Uploaded April 2025 | Updated September 2026, 2 hours ago
UPDATE - PART 2. Richard Weed has filed motions to dismiss the case, which were denied. I wanted to take a look - not as a lawyer - but as an citizen interested in Constitutional law, and see what has taken place. I reviewed some cases on these issues. While this is not legal advice, I see a possible avenue of attack that Richard's legal team could use - which is to challenge on undisputed facts: 1) the stop was allegedly a pretext (the bumper sticker); and 2) that the exhaust does not violate any specific ordinance. If those two things are true, then the judge must rule on not disputed issues, but undisputed issues, which becomes a pure question of law. It may be that this would then wipe out the gun charge because the basis for the stop was unconstitutional. The motions to dismiss did not - from what I could tell - challenge the reasons for the stop through videotaped admissions (e.g., the bumper sticker), nor offer up evidence of the statute regarding exhaust noise, and how it was even violated. If there are no other legitimate reasons for the stop, then it seems the whole case must be tossed.
VIDEO LINK FOR UPDATE: youtube.com/watch?v=V6Ymuo0paGA
Reminiscent of “Bait Car,” the sting operation launched by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department many years ago to catch car thieves with cameras in the bait car, Direct D presented this amazing video of a “Bait Truck,” which is driven in the Mesa city streets. Direct D narrates and wasn't the driver. The truck serves as “bait” to attract cops, watches them with cameras, and includes an axe suspended from the rear window. Direct D raised several important questions, including the right to remain silent, the extent of a lawful search, and other things as well. The video admissions are stunning, and the whole point of this video was not to antagonize the cops. The cops were free to ignore the truck. The cop admits the truck was pulled over due to an offensive bumper sticker, but that's the reason he gave to the driver. I provide some insights on the Arizona Revised Statutes and relevant Ninth Circuit case authority on this matter, including a dismissal of the gun charges if an unlawful arrest. All persons are presumed innocent and free of fault unless and until final judgment is rendered. I can only base my reaction from this video, and I am not expressing any legal opinion. I am not licensed in Arizona, and provide my reaction purely as a citizen under the protection of both Arizona and California’s anti-SLAPP laws. No attorney-client relationship is formed, this video cannot be relied upon as legal authority for anything, and is just my reaction based on a public issue involving citizens and the police. All rights reserved. Any information that is in error or that should be included will be added in the description. The video is on Direct D’s channel. I did not ask him for permission to run this video, but presumed he would give consent, since it does provide relevant information to the questions he asked.
@ValleyOfTheSunNewsNetwork
@Direct_D
UPDATE - PART 2. Richard Weed has filed motions to dismiss the case, which were denied. I wanted to take a look - not as a lawyer - but as an citizen interested in Constitutional law, and see what has taken place. I reviewed some cases on these issues. While this is not legal advice, I see a possible avenue of attack that Richard's legal team could use - which is to challenge on undisputed facts: 1) the stop was allegedly a pretext (the bumper sticker); and 2) that the exhaust does not violate any specific ordinance. If those two things are true, then the judge must rule on not disputed issues, but undisputed issues, which becomes a pure question of law. It may be that this would then wipe out the gun charge because the basis for the stop was unconstitutional. The motions to dismiss did not - from what I could tell - challenge the reasons for the stop through videotaped admissions (e.g., the bumper sticker), nor offer up evidence of the statute regarding exhaust noise, and how it was even violated. If there are no other legitimate reasons for the stop, then it seems the whole case must be tossed.
VIDEO LINK FOR UPDATE: youtube.com/watch?v=V6Ymuo0paGA
Reminiscent of “Bait Car,” the sting operation launched by the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department many years ago to catch car thieves with cameras in the bait car, Direct D presented this amazing video of a “Bait Truck,” which is driven in the Mesa city streets. Direct D narrates and wasn't the driver. The truck serves as “bait” to attract cops, watches them with cameras, and includes an axe suspended from the rear window. Direct D raised several important questions, including the right to remain silent, the extent of a lawful search, and other things as well. The video admissions are stunning, and the whole point of this video was not to antagonize the cops. The cops were free to ignore the truck. The cop admits the truck was pulled over due to an offensive bumper sticker, but that's the reason he gave to the driver. I provide some insights on the Arizona Revised Statutes and relevant Ninth Circuit case authority on this matter, including a dismissal of the gun charges if an unlawful arrest. All persons are presumed innocent and free of fault unless and until final judgment is rendered. I can only base my reaction from this video, and I am not expressing any legal opinion. I am not licensed in Arizona, and provide my reaction purely as a citizen under the protection of both Arizona and California’s anti-SLAPP laws. No attorney-client relationship is formed, this video cannot be relied upon as legal authority for anything, and is just my reaction based on a public issue involving citizens and the police. All rights reserved. Any information that is in error or that should be included will be added in the description. The video is on Direct D’s channel. I did not ask him for permission to run this video, but presumed he would give consent, since it does provide relevant information to the questions he asked.
@ValleyOfTheSunNewsNetwork
@Direct_D
