Dallas, Texas Police State: Camera as Probable Cause

Dallas Deputy Sheriff James Westbrook
Motorcyclist: Chris Moore

WESTBROOK: “The reason you‘re being pulled over is because I’m gonna take your camera and we’re gonna use it as evidence of the crimes that have been committed by other bikers.”

MOORE: “I have not committed any crimes, and you cannot take my personal property from me, sir.”
The motorcyclist is correct and this is where he should stop, allow the cop to continue to be a bully, violate the principle of probable cause, further his illegal activities by confiscating private property, and thereafter fighting the violations by filing a complaint, suing the law enforcement agency, and following up after the cop's infractions occurred. However, it is difficult for an ordinary citizen to remain calm and fight the offending officer effectively and legally at a later time.

From the tape I do not see any evidence that Moore's license is obstructed, he spouts it off easily so he could have it memorized but in any case I see no probable cause to arrest Moore for the offense.
After the incident Moore spent eight hours in jail and, as promised from the beginning, the video from his camera was turned over to the gang unit as evidence.

The tape shows no evidence that the motorcycle club engaged in illegal driving. The traffic is light and it appears to me that the club is simply out to enjoy a Memorial Day drive themselves; this is an American right.

But the story doesn’t end there. Local station WFAA-TV caught wind of the story and aired it.



The department has said that officers that day were being taunted by large groups of riders, and has released video of that (riders also shut down the freeway last year with their antics).

The video shows that fifteen minutes before Moore was pulled over there were driving violations, and probable cause of some wrong doing particularly where a female rider was seen handing off some unknown objects to a motorcyclist and then she subsequently hops on another bike and rides off. The police were simply out manned and unable to effectively respond to the violations which must have been frustrating to the police.




What Is Probable Cause?

Probable cause must be based on factual evidence and not just on suspicion.

Most probable cause sources can be placed into four categories. These categories are:
Observation – This is information that the officer obtains through their senses, such as sight, smell or hearing. This category is also used when an officer detects a familiar pattern of criminal activity that contains suspicious behaviors (i.e., flashing headlights, circling around a certain neighborhood.)

Expertise – These are skills that officers are specially trained in, such as: being able to read gang graffiti and tattoos, detecting tools that are used in burglaries or knowing when certain movements or gestures indicate that a criminal activity is about to occur.

Information – Statements provided by witnesses and victims, information provided by informants, and announcements made through police bulletins and broadcasts.

Circumstantial Evidence – This is indirect evidence that implies that a crime has occurred but does not directly prove it.

While there are some sources of probable cause that need to be supplemented by other sources, some sources are sufficient enough to stand on their own.

For a judge to issue a search warrant, probable cause must show that it is likely that a crime took place and the person who is accused was involved in the criminal activity. If a search or arrest is made without a warrant, it must meet the standard of probable cause to be admissible in court.

Evidence obtained through searches and seizures made without probable cause can not be used against a defendant in court.


However, even if violations occurred it does not justify the actions against Moore. It does not constitute probable cause. There is no evidence to connect the earlier incidents with Moore; it would be good police work if it could be done but the officer did not perform his duties in an admirable fashion.

The deputy likely felt that earlier and unrelated incidents were frustrating when he pulled over Moore in order to seize Moore’s helmet camera.

“Well, I think in this particular case, you did need a warrant to get that piece of evidence,” Toby Shook, a former Dallas prosecutor, told the station.

He added later, “The Constitution wins out over frustration every time.”

Absolutely. Ironically, the department says no dash cam video exists from Westbrook’s squad car.
the sheriff’s department has launched an internal investigation over the matter.