I write in response to the recent front-page article, “Sheriff blasts councilman on radio show.” County Council member Kai Hagen had stopped to check on the well-being of a Black driver who had been pulled over by police even though Hagen had not witnessed inappropriate driving. Sheriff Chuck Jenkins lambasted Hagen for interfering with the deputy’s duties and for jeopardizing officer and traffic safety. I see the issue here as racial profiling.

More than a year ago, the nation along with Frederick County, was moved in a major way by the visible and callous murder of George Floyd, a Black man, by Derek Chauvin, a white cop. It brought to national consciousness the issue of racial profiling, of disproportionate treatment of Blacks and other people of color across many dimensions of American life. There have been strong voices from the Black community that white silence over the years to oppressive practices against Blacks has allowed systems of inequity to perpetuate.

As I’ve tried to listen to the voices of people of color, I’ve become keenly aware of numerous instances of racial profiling in our own community as well as elsewhere in our nation — too extensive to properly relate in a single letter to the editor. But I think of the phrase, “If you see something, say something.” In the article, Hagen did not assume he saw racial profiling; rather he stopped to check if all was OK and left peacefully when he received that assurance from the driver.

I remember once having a flat tire on I-70 and the panic I felt about my situation. I was extremely grateful when a car pulled up, a man got out to check, and changed my tire for me despite the dangers of the many cars whizzing by.

I think Kai Hagen should be commended and not condemned for his act of caring for what might have been an instance of racial profiling. White silence does not stop racial injustice.

(97) comments


I'm no lawyer but there is a matter of 'prosecutorial discretion' under which a person is not prosecuted even though technically they may have broken a law. That is supposed to be used in cases where the breach of the law is rather minor, if it is the first offense, or if it is thought a judge would dismiss the case or impose a minor penalty. I'm no fan of Kai Hagen, but I think the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion would apply here and he shouldn't be charged.


Yes, I agree with other commentary here that stated: Mr. Hagen's action was foolish, disrespectful, and unlawful. 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 shows 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?


hagen act was irresponsible and the above commenter about present. Trump is obviously clueless the the subject...the fact is that the President. asked for a PEACEFUL demo and had suggested to the Capitol police a week earlier to call in nat. guard which they refused to do....try getting the facts before speaking out.


Alternative facts bro! You must be delusional to post this.

Greg F

Jethro…have you been on the wacky weed again? You make no sense.


The writer is DEAD WRONG on this issue; police business belongs too the police , not to hagen whose foolish act could have resulted in serious consequences....


is that you? How many personalities do you have anyway? but don't the police belong to us taxpayers that pay their salaries? So yeah police business does belong to us the public....we are paying for it. Next time I need help with a flat tire I plan on calling a Frederick County Deputy to come help me....because I as a taxpayer am paying for that service so why not use it? Sheriff Jenkins was advertising the deputies tire changing services on the radio the other day so...oh and if you are a POC you may get at least 3 deputies to come to your aid....


Pickles, just call the non-emergency hotline.

Or, join AAA. Some tires now even come with roadside hazard assistance, which covers flats. Just need to spend some $s.

Or you can call your polite white man friend Kai? You have plenty if options.

You should never tie up police resources on frivolous needs when required assistance may be needed elsewhere. Just ask Kai about the backlash he received requiring police to respond to massive balloon release calls.


Thank you for that info! You really are trying to earn that participation ribbon aren’t you? You should also have a number for roadside assistance on your car insurance card , so you can also call Roadside assistance but me I prefer to see my tax dollars at work! And I could probably get deputy there way faster than roadside assistance, especially if I’m a POC so? Who you gonna call?


Pickles, you ask too many questions in your posts. Please focus on statements of fact and information, rather than always trying to turn conversations into counseling sessions.

You also make assumption after assumption, Pickles.

You are never going to gain or hold onto any credibility staying on your continued posting path. I recommend going with one name, and focusing on the issues raised in the article you are responding to. Not asking ridiculous questions, bringing in outside smoke and mirrors non relevant information, etc.


