TV on bike handlebars leads to felony...

TV on bike handlebars leads to felony charges for Utica man

There are 76 comments on the WKTV story from Sep 18, 2013, titled TV on bike handlebars leads to felony charges for Utica man. In it, WKTV reports that:

A 24-year-old Utica man was arrested Tuesday after police spotted him riding a bike with a flat-screen TV propped on the handlebars, Utica police say.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WKTV.

Level 7

Since: Jan 08

Rome

#21 Sep 19, 2013
Tom wrote:
I am simply saying that I would hope that a police officer would stop and question someone riding a bike with a tv on the handlebars at minimum for the biker's safety not to mention at least I think its a little suspicious. Perhaps this topic is too much for you to understand.
I get what you're saying, Tom.

What Titanium, me and others here are saying is that poor people and ignorant people give up their 4th amendment and 5th amendment rights when asked questions or asked for permission to search by the police.

Intelligent, knowledgeable people understand they do not have to submit to questioning or searches simply because a police officer asks.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#22 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>It's our right by law to remain silent. By the sounds of it he sung like a canary. You missed the point completely. While I'm glad that this thief is off the street I'm not happy how it was handled. So what if a person is lugging a tv down the street in the middle of the day in broad daylight? It's NOT against the law. The cop could of asked questions and maybe got a name. But that's it. You can't detain a person without good cause.
Check out our constitutional rights. They are there for a reason. It's people like you who scare me. One's that think it's okay to stomp all over our rights and arrest and detain people for ANY reason. I'd hate to hear what you think about gun rights. Prob take all them away too?
The "good cause" is the suspicious activity. Don't you think he looked suspicious?
lol

Cadiz, KY

#23 Sep 20, 2013
frankcor wrote:
<quoted text>I get what you're saying, Tom.

What Titanium, me and others here are saying is that poor people and ignorant people give up their 4th amendment and 5th amendment rights when asked questions or asked for permission to search by the police.

Intelligent, knowledgeable people understand they do not have to submit to questioning or searches simply because a police officer asks.
So what you're saying is, if he had been a smart and not poor person riding a bike with a TV on the handlebars, he wouldn't have looked suspicious or got arrested because he would have known to invoke his right to remain silent? Smart -stupid, rich -poor, black-white ... He looked suspicious and should have been stopped and questioned. It's not everyday a person rides a bike with a tv on their handlebars.

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#24 Sep 20, 2013
lol wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're saying is, if he had been a smart and not poor person riding a bike with a TV on the handlebars, he wouldn't have looked suspicious or got arrested because he would have known to invoke his right to remain silent? Smart -stupid, rich -poor, black-white ... He looked suspicious and should have been stopped and questioned. It's not everyday a person rides a bike with a tv on their handlebars.
Where's the line we draw in the sand though? How about a black guy walking down the street in a nice part of the neighborhood? Is that enough to be stopped and searched? Maybe that's a bad example, who knows. But as weird as it seems, carrying a tv on a bicycle IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY is NOT illegal. It might warrant a few questions from police... but here's the important part... you DON'T have to answer those questions. it is your right to not have to talk to police ever.
But remember also, if somebody is doing something odd that doesn't make him/her a criminal. We have rights that protect us from illegal searches and detainment.

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#25 Sep 20, 2013
lol wrote:
<quoted text>
The "good cause" is the suspicious activity. Don't you think he looked suspicious?
In the middle of the night I'd say he would look suspicious. During the middle of the day when this happened I would think it was odd. However, if I was police and stopped this person for questions and he refused to answer anything I'd have to let him go. Most I could get is a name for my report. Because last I checked carrying a tv down the street isn't illegal and I can't arrest of detain someone (legally) just because I might "think" he committed a crime.

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#26 Sep 20, 2013
There's an excellent video on Youtube that has over 3 million views of why you shouldn't speak to police. It's def worth a watch. Let me know what you think.

