I just wonder how this cop got so lucky that he randomly stopped a car with 91kg of meth in it. 91kg!!!<p>LPR will scan thousands of cars automatically, but he stated in the footage that he chose her specifically. Why?
Well, had the officer not been lucky, he'd've opened the trunk and found nothing. The stop would presumably end there¹, and so too would any discussion of the legality of the stop unless the person whose rights had been violated had the time and resources to pursue the violation "on the principle of the matter"… not something I think most people are going to have the resources to do.<p>So I wonder if we could be seeing a bit of survivorship bias.<p>¹though with cops you never know
You can tell 100 people in a day that you pulled them over specifically.<p>With training to always act as if you're being recorded, it gets a lot easier to say with a straight face.<p>It just doesn't necessarily mean anything, instead of hiding a secret reason -- which is what a statement like that is often intended do, making someone else feel anxious, nervous, and vulnerable.
California plates. I was pulled over and searched years ago in Kansas for the same reason.<p>In this case, the Flock data then showed a bunch of recent interstate travel, which cops consider to be probable cause. They know it’s not legally probable cause though, so they pointed to her “nervousness” (aka not consenting to search).<p>The real question is how many times the same cop pulled over people who he searched and found nothing. Certainly nonzero.
My guess? Parallel construction.