Remember how I said we were playing a game and you thought you were on step 10?

This is a brand new game, are you sure you really want to play????

I want to see Annette Breiling, a polite white woman, get at least 100 comments on her letter, I am pleased to see you are helping me do that Happy/gab/???

So as you were saying about those smoke and mirrors? Let the people decide for themselves whose smoke and mirrors are smoke and mirrors.

These comments are just performance art, let's see who performs better, I'm over my stage fright...I'm always real,,,,,,,never fake.

Greg F

Sheriff trumpkins doesn’t like to have witnesses…nor do his trumpkin followers.


At the end of this comment stream Gary4books posted this:

"Not only acceptable, but a right we must protect. And to me an obligation to do so, even at risk to myself."

This was in response to my comment that Mr. Hagen's action could not be considered acceptable, legally, regardless of the surrounding circumstances.

This could end up being a nightmare and potentially dangerous if gary4 is correct.

If citizens have the right to stop, interfere and inject their own bias into LEO's actions trouble lies ahead. We need clarity .


Witnessing is not interfering. We cannot trust cops to act in secrecy any more.


Why don't you pray about it? If you need clarity isn't that how you find It? Also yesterday gab/happy did post (probably just for you) info to email Mr. Jenkins so he can go ahead and charge Kia...because really I'm not real sure what you still are blathering on about? Maybe it's you that needs to provide us clarity? Also did you get your vaccination for Covid? or did you decide to leave the earth to the Heathens like me?



Well to clarify- “ to stop, to interfere, to inject” are three separate acts. Yes - you can stop. No - you can’t interfere. Yes - you can inject. You can question officers and the detained and report questionable acts. Asking what’s going on isn’t necessarily being bias.

This ending up being a “nightmare and potentially dangerous” is being over dramatic. Since guards where hired to protect merchants and the elite observing and questioning has always gone on. It’s called “baring witness.” Read the six amendment.


Also JSK, did you mean “LEO's actions trouble “lies” ahead (as in untruths by police) or trouble “lays” ahead (as bad conditions for police)? Asking for a friend. I think you know the difference. Right? I’ll tell my friend it was a typo.


I quite agree. We do need some clear idea of what we can and can not do. Had Kai been given a ticket, the court decision migh have helped. As it is, the Sheriff seems to say it wa not against the law. I wonder if n opinion of the State AG would help. Certainly we have enough opinions from readers. More than enough?


Peter Samuel shorter: "Black people annoy me"


That's pathetic. I judge people as individuals, some of whom I love, some I respect... and yes a few who annoy me. Race has nothing to do with any of that.


Sammy, I thought you posted yesterday that standards are lowered for minorities, specifically blacks, going to college and getting jobs, that was your version of systemic racism. So I’m calling out your bullsh** ? Your judgement has has everything to do with race. Read your comments on systemic racism. That wasn’t judging by race is systemic. You know what you are full of …


Annette Breiling wrote that the murder of George Floyd in 2020 "brought to national consciousness the issue of racial profiling..." Sure that murder was used by activists and rioters as evidence of racism. And sure Floyd died under the knee of Derek Chauvin, a very bad cop who was rightly charged and convicted of murder, and will justly spend the rest of his life in jail. But there was zero evidence Floyd's race had anything to do with the way he was treated and his death. There was no racial profiling, Annette. Prosecutors searched hard but found nothing to indicate any racial profiling or racial animus or associations with racists or prior expressions of racism. None was found or alleged in the trial. George Floyd's treatment by the Minneapolis police officer was a terrible crime -- a case of disgraceful police abuse of their power. But there is nothing to suggest Officer Chauvin would have behaved better if the guy struggling with him had been hispanic or asian or white. Unfortunately race-hustling activists, politicians and journalists ran with the baseless but incendiary notion that Floyd's death was racial and many people came to believe it.

Mr. Samuel do you remember when you thought you were this person?