Level 7

Since: Jan 08

Rome

#27 Sep 20, 2013
lol, you got a problem with any other parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

Wanna do away with the 1st and 2nd Amendements too? That'll make it easier to kill the 4th and 5th that way.
hank brackett

Verona, NY

#28 Sep 20, 2013
frankcor wrote:
If he could carry all that on a bicycle, he sounds resourceful enough to find a keep a job. Wouldn't that be easier than peddling a couple hundred pounds of crap around on a bike?
Let's also consider the gene pool of this person. It's obvious we're not talking about a Colgate U. graduate here. If criminals had 2 molecules of brain matter they could commit alot of property crimes before they are caught. This guy obviously needs to rest his overtaxed brain, considering how & when he got caught.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#29 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>Where's the line we draw in the sand though? How about a black guy walking down the street in a nice part of the neighborhood? Is that enough to be stopped and searched? Maybe that's a bad example, who knows. But as weird as it seems, carrying a tv on a bicycle IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY is NOT illegal. It might warrant a few questions from police... but here's the important part... you DON'T have to answer those questions. it is your right to not have to talk to police ever.
But remember also, if somebody is doing something odd that doesn't make him/her a criminal. We have rights that protect us from illegal searches and detainment.
Yeah black man walking down the street in the middle if the day is not a good example. He does not look suspicious. A man riding a bike with a TV on the handlebars DOES look suspicious. I never said the idiot had to answer any questions however, when he is asked where he got the tv ( which he doesn't have to answer) and he doesn't have a good answer for such a simple question, it will most likely reaffirm the officers suspicious theory. Would you have wanted an officer to stop and question this man has it been your TV he was toting on his bike? Stop with the damn "Constitutional Rights" BS, these officers did their JOB and they did it well.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#30 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>In the middle of the night I'd say he would look suspicious. During the middle of the day when this happened I would think it was odd. However, if I was police and stopped this person for questions and he refused to answer anything I'd have to let him go. Most I could get is a name for my report. Because last I checked carrying a tv down the street isn't illegal and I can't arrest of detain someone (legally) just because I might "think" he committed a crime.
A thief has NO set hours. They steal when the opportunity arises. Police have 24hrs to detain a person before they must release them or charge them.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#31 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
There's an excellent video on Youtube that has over 3 million views of why you shouldn't speak to police. It's def worth a watch. Let me know what you think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =6wXkI4t7nucXX
Why are you so supportive of the bad guy not being questioned?

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#32 Sep 20, 2013
lol wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you so supportive of the bad guy not being questioned?
Once again, you guys read what YOU want to read. I am supportive of people, GOOD OR BAD, NOT answering any questions.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#33 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>Once again, you guys read what YOU want to read. I am supportive of people, GOOD OR BAD, NOT answering any questions.
Just how do you expect officers to solve crimes if they don't ask questions? ESP?
harken

Utica, NY

#34 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
Thank you for the reply. People out there are letting their constitutional rights get trampled on all the time. While I'm glad this dirtbag is in jail I question the manner in which he was arrested. Although, like any other stupid criminal, I'm sure he willingly gave the police all the details they needed to convict him.
Once again, thanks for the reply.
Another worthless topix lawyer. You are wrong. Home reports burglary; police view individual in the vicinity, carrying household goods. Police stop and detain individual for questioning regarding burglary. What rights have been violated?
lol

Cadiz, KY

#35 Sep 20, 2013
harken wrote:
<quoted text>Another worthless topix lawyer. You are wrong. Home reports burglary; police view individual in the vicinity, carrying household goods. Police stop and detain individual for questioning regarding burglary. What rights have been violated?
IKR! I call them outhouse lawyers.

