Mr. Hagen showed his arrogant and above-the-law attitude by getting involved in a recent traffic stop. I find his knowledge of police work just amazing. He says he noticed a deputy was pulling over a car that wasn’t speeding, so he didn’t know what that was about. Obviously, it could be a lot of different things. And as he drove past, he noticed it was a Black driver.

Would you have been concerned if it was another race? It was none of your business. There are hundreds of reasons that deputy could have been stopping that vehicle. I trained deputies for the sheriff’s office and I can guarantee you they were not trained to stop someone because of their race.

The first five minutes of a traffic stop are the most dangerous, Mr. Hagen. You have no idea who the driver or occupants are. Yes, they just committed a traffic violation, but what else may they have done before being stopped? If you’re unaware, Mr. Hagen, several police officers have been killed in the last few months on traffic stops. Some were set-up stops/ambushes to execute the officer.

You distracting the deputy from his stop could have resulted in serious injury or death to the driver or the deputy. You seemed more concerned about the driver than the deputy. Why?

Mr. Hagen states, “I didn’t do it as a council member. I did it as a concerned citizen.” Then why did you identify yourself as a county council member when confronted by the deputy? You also refused to leave when told to to so, which is a crime. The other council members should be addressing this because it appears you were trying to use your position as a Council member to influence the outcome of the stop. Mr. Hagen also appears to have violated several laws. The sheriff should charge him or have the state’s attorney investigate it.

Mr. Hagen has the same beliefs as most liberals, what applies to thee doesn’t apply to me.

I hope the sheriff has a change of mind and charges Mr. Hagen. If he doesn’t, Mr. Hagen will become more embolden to do the same again. If you read what he says in the paper, he believed he did nothing wrong and had every right to interfere with what the police were doing.

Sheriff Jenkins, charge this man.

Bradley Baxter


(70) comments


I am wondering if Mr. Baxter also trained the deputies to choke out young men with Down's syndrome for the horrific crime of overstaying a show at the movie theater?

Hmmm that is a troubling thought shiftless88...but I'm glad you thought it. Because wow if that's true...OMG.....can a trainer be held accountable?


Like everything else in this crazy Country, it’s the Republicans attacking the Democrats over nothing of importance. Hagen approached the Deputy to ask the driver if he was o.k. The Deputy asked the driver if he was o.k. The driver said yes. Hagen left. End of story. No harm, no foul. Well over 200 angry comments over the last week and it’s still about nothing of importance. Only in America. Get vaccinated, that’s important.


[thumbup]Phy. Exactly. Similar thing with the balloon bill. People went crazy with that too. My side is not much better with people going nuts when they found the deputy was Jenkins' son.


My understanding of events is that Hagen was driving the same direction as the car that was pulled over. He made a U-turn and parked on the other side of the road. Therefore he was in no way interfering with the policeman, just observing--as any citizen has the right to do (until the right-wing nut jobs complete their goal of a total police state). Hagen did not start the conversation--the policeman did. Why? Why not continue to do his job? If I stop to watch a sewer crew, they don't immediately challenge my right to be there. Why did the policeman feel so threatened by having someone watch him?

Now why on earth would Hagen want to see what the police are up to? Without going into the details I did in a previous comment, keep in mind the Frederick Sheriff's Dept. has lost not one, but two Supreme Court cases about abuse of power. And they have killed people--a h.s. student tasered to death at Tuscarora, a 19-year-old blown away in a totally unnecessary 4 AM SWAT attack, etc. Not to mention the two diabetics beaten up for the crime of having seizures. The police are not coming into this all light and innocent. They are coming into this carrying a long and abhorrent record.

For all those keen on charging Hagen with a crime, what crime would that be? Interfering with police? Nonsense--he had a perfect right to stop and observe. So what else????

The police are NOT above suspicion. They have no right to operate out of the sight of average citizens. They must operate in public, like it or not.


“ Blatchford couldn't be more wrong if he tried, and he has tried pretty hard.

First off, Hagen didn't "interfere" in the traffic stop. He was simply curious why the car had been pulled over, since he personally didn't see any problem. Note that he "turned around" -- i.e., he made a U-turn and parked on the opposite side of the street from the police and suspect car. Not in the way at all. It was the policeman who started the problem--I guess he missed that less on "de-escalation."

Anyone--citizen, illegal immigrant, ANYONE--has a perfect right to watch what the police do. They don't have a right to interfere, but this is NOT a police state--the police have no right to privacy as they go about their jobs.