Samuel Peter v Jeremy Williams - Hard Knockout


It's cool you can watch yourself on YouTube right?


Thanks. Hadn't seen that. What a great left hook eh?

Also Mr. Samuel I wonder why you as a polite white man are so intent on attacking Annette Breiling, a polite white woman? You two know of each other, I mean I'm sure you know who Annette Breiling is, correct Mr. Samuel, a polite white woman? Not for sure she knows who you are though?


As a pierce of writing it was well done. But it was based entirely on fantasy and reflects a cultish obsession with race. No I don't know who she is. And I don't care particularly. It's what she wrote that matters -- so silly it deserved a response. Which is "an attack" on her.



As a pierce of writing it was well done. But it was based entirely on fantasy and reflects a cultish obsession with race. No I don't know who she is. And I don't care particularly. It's what she wrote that matters -- so silly it deserved a response. Which is "an attack" on what she wrote, not on. her personally.


Sammy, you don’t think it matters who Annette Breiling is?


Sammy, A black person murderer by a White cop. Strangled for over nine minutes while onlookers screamed and pleaded with the cops to stop “ you are killing him”. I guess we saw the events differently. Humanity is obviously different from every human’s point of view. You don’t see the lack of humanity based on race when I do. I don’t think you’ll can acknowledge racism or ever well. That’s your problem. As long as the courts do, your racism is your burden.

“There was zero evidence Floyd's race had anything to do with the way he was treated and his death.” The federal justice department sees differently. Derek Chauvin will be tried again, in a few months, by the federal courts on racial civil rights violations. I don’t think they’ll see it your way. But you’ll stick to your view.


Mr. Samuel, The trial was about murder - not racism. It would have been a tactical mistake to try to prove that Mr Chauvin was racist, rather than simply guilty of murder - which was clear from video and testimony from witnesses and from Chauvin's coworkers. It is notoriously difficult to prove what is in the heart of an individual who commits a crime, which is why hate crimes are seldom prosecuted as hate crimes.


3c: I read that prosecutors tried very hard to find a racial animus because they felt that would have strengthened their murder case. Not because hey wanted to prosecute it as a hate crime. As it turned out they didn't need to show a nefarious motivation to get their murder conviction.


Awteam2021: The only systemic racism we have is the system of preferences being instituted in the name of diversity -- the lower standards in job recruitment, and in admission to universities for 'minority' applicants, preferences for minority businesses etc. Nothing in policing nowadays is systemically racist in nthe sense of being anti-black. There are no doubt the racist cop here and there but all the police official rules and procedures -- the systemic features -- are based on treating people equally regardless of race. Unfortunately blacks get in to trouble with the law more than whites (and males get into trouble more than females, and young people than. old people.) So as blacks offend more so they get disproportionately stopped, arrested etc. That's not racial discrimination or racism. That's the cops doing their job. The only systemic racism in the US today is pro-minority and anti-white.


Peter you may think not, and it’s all about diversity. I quite sure folk of any color don’t want to diverse with you. I think you are safe… you don’t know what systemic racism is.

Black girls or black boys having to cut off their braids to participate in sports when white girls have their hair down to their butts. When Black Olympic swimmers can’t wear head masks because they aren’t shaped the same as white head mask. When voting laws across the country are purposely making it harder for minorities to vote. When a white care driver with a tail light out is looked at as a simple care maintenance problem but a black driver with tags in the wrong place is perceived as a drug dealer. When a white person can’t stop to see if a Black driver is say. When the Sheriff of Frederick goes on the air 10 days later to bully and smear sayin “ you can’t check on a black persons being stopped by a deputy, that’s a crime” but he can’t press charges because it ain’t a crime. When you can’t see that Blacks have legitimate grievances even if you disagree .The list goes on… that’s all systemic racism. Systemic racism as anti-white would be an oxymoron, simply not systemic. I don’t think you know what systemic racism is or have the ability to comprehend seeing blacks have to work twice as hard to reach the same accomplishments. But that’s what you think 🤔. And that’s fine. I especially like your perverted view of lower standards. You won’t see it coming. The winner of the last national spelling bee was a 14 year old Black girl. Lower standards?


