A very troubling case of racial profiling recently transpired on the streets of New York City involving multiple NYPD officers and a Black police academy graduate named Michael McQueen.
On May 22, 2022, McQueen, a retired disabled military veteran, was unlawfully questioned and pressured by NYPD officers for parking in a handicap spot at a 7-Eleven convenience store located near the Dallas Fort Worth area. Despite properly displaying disabled veteran plates on his vehicle, the officers inexplicably demanded that McQueen produce an ID without providing any legal justification.
McQueen firmly stood up for his rights by vocalizing his intricate knowledge of the relevant laws and regulations. He suggested the officers immediately verify his disabled veteran status by simply running his license plate number through their system. However, McQueen’s sound advice fell on deaf ears.
The officers, later identified as Captain Scott Peters and Sergeant Sean Figer of the Joshua Police Department, continued to aggressively press McQueen for identification while refusing to check his plates or offer any valid rationale for their invasive actions.
As the unlawful confrontation escalated, McQueen rightfully asserted that he was under no legal obligation to comply with the officers’ demands or answer any questions without probable cause. McQueen stated he had every right to promptly leave the scene if he was not officially being detained.
McQueen also vocalized the well-established laws allowing disabled veterans like himself to legally park in handicap spots with the proper license plates. He highlighted that this law had been in place for many years, strongly calling into question the officers’ suspect knowledge of basic parking regulations.
Despite McQueen’s repeated attempts to de-escalate the situation by urging the officers to look up the parking regulations for disabled veterans themselves, the officers continued to menacingly insist that McQueen produce identification without any legal basis.
Michael McQueen Stood His Ground and Defended His Rights
As the conversation continues, Mr. McQueen asserts his rights, questioning the officer’s authority and expressing his knowledge of the law. He challenges the officers, stating that he is not obligated to answer their questions without probable cause and asserts his right to leave if not detained.
He also points out that as a person with a disabled veteran plate, he’s allowed to park at a handicapped spot, emphasizing that this has been the case for some time.
Mr. McQueen asserts that individuals with disabled veteran license plates like himself have the legal right to park in handicapped spots, a privilege granted for years. According to Section 504.202 of the Texas Transportation Code, a U.S. armed forces veteran is eligible for disabled veteran license plates if they have suffered at least a 50% service-connected disability or a 40% service-connected disability due to the amputation of a lower extremity.
The person must own the vehicle, have a gross weight of 18,000 pounds or less, or be a motor home. Disabled veteran license plates typically include the letters DV and the words “Disabled Veteran” and “U.S. Armed Forces.” Notably, individuals can obtain these plates without qualifying for specialty plates displaying the international symbol of accessibility.
Section 504.201 allows those with a permanent disability to acquire these plates by providing a physician statement certifying legal blindness or a substantial mobility problem.
Before 2022, Section 681.006 of the Transportation Code allowed disabled veterans to park in spaces designated for individuals with physical disabilities given they had disabled veteran plates. However, as of the 1st of January 2022, Texas Senate Bill 792 amended Section 504.202.
Disabled veterans with a qualifying permanent disability can now obtain license plates featuring the accessibility symbol by submitting a physician statement.
McQueen highlights that this change in the law ensures that only disabled veterans meeting the medical requirements can use designated parking spaces. While the footage does not show McQueen’s license plate, it remains unclear whether he has the correct disabled veteran plates to legally park on the spot.
The Officers Lacked Probable Cause and Proper Knowledge
This extremely troubling incident reveals the deep-seated issues of racial profiling and abuse of police powers currently plaguing the NYPD. It highlights the desperate need for more rigorous training programs focused on avoiding implicit biases, establishing proper legal grounds for stops, adhering to probable cause requirements, and employing de-escalation tactics.
As the encounter continues, Mr. McQueen asserts his rights, questions the legitimacy of the officer’s actions, and emphasizes the importance of probable cause before approaching individuals. He expresses frustration with what he perceives as a violation of his rights and calls for the officers to learn and abide by the law in future interactions.
Mr. McQueen argues that the officers lacked probable cause to detain him, while Captain Peters claims they had reasonable suspicions due to Mr. McQueen being in uniform.
It’s unclear why Captain Peters found Mr. McQueen’s uniform suspicious. However, if Mr. McQueen’s license plate did not meet the new legal requirements under Senate Bill 792, the officers would have reasonable suspicion to investigate him for a violation.
This section states that parking in a space designated for individuals with disabilities without proper license plates or an accessible parking placard is an offense.
Additionally, even if Mr. McQueen had the required accessibility symbol on his license plate, there’s a possibility that a court could conclude the officers had reasonable suspicion to detain him.
In the 2014 case of Heien v. North Carolina, the Supreme Court ruled that if an officer reasonably believes a faulty brake light is a violation of the law, even if it’s not, they have reasonable suspicion to conduct a stop.
The court emphasized that the Fourth Amendment’s ultimate standard is reasonableness, allowing for some mistakes by government officials as long as they are reasonable. According to the court’s viewpoint, it acknowledges that reasonable individuals can make errors, and such mistakes align with the concept of reasonable suspicion.
The court emphasizes that reasonable suspicion stems from an officer’s understanding of facts and the relevant law. Even if the officers made a reasonable mistake in thinking that a disability parking placard was required, it suggested that a court might consider it within the realm of reason.
Crucially, it’s highlighted that Texas law lacks a stop and identify requirement during a Terry stop. According to Section 38.02 of the Texas Penal Code, an offense is only committed if someone intentionally refuses to provide their name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested such information.
Refusing to self-identify during a stop based on reasonable suspicion is not a criminal offense as per Texas law.
Mr. McQueen strongly contends that the officers had no reasonable suspicion, asserting his alignment with them due to his Police Academy graduation and TCOLE certification. He challenges the officer’s grasp of the law and parking regulations, accusing them of violating people’s rights.
Both Mr. McQueen and the officers left the scene without further incident. The video, initially shared on Facebook, has since been removed, leaving uncertainty about Mr. McQueen’s plans for any further action.
The Joshua PD officers are critiqued with a C- for their conduct, acknowledging their potential reasonable suspicion but faulting them for demanding identification when it was not legally required, all while maintaining a hostile demeanor.
On the other hand, Mr. McQueen is commended with a B+ for standing up for his rights, even if his approach was occasionally aggressive, and for exhibiting superior knowledge compared to the officers regarding disabled veteran parking laws.
In the end, McQueen calls for Captain Peters to reconsider his viewpoint and stresses the importance of fostering better relationships between officers and the communities they serve.
Mr. McQueen is lauded for his resolve in upholding his rights against what is perceived as unlawful police commands. What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments. Thanks for watching until next time.
What Needs to Change Within the NYPD
McQueen’s steadfast resolve to uphold his rights in the face of unlawful police intimidation and ignorance serves as an inspiring example to all. This disturbing encounter offers many vital teaching moments for the officers involved and the NYPD as a whole.
Above all, it serves as a urgent reminder that racial profiling and overstepping legal boundaries severely erodes public trust in law enforcement. It is our collective hope that this disheartening incident motivates rapid systemic change within the NYPD to address implicit biases through updated policies, procedures and enhanced ethics training. These changes are absolutely vital for improving police-community relations moving forward.
Turning Negative Incidents Into Positive Change
The actions of these officers contradict the values of fairness, equality and integrity that the police force strives to uphold. Let’s hope this motivates positive change within the NYPD culture and policies to address implicit biases. What are your thoughts on how the NYPD can learn and improve from this?