Now why on earth would Hagen be concerned? Blatchford seems to have a great memory about Hagen's crimes, like wanting a computer he could operate. But Rick seems to have a short memory about the police in Frederick. So let me remind him:

We live in a county where in the recent past TWO police misconduct cases have made it to the Supreme Court--and the police lost both times.

Remember a few years ago when a guy having a diabetic attack was pulled over and beaten up by the police for "resisting arrest"? Apparently the police didn't learn much from that since they pulled over yet another diabetic a few months later and beat HIM up too.

Then there the numerous deaths at police hands, all totally unnecessary. A Downs Symndrome guy staying to watch a second showing of a movie for a few minutes? Death penalty. A Black student at Tuscarora asking why the resident policeman was going after his friend? Death penalty--by taser. Remember the 19-year-old guy who beat up his drug dealer? The police knew exactly where he worked, a gas station. They could have simply gone to the gas station and arrested him during working hours. But no, this was a great chance to call out the SWAT team for a 4 AM raid on the guy's (and his mother's....) house. Death penalty--by shooting this time.

I could go on. There's a long list. I was personally stopped about 15 years ago. It was midnight, and I was driving the speed limit down Oppossumtown Pike. Police pulled me over....I had made the deadly mistake of driving a 20+ year old car. We all know anyone who does that is a major criminal. The policeman was taken aback when he realized the driver was an old white guy, not a major gang leader. He said my license plate light was out (!). I asked if I could get out and look. He allowed me. The light was just fine. Luckily, he didn't shoot me.

Let me repeat--this is not a police state. The police work for the public. We all have a right to make sure they are not abusing their power.”


"I trained deputies for the sheriff’s office and I can guarantee you they were not trained to stop someone because of their race." This is the crux of the issue. This is only part of the problem. Did you train them about implicit bias? Did you have them all take the implicit bias test? Do you train them specifically to pay attention to their activities based on race? Does the office actually evaluate their deputies along those lines? You might not train them to do something, but they also need to be trained NOT to do some things.


Agreed. You’re thinking like me

See I think Bradley found the problem without even realizing it?

So he trained deputies for the sheriff’s office .....maybe they need a different trainer?

You know train the deputies into knowing it isn't worth putting themselves in a risky situation to write a warning for tiny little light on your taillight...Heck Gabe could tell you all about that so maybe he can explain further?

Obviously the Sheriff's office is in the need of some ethics training..anyone versed in ethics training and want to step up? You can probably at this point name your price? Go high at first...I know the sheriff's dept. has room in the budget to pay for some ethics training, I mean if they can afford to pay Bradley Baxter to train the deputies then they can afford to pay you, probably pretty well?

Since Sheriff Jenkins is commanding his own son, I would be worried that he may not be able to command his son safely and ethically? But's that's just me?

How do the rest of you see this ethical conundrum?



Implicit bias. Is that what motivates Hagen when he sees a white officer stop a black driver Automatic assumptions? is that a learned and taught factor when students study our history and automatically start leveling charges of white supremacy? Is there now an implicit bias against anything white?

Just curious. And please do not let this lead you to believe that I do not acknowledge the horrific injustices of our past. I deplore racism. Always have. That is why I have strong feelings about the new form of racism we are now witnessing.

No JSK just want POC to not say the N word anywhere you can hear it?

Talk about implicit bias there....what form of racism are we seeing here? When you as a polite white man know nothing of racism whatsoever....nothing at all ever. Not once have you ever experienced racism so how in the world can you be seeing a new form of racism?

You have not once in your life experienced racism,,,neither have I because I am a polite white woman, so please tell me a polite white woman what this new form of racism actually is?

oh the definition of racism is this FYI

gonna make it easy for you to define this new form of racism and give you the definition of actual racism

The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

n. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

n. The belief that each race has distinct and intrinsic attributes.

I look forward to your definition of this new racism we are witnessing ??? JSK start defining ......


jsk; no, that is not implicit bias. We all have biases and we understand many of them, but what is critical are biases you do not even recognize but hold. They impact your behavior and you think it is "normal" but it is not. If you deploy racism then you should be supporting the use of implicit bias in training for LEOs. With follow up as a performance metric.