It has become quite apparent that Mr. Hagen must be charged for his unlawful act. It is understandable why he wasn't charged. (A delicate, politically volatile, situation to say the least.) But this incident is now to well known to soft pedal.

Mr. Hagen broke the law. If he was unaware he was breaking the law we all know Ignorantia juris non excusat[1] or ignorantia legis neminem excusat[2] (Latin for "ignorance of the law excuses not"[1] and "ignorance of law excuses no one"

We cannot permit people to interfere with police. That is a law and for good reason. If Mr. Hagen is not charged what happens to the next person who breaks this law. Or will it appear to give carte blanche freedom to interfere at will. This cannot be.

Kai isn’t going to be charged for anything ever……but you can still dream right, no one is stopping you from dreaming…also you may want actually email Sheriff Jenkins now?

Just sayin dreams can’t come true if you don’t do your part to make them come true am I right or what? Posting your dreams here just causes some major eye rolling (insert eye roll emoji)


This information may help Jenkins and all of us with our decisionmaking and beliefs...

What is Obstructing or Hindering an Officer in Maryland?

In Maryland it is a crime to obstruct or hinder a police officer from conducting an investigation. Obstructing and hindering is a common law crime and a misdemeanor in Maryland. It carries a maximum of three (3) years incarceration and/or a $3,000 fine.

Elements of Obstructing/Hindering

This offense in Maryland is a common law crime, meaning the definition of the offense has been passed down by precedent through the courts instead of being codified by statute. The Maryland courts have defined the crime of obstructing/hindering as consisting of four elements, all of which must be met in order for a crime to be committed. The four elements are:

1. The officer is engaged in the performance of duty. This element is met where the officer is on-duty or otherwise conducting official business and not off-duty.

2. There is an act or omission of an act which obstructs or hinders the officer in the performance of duty.

3. The accused has knowledge that the officer is engaged in the performance of duty. If an officer is undercover and not in uniform, that may be a valid defense as the accused may not know that the officer is on duty.

4. There is intent to obstruct or hinder the officer by the actions of the defendant. This is usually the most difficult element for the State to prove. The prosecution must show that the defendant’s actions amounted to a specific intent to commit the crime–that is, a specific intent to obstruct or hinder the officer from performing his or her duties.

A Maryland Lawyer for Obstructing or Hindering

If you are facing a charge of obstructing or hindering an officer, contact the Law Offices of Christopher L. Peretti for a free consultation at 301-875-3472. We have experience with these types of cases and can help you out with your situation.


Happy/Gab provided all the info you need for your email to Sheriff Jenkins..so get emailing Sheriff Jenkins right now so you can make your dream come true..I really like when I see people's dream come true.....pins and needles for this dream.

Happy/gab I'm sure JSK thanks you for this info and for helping his dreams come true...you two probably deserve a medal of some sort. At the very least a participation ribbon?


If Hagen broke the law why can’t Jenkins bring charges. How does that work? You do understand you can’t interfere with police but you can, observe, tape, question. The officer (rumored to be Chuck’s son) said he requested Kai to move his car to prevent blocking traffic, according to Chuck Jenkins phone call into WFMD. His son never said anything about interfering.

Side note: On the June 20th, the day of the incident, Jenkins was in Arizona at an extreme right wing group meeting still trying to overturn the last election, hoping Trump will be reinstated to the presidency next month.


Obviously they are choosing to ignore Mr. Beasley's investigative reporting on Mr. Jenkins.. and that, well should Mr. Jenkins decide to charge Kai, Mr. Beasley would no doubt need to do some more investigative journalism...so me I want see more of Mr. Beasley's work, and that's why Jenkins won't charge Kai because Mr. Jenkins doesn't want to see anymore of Beasley's investigative journalism....I'm sure Mr. Beasley probably has his next piece ready to post..?