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#36 Sep 20, 2013
harken wrote:
<quoted text>
Another worthless topix lawyer. You are wrong. Home reports burglary; police view individual in the vicinity, carrying household goods. Police stop and detain individual for questioning regarding burglary. What rights have been violated?
Let's stick to the scenario at hand. There was NO home that reported a burglary. Just some random dude with a tv on a bike going down the street in broad daylight.
Sure, go ahead and change what happened to fit what you think. Why didn't you just say some dude was caught coming out of a broken window with a tv?
Please try to keep the story on topic.
But to answer YOUR question. In that scenario it's absolutely fine to stop and detain the suspect.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#37 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>Let's stick to the scenario at hand. There was NO home that reported a burglary. Just some random dude with a tv on a bike going down the street in broad daylight.
Sure, go ahead and change what happened to fit what you think. Why didn't you just say some dude was caught coming out of a broken window with a tv?
Please try to keep the story on topic.
But to answer YOUR question. In that scenario it's absolutely fine to stop and detain the suspect.
Dude did you NOT read the article? He had a TV and collectible coins in his pockets. While he was being questioned, a burglary report came in from a home in the same neighborhood. Crimes won't and don't get solved if questions are asked. Especially questions of suspicious people.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#38 Sep 20, 2013
Reasonable suspicion is as follows:
http://www.google.com/url...

“I Make you wonder”

Level 7

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#39 Sep 20, 2013
lol wrote:
<quoted text>
Dude did you NOT read the article? He had a TV and collectible coins in his pockets. While he was being questioned, a burglary report came in from a home in the same neighborhood. Crimes won't and don't get solved if questions are asked. Especially questions of suspicious people.
Yes. Read the article again. The call came in AFTER the suspect was already at the police station. AFTER.
Try to follow along here.... let's assume the suspect didn't say anything at all to police. He verbally said he pleads the right to remain silent at the scene. On what grounds do they arrest him? Carrying a tv down the street?
You guys are quick to jump steps but I feel you are missing the entire point. You don't ever HAVE to speak to police and tell them anything other then your name in this situation. Of course being the idiot that the criminal is, he sung like a canary.

And to answer your question above, about how police are supposed to solve crimes. 95% of people give the police ALL the information they need. The point of the video is to NOT speak to police at all. Guilty or innocent. Ever. Let the police do their job to protect and serve.

Should we give up our guns as well? So when someone breaks into our home we'll just sit around for the police to show up?
Last I checked, NY isn't a police state. We do have rights. It's up to the individual to exercise them.
lol

Cadiz, KY

#40 Sep 20, 2013
Titanium22 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes. Read the article again. The call came in AFTER the suspect was already at the police station. AFTER.
Try to follow along here.... let's assume the suspect didn't say anything at all to police. He verbally said he pleads the right to remain silent at the scene. On what grounds do they arrest him? Carrying a tv down the street?
You guys are quick to jump steps but I feel you are missing the entire point. You don't ever HAVE to speak to police and tell them anything other then your name in this situation. Of course being the idiot that the criminal is, he sung like a canary.

And to answer your question above, about how police are supposed to solve crimes. 95% of people give the police ALL the information they need. The point of the video is to NOT speak to police at all. Guilty or innocent. Ever. Let the police do their job to protect and serve.

Should we give up our guns as well? So when someone breaks into our home we'll just sit around for the police to show up?
Last I checked, NY isn't a police state. We do have rights. It's up to the individual to exercise them.
A suspicious person can be detained and transported to headquarters for questioning. Actually he can be detained for 24 hrs before being released or charged. We are not talking about an innocent person here, he are talking about a guilty person. And good police work. Any day of the week at any time of day, if I saw a person riding a bike with a flat screen tv on the handlebars it would appear suspcious. You see no problem with it, that's fine. One could only hope that that you become the next victim, then maybe you would change your mind. This has absolutely nothing to do with any of this criminals rights being violated. He didn't say, I don't want to talk to you. And because he didn't say that, he was transported and questioned further. I'm pretty sure this criminal knew he was caught which is why he cooperated.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
fly a drone in my backyard 30 min Grandson 5
A third term for Obama 33 min Bob 17
WELSH IS ONLY CHOICE FOR COUNTY LEGISLATOR IN 1... 58 min Trouble amongst us 68
Instead of Lions 1 hr Unticannoli 6
Any recommendations for a travel agency? 1 hr Traveler 1
St Patricks School (Dec '09) 3 hr JMS 69
Help!...where can I sell loose gemstones? (Nov '12) 5 hr Stephanie 107
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Utica Mortgages