Shiftless you are correct. The biases I referred to are not subconscious but learned and drilled in. almost to the point they become implicit biases. Similar to how implicit biases are learned. No one is born with implicit biases..


jsk; I think you do not understand "subconscious". When something is subconscious it means that you are not conscious of it. It has nothing to do with whether or not something is innate or you are born with it. In fact this is exactly the problem; when people (especially people serving as LEOs) subconsciously see black people as potentially violent, for instance. They conduct themselves according to that bias. They need to learn that these biases exist. The LTE writer did not discuss training in this way.


What is the new form of Racism jsk? There’s only one, if you believe your race is superior to another or others, that’s Racism. What did Hagen do that was Racist? Sheesh!!




Both Hagen and the motorist were in wrong. The motorist for having the wrong tags (illegal activity warranting traffic stop). Hagen for grandstanding and placing the motorist, the deputy, his wife, himself and those driving on the road in danger. He is a racist and a moron and has no place on the county council or in the county executive role. His career should be toast.


So about that toast, me I like cinnamon and sugar toast. What do you like on your toast Mr. PDL?

I bet you like plain toast? Plain dry toast, am I correct?

Oh is this you happy/gab/????


Hey Schizo, I like the finest butter money can buy and expensive marmalade imported from somewhere they know how to make it.

Yeh I love orange marmalade...on English Muffins. So where do you get your orange marmalade from ?

You ever try Passion fruit jelly, it's amazing. I get mine from Hawaii, I have a connection there if you want to try some? Let me know okay?


I like Duerr’s Seville Orange Marmalade. A lady in Sorrento, Italy who runs the Hotel Girasole, makes the second best. Her name is Rita. My home away from home.


I like Duerr’s made with Seville Oranges. A lady name Rita who owns/runs Hotel Girasole makes the second best from Sorrento Oranges.

Heck, I thought you were a banana and peanut butter girl.


I feel like if Brad Baxter ran for sheriff against me, I would easily take the win. Agree

Depends on your platforms?


There you go again. You ‘feel’ how democrat of you. Pathetic.


There’s a clearance event% sale at JCPenney‘s. I give up “uncle” on the non-event.


Not sure why people keep criticizing the sheriff's department for not having immediately charged Kai, rather than complain about him on the radio. Do they think the sheriff has bad judgment or that he is showing favoritism?


I think it is about calling his bluff. What would he be charged with and why? It's easy to score political points and just say "he should have been charged" but it is trickier to actually have probable cause and point to a specific law and action that violates it.


If Kai is not charged and disciplined, he will just do this again, and again, and again.

No one can get in his mind, but if he is not stopped NOW, there is no reason his "concerns" won't arise every time he passes a pulled over car in the future.

Charge him. Then let a court of his peers determine his guilt, and penalty.

You let him off this time, what is the deterrant for Kai, or any Frederick County citizen, to not do this in the future?


Just curious, reading your opening line implies that this is a common occurance. Please cite the numerous times this type of action by the councilman has occurred in the past. Could it be that your over the top commenting is ballooning out of control??


It appears to be common, yes. Some saying another incident last Fall prior to this one. And who knows how many more stops Kai has inserted himself into that we do not know about.

So yes, there is commonality and it must be stopped.


Come happy, no support for this and unsupported claims just balloon this out of proportion and typlifies the shortcoming of this type of forum, you can say anything and make outlandish statements that do nothing to further discussion.


There are more recorded instances of Hagen stopping to interject himself at traffic stops than there are of Frederick County Sheriff department's violence against minorities who have simply been pulled over for traffic violations alone. What statistics does he have to show that minorities are in danger of being killed or otherwise seriously harmed in Frederick county where there is only a traffic violation?


Really- how about your source for both claims.


Is this worse than Sheriff Jenkins profiling Hispanics? I don’t think so.


Not gemane to the issue at hand. Just smoke and mirrors, phy.


I agree, Kai should be charged like today, right this minute...this very second.

See we agree on something...let's charge Kai and waste more taxpayer dollars and also I really want to see more of Mr. Beasley's investigative journalism, which apparently you do too?

I wonder what other secrets Mr. Beasley has uncovered about Sheriff Jenkins and is just waiting for the perfect opportunity to share those secrets with us the public?

Charging Kai could be the opportunity Mr. Beasley is waiting for....?

Minor Details: Sheriff Chuck Jenkins and Deputy 1st Class Charles Jenkins Jr.


So is this Chuck's son who is on the same police force that is ran by his father? If so, that is a serious concern. I know of no companies that would allow this reporting structure.