Oh I forgot to add this



Jsk, can you share the law Kai broke that the “sheriff of Frederick” was unable to bring charges? Is he to incompetent to bring interference charges? Obviously Chuck exercised all his options, frustrated found no other recourse but to go on the radio 10 days later. Fox News reported his son was the deputy. Seeing there won’t be any charges over such a non-incident. What’s your next world ending drama.


This obsession with race is manic. If a cop is abusing his power against any person, that's wrong, regardless of the person's color. Councilman Hagen notably says he only decided to stop, turn around and investigate this incident after he saw the driver was black. If it had been a person of another color he would have driven on. Hagen says in effect: "I'm only interested in defending you against police abuse if you are black. If you're any race else, look out for yourself. I have no interest in your problem." That's the racism right there. Hagen is the contemptible racist, not the cop who apparently had no idea of the race of the driver when he decided to pull him over.

But polite white people are usually the ones that walk away from polite white policemen unscathed, I’m thinking Dylan Roof? The polite white police men took him out for a cheeseburger after he shot up a church full of POC ! So yeah I guess cops are really biased towards polite white boys?

Oh yeah Peter wasn't it you that pretended to be a POC boxer awhile back? Yeah that was you...see I remember when people pretend to be something they are not. But carry on my good man....


I agree 100%, petersamuel. It's the ones who holler "RACIST" the most, and loudest, who are the real racists. And they've done it to the point where calling someone a racist today means very, very little anymore.


You hope.


No PeterSamuel, Race isn’t something you can choose not to be it not an obsession. Especially if you’re perceived systemically by race. It’s not a Black problem but a White problem.

The villain in this story is, Kai Hagen (not Kia Hagan) a White man, who believes there is still systemic racism in policing with, that’s what makes him concerned over Black stops. There’s plenty of examples. So he stops and ask questions. Kai said he wouldn’t stop for White person’s stop because he wouldn’t feel the likelihood of stereotyping as with minorities, especially Blacks so he wouldn’t feel the same level of concern. You may disagree, you may not feel the same level of concern for Blacks safety in traffic stops, you may feel if a Black person is stopped he must’ve done something wrong, but why can’t you understand, acknowledge his point at the same time say time as legitimate as your feelings for the safety of police. Can’t both concerns be legitimate? Are Black people just lying about their traffic encounters with White people officers? Are police lying when they say they feel more threatened stopping Blacks, more likely to be encountering a criminal activity? Both extreme but why is it so hard to understand or conceive the possibility. Kai didn’t bring up the stop, no one knew about it until 10 days later when Chuck Jenkins brought it up on WFMD radio. As bullies do. The stop would have been just another stop. As most are, uneventful but Jenkins have pushed it up to a different level. There are commenters saying a White man who’s skeptical over Black stop is racist because he not concerned when Whites are stopped. Some how in their world that’s racist. No. It means he’s skeptical of Blacks being stopped based on systemic racism and not skeptical of Whites being stopped based on systemic racism. What’s so hard for you people to understand? If you feel defending Blacks against police abuse, is somehow racist think so. That’s a White problem not a Black problem.


Awteam2021: I'm for defending everyone from police abuse. There is no justification for making it racial, as Kai Hagen plainly did when he said he turned around and decided to intervene after he saw the driver was black. He thought it was an abusive stop, he said, because the driver had not been speeding.


Very good analysis petersamuel. Spot on.


In 1993, a deranged Jamaican immigrant boarded a LIRR train in NY & shot white people, killing 6 & wounding 19. He believed he was the victim of racism (actually, the exact opposite was true, he was the racist). Using Ms. Breiling's logic, Kai Hagen should position himself outside the Marc station to stop & investigate all black males who try to board a train. The rest of us are to applaud such action, and thank him for his valuable service to the community.


Blueline, The Marc trains incident was 30 years ago. It was determined carried out by a mentally ill person. Addressing mental illness is a problem in our country. But what, bubbles or balloons are you trying to floating?

