By: John Bush
The thin blue line, the unwritten police compact which holds that officers should get each others back no matter the circumstance, has been crossed! On day two of the Antonio Buehler trial, which wrapped up late Friday afternoon, Austin Police Officer Jermaine Hopkins testified on behalf of Antonio’s defense regarding the ins and outs of reasonable suspicion. Antonio is being tried for Class C Misdemeanor Failure to Obey the Order of an Officer in association with his infamous New Years Day 2012 arrest where he took pictures of Officers Oborski and Snider violently ripping a young woman from the passenger side of her friend’s automobile.
Day 3 of the trial takes place today with closing statements and the delivery of the verdict. Buehler’s attorney, Millie Thompson, is hoping to convince the jury that the order given to Antonio to put his hands behind his back was not a lawful order as Officer Oborski had no reasonable suspicion to detain Antonio in the first place.
Hopkins told the court that he was testifying in his personal capacity and he was doing so out of concern for Buehler’s rights. His testimony is critical to the defense’s case. If the state is able to convince the jury that Buehler did in fact disobey the order of a police officer, the defense must show the jury that the order given was in fact unlawful. To do this, Millie is making the case that Buehler was well within his rights to film the police and even express his verbal disapproval of their actions. Hopkin’s testimony showed that verbal expression alone is not enough to be considered interference nor would it in any way constitute reasonable suspicion which is necessary in order to detain someone. His testimony was especially crucial as Oborski and Snider, at the direction of the Prosecutor, had previously told the court that reasonable suspicion was when someone merely seemed out of place.
Hopkins has a history of going against the grain at APD. During his testimony Friday, it was revealed that he is currently on administrative leave for taking a complaint of discrimination outside of the chain of command. For bringing forward the complaint, Hopkins stated APD retaliated against him witholding his overtime pay. He later got the Department of Labor involved and they decided against APD.
This time around, Hopkins’ crossing of the thin blue line will cost him more than overtime pay. During the trial, Millie Thompson asked Officer Hopkins if he has faced retaliation for his role in testifying on behalf of Buehler’s defense. Hopkin’s replied stating that upon his supervisor hearing he was subpoenaed and would be testifying in the case, he told him he would no longer have a job after October 30th.
It appears that when an officer goes against the thin blue line, his days on the force are numbered. Antonio Buehler and his supporters are hoping that through this trial, the scrutiny of the public will be turned on the leadership of Austin Police Department for their insistence on covering up the misconduct of their employees and firing those who attempt to hold their fellow officers accountable. Until the thin blue line dissolves, expect business to continue as usual.
No matter how thick the blue line may be, there is strength in numbers, there is strength in unity, and is strength in unity. Buehler and his supporters seem to have all three of those things in their corner. If the jury agrees, the thin blue line may not be enough to hold back the truth in this case. Only time will tell. Stay tuned to the Liberty Beat twitter feed at http://twitter.com/thelibertybeat to get live updates from Day 3 of the Antonio Buehler trial. Be the first to hear the verdict!