I know right me either but apparently it's just fine in the Sheriff's dept. ?

I feel for the other deputies in the office, the tension has to be something awful...

I mean how can Sheriff Jenkins successfully manage his people...he can't, his people are going to rebel sooner or later and well often times that frustration could be taken out on us the public?

So that's what I'm concerned about, is how Sheriff Jenkins could possibly be running a fair and equitable office when he's wantonly flaunting the rules, at the very least the ethics...are there ethical rules the sheriff office must follow?

My last company I worked for we had required ethical training we had to do at least once year....some times more if someone was found to have acted unethically. And people were fired for being unethical there's that?

In case someone thinks I didn't use Wantonly correctly

1. in a way that is intentional or shows no care about bad things that might result:


I worked 5 summers in a town's parks department where a son of the manager was one of the full time employees. I suspect it happens more than you think, especially in private companies.


This link is informative. Thank you.


Kai said what he did was wrong, so how do you come to the conclusion that he will do it again (and again and again)?


Well, I often wonder the same exact thing with habitual DUI and drug offenders.


I often wonder about the same with commenters who make habitual statements with no logic.


Poor Kai needs punishment to break his addiction?


Maybe we should take away his car.


Good points in your LTE Bradley Baxter. I don't like to criticize others unless there's merit for it and it's necessary to do so. In this case, Mr. Hagen reasonably deserves criticism. He didn't just observe the police traffic stop, it appears from the reporting of the incident, that Mr. Hagen needlessly created a potentially dangerous and problematic situation. As the FNP indicated in their editorial comment on this matter - Hagen was wrong to interfere in the police officer's duties the way he did - which could have put all parties in danger. If one has observed Mr. Hagen's past actions, some of his personality traits become clear. It's no surprise that Sherrif Jenkins or others may wonder "Who does Mr. Hagen think he is?!" Mr. Hagan's past conduct proves he can be arrogant, pompous, radical, impulsive, and lacks credibility as at times, he's been dishonest in his statements and treatment of others. This current police traffic stop incident reflects poorly on Mr. Hagen and is a result of his own arrogance and lack of judgement. Frankly, many may agree Councilman Hagen should be removed from office as Sherrif Jenkins suggests. If he doesn't get removed now, the next election can not come soon enough. Lastly, Mr. Hagen appears to have an impulsive tendency to over-react and I agree with other commentary posts in FNP articles on this traffic stop incident where folks previously noted that it's practically racist in itself, that Mr. Hagen became involved because he saw a black person in the car. Others have also wondered: Has Mr. Hagen ever stopped to check on the driver during a police traffic stop when a white person was the driver?


It seems to me, based on the outcome of the stop, that the LEO created a potentially dangerous and problematic situation in the first place.


So many morons in one place, a real circle fest! Idiocy reigns supreme.


People keep talking about charging Hagen but with what? Did he actually interfere with a LEO? Did he push him? Did he prevent him from doing his duty? Is pulling over to the side of the road illegal?


I Agree with your points


Bradley; is it reasonable to stop someone for a tag violation at the risk of death? I mean seriously; shouldn't we re-think how we police things? If every stop is so risky then perhaps we should be more thoughtful about the level of seriousness of the violation required for it to result in a stop.


I agree with your point.

And I have always said that police often use bad judgement in where and why they initiate traffic stops.

Is it reasonable to initiate a traffic stop for a minor traffic offense on a busy high speed freeway, and with the high volume of distracted driving we have occurring every second of the day?

Is it reasonable to block a lane of traffic on a busy road with your cruiser or rescue vehicle during either a traffic stop or fender bender, when there’s other spots you can stage at, just because you can because you have the authority?


That's the point, stupid. The stop was most likely not dangerous, but it's unknown until it's concluded. It's an equipment violation, the stop made more dangerous by the distraction.


huckster, what a stupid post. The delta of any increase in danger was miniscule. There was no interference. If the deputy is that distractible then that is a problem. If the situation is so explosive then don't pull over for a minor tag violation.


In all fairness, the state of MD does allow a year and one day for a officer of the law to issue a ticket. Yes, the deputy involved can legally still cite Hagan.

Q: Why hasn’t this been done?

A: I’m pretty sure that Neither Sherf Trumpkins nor DFC Trumpkins were aware that the capability exists.

