were using excessive force it just the car can just stay here I mean I’m her daughter please don’t like it’s already like please don’t cuz like out of jail and I just Bab and I’m and I

Feel for you and I’m not trying to cause you no headache you just got to understand we have a job to do also step out let’s talk how old are you man I’m 18 sir 18 mhm and I’m a man un like you why you

Got to my mama like that bro you going keep all right I tried I you see I Tred to talk to you like a man I Tred to talk why you have to do her like that bro get in the car I I tried to talk to you I

Tried I tried I’m not your bro you see I tried you see I tried to talk to him how old is he 18 he’s old enough to take a ride he goes to the big boy jail listen I want you to know how this would have

Went ma’am I’m going to have to search a car okay I didn’t find anything guess what have a good night after Miss Gerard’s arrest the officer searched her vehicle and found no marijuana or any illegal Contraband they also conducted the well child check and found the child

In question healthy and happy inside the home miss Gerard was transported by EMS pass to a hospital where she was medically cleared and then charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest the officers released Haley and Angel’s 15-year-old daughter who had been handcuffed during the encounter but Devon was charged with disorderly

Conduct on April 19th 2022 the state of Tennessee dismissed all charges against Angel and Devon on July 12th 2022 Angel Devon and her minor daughter filed a lawsuit in state court and the case was removed to federal court on August 11th 2022 the lawsuit alleged multiple constitutional violations and state law

Tort claims against the individual officers involved in the encounter as well as the city of East Ridge on September 21st 2023 the shards reached a settlement agreement with East Ridge although the amount received by the adult shards has not been disclosed due to Tennessee laws requiring Court approval of settlements and legal fees

For minors we know that Miss Gerard’s minor daughter received a settlement of $110,000 with $4,000 of that sum being paid to her attorney now although the population of East Ridge is less than 22,000 the chard’s lawsuit is not not the only civil rights case that has recently been filed against the city

Alleging police misconduct including a case where officer Dyer is accused of using excessive force against the citizen and officer Miller is accused of failing to intervene and another lawsuit alleging that officer Simmons used excessive force in preventing a patient from leaving a hospital on December 22nd 2022 the East Ridge Police Department

Fired officer Simmons for so-called use of force and so-called discourteous behavior during another encounter on December 29th 2022 it was confirmed that officer Simmons had been hired by the Bradley County Sheriff’s Office less than a week after her termination as she was reported as the Department’s first

Responding officer to a car accident on Christmas Day in May of 2023 officer Simmons resigned from the Bradley County Sheriff’s Office for undisclosed reasons no disciplinary action has been publicly reported for the other officers involved in the encounter with the shards overall the East Ridge officers get an F for

Using unnecessary Force against M sherard blatantly misrepresenting Miss Gerard’s conduct during the encounter in an apparent attempt to manufacture criminality and justify their actions and seeming to take pleasure in subjecting M Shard to both physical abuse and emotionally demeaning Behavior officer Simmons in particular seemed to relish misusing her Authority telling

Miss Gerard and I quote sucks to be you when she revealed that she could not fit in the backseat of the police vehicle and openly admitting that she was quote unquote emotionally invested in seeing miss Gerard to be processed desite the fact that she had not committed any

Crimes there are too many issues with the officer’s behavior in this encounter for us to discuss all of them but on the whole they remained unprofessional aggressive and cruel throughout the interaction and likely violated the constitutional rights of all of the present members of the sherard family

Miss sherard gets an A minus because while she was mistaken about the legality of Officer Dyer’s decision to run her tags she opposed a potentially illegal search of her vehicle fought the charges against her in court and took proper legal action against the officers after the encounter although the search

Of a vehicle may have been lawful if officer Dyer actually smelled marijuana given the clear lack of honesty in the way the East Ridge PD represented other aspects of the encounter and the absence of marijuana in the vehicle it is more than plausible that officer Dyer was

Simply lying about the odor which would make the search clearly unconstitutional beyond that the physical force and verbal abuse that Miss Gerard and her family were subjected to during this altercation was inexcusable and I commend the shards for filing a lawsuit to attempt to hold these officers accountable for their reprehensible

Actions let us know if there’s an interaction or legal topic that you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don’t forget to check out my second channel for even more police interaction Content