We all know that Hagan will be at the next open county council meeting. If I were the deputy, I’d be waiting outside after the meeting adjourns with Hagan’s tickets in hand........


Please don't leave out the fact that the deputy in question is Jenkins son.


I didn’t :)

But your clarification for those that are not acquainted with the family is welcome!


Why hasn't the FNP written an article about the second alleged encounter that Jenkins accused Hagen and his wife of doing inn October? Jenkins' deputy completely misidentified the Hagens, yet Jenkins went on another WFMD tirade, and this time it was slander.


Professional news media does not report every single time accusations are made. They can be liable in civil court.

Trumpkins has been no angel himself.

1. Trumpkins has used his county owned, maintained, insured, and fueled police unit for purpose of political campaign, multiple times. There are governing docs (known as the General Order) pertaining to FCSO that specifically state this is not allowable. Big no no.

Also, there was an incident at a frederick city forty of July fireworks event where Trumpkins parked his cruiser in a spot reserved for police / emergency personnel. Except Trumpkins was not at the event as a police and or emergency person.......he was there campaigning.

Shall we talk about Trumpkins harrassing his former deputies because of who they are/were friends and or related to?

Going on the radio and Running his chops about other people other open the door for people like me to fire back on Trumpkins’s missteps.

What I have written is just the beginning. There’s more.

(Copy made)


Why the "(Copy made) Plumbum? And what qualifications do you have to offer all the "legal advice" that you do? Where did you go to college and what did you major in? Law? Criminal justice? You keep saying our sheriff isn't qualified to do the job he's been doing for, what, 14 years now, yet you keep going on with your "legal opinions." So, again, Pb, just what qualifications do you have to do so?


CD - do you ask yourself the same questions about qualifications when you freely exercise your opinions??? Should a particular commenter be "silenced"?


Like it or not, rules are rules (fcso general order). And laws are laws (md statue allowing a year and a day).

Just the same as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.


Hayduke - they say the trump loyalists do not like facts.

Apparently the Trumpkin Loyalists don’t like facts, nor do they like people that present facts.

Not sure how stating facts as I have above is offering legal advice. But it’s flattering that Davey Reid recognizes and thinks of me as a scholar 👩‍🏫 👨‍🏫


Hay, if you can't see the difference between me offering an opinion, and what Plumbum obviously considers legal advice, than you're more blind than I ever would have imagined. Did you happen to see her remark a while back that the FNP had "retained her as their legal counsel?" Did you? She does not always express a personal opinion, she more often states what are, and are not legalities and you, I, and everyone else is aware of it. My question to her is what qualifications does she have to do so? And I'm sure you noticed that, rather than answer my question for us she has, once again, deflected. And that would be because she is not qualified to be anyone's"legal counsel." She keeps whining about the sheriff not being qualified for the job that's he's held for over a decade, yet she wants us all to think that she's some kind of legal expert. Well, if she has you suckered into believing it, that's your problem. And embarrassment, too.


And to you, Plumbum, I'm not talking about any "facts" you stated above. You have acted like some kind of legal expert for years ad you know it. So, what are your qualifications? Where did you go to college? What did you major in? Did you do an internship in a lawyer's office? Where did you get your legal experience? What makes you the legal expert you would like everyone to think you are? And don't flatter yourself, I do not consider you a scholar. So, go ahead and prove me wrong.


Correction: "... years 'and' you know it."


Yeahhhhh “Who do you think you are?” (and versions of same) turn up way too often around these parts.


Report to moderator no filed.


Let Davey embarrass himself for all Elm Street to see


CD - maybe you don't understand my point.. This is an OPINION forum and, as such, it is up to the reader to judege the validity of the response. Denying one's claim is fine, but realize that when you post you are doing the same as the person who is the focus of your anger, unless of course you post your bona fides to respond PS, my eyesight is just fine but I will admit to needing corrective lens.[smile]

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. No vulgar, racist, sexist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, not personal attacks or ad hominem criticisms.
Be civil. Don't threaten. Don't lie. Don't bait. Don't degrade others.
No trolling. Stay on topic.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
No deceptive names. Apparently misleading usernames are not allowed.
Say it once. No repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link for abusive posts.

Thank you for reading!

Already a member?

Login Now
Click Here!

Currently a News-Post subscriber?

Activate your membership at no additional charge.
Click Here!

Need more information?

Learn about the benefits of membership.
Click Here!

Ready to join?

Choose the membership plan that fits your needs.
Click Here!