Kai only asked if the Black driver was okay, is that crazy to you. Why do you find that apprehensible by police stops are comparable to a maniac going off in a train or the siege on the Capitol? What’s your opinion on the insurrection at the Capitol? Wasn’t that pretty crazy? Should all White people be tested before getting on metro?

140 police officers were plummeted , injured by White people. Were they all crazy? Many of the officers say Trump provoked their injuries and the insurrection started months before because of his rhetoric.

In the 19th and 20th centuries, lynching and the threat of lynching of Blacks was commonplace even in Frederick, county deputies were complacent if not participants. As recently as 2 years ago a black man was murdered for having the nerve to jog. Killed by a retired cop and his son. Please, what’s your point?


excellent letter.

Talk about racial injustice here's something that will curl your toes.....

Maddow destroys Texas AG Ken Paxton for suspicious prosecution of Black man before his CPAC speech

Rachel Maddow on Friday discussed the prosecution of Hervis Rogers by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Rogers made national news in 2020 after standing in line for eight hours to vote in the Texas primary on Super Tuesday.

The MSNBC host noted suspicious details in the prosecution as Rogers is held in jail on $100,000 bond.

"What? Because he might escape and vote again?" Maddow wondered.


Kai can stop whenever he feels the need to make sure someone is okay as far as I'm concerned.....


Chuck may want to check this out from the former Republican Central Maryland Committee Chairman.



Kai was only interested in political advantage. That’s why he reported the encounter 10 days later on WFMD mid Maryland Live with Tim and Frank. Right? Wrong. No that was Sheriff Chuck Jenkins who claimed he had no other recourse but to report the incident on the radio after not getting any cooperation on taking penal actions against Kai. Yesterday Chuck did a follow up call to WFMD radio station warning listeners that Kai could be a Serial Good samaritan”. Chuck reported another alleged incident in October where Kai stopped to assist another Black driver when the police were already present. Kai offered to assist in helping change the flat tire. I dare he being skeptical of Blacks being stopped by police. Next thing you know Whites won’t be able to intimidate minorities and have to treat them respectfully.


So anytime we might be pulled over with a flat, we may be forced to deal with Kai offering to help? Ohhhh noooo

Oh but be aware Dwasserba if you are a POC and have a flat tire you are going to get 3, yes I said 3 cops come to your rescue and help you change that flat tire .....but if you are a polite white woman like myself you may get one cop that thinks you need help...? Also yesterday Public-redux was saying that Sheriff Jenkins does advertise his deputies tire changing services on the radio now. So if anyone has a flat tire and needs help just call a Frederick County deputy, they will be more than happy to come to your assistance it seems? Your tax dollars at work........use them.


No racial injustice here in this case. Dude was driving a car with the wrong tags which the deputy correctly assumed something was amiss. He did his job. Kai interfered, showed poor judgment and performed an illegal act. Enough said.


If he did something illegal, then he would have been issued a citation.


Not necessarily. Depending on the offense, it's the officer's discretion whether or not he decides to issue a citation. They have that authority.


Obviously not every illegal activity warrants a punishment. Otherwise we would get a ticket for going 1 mph over the speed limit. I was being a bit facetious, and you made my real point that whatever Kai did was not up to a prosecutable level - unless you think the Sheriff and his son have bad judgement.


Threecents, folks are released with warnings all the time. Hiding your head in the sand here not gonna work. You grasping at straws now.


Yep [thumbup]


And he only interfered after he saw the driver was black. His racial focus is disgusting.

No it’s spot on Peter and you know it. I understand it’s hard to admit when you are wrong but…..


Where am I wrong?


You're 100% correct, peter. 100%. [thumbup]


Petersamuel, you are right. The definition of racism is a person of one color who singles out a person of another color, for whatever reason.

The colors of the people are not relevant. What is relevant is each of the two people is a different color.

Purple, despite all her trying, cannot get over this hurdle in her thinking.


The definition of Racism is believing that your race is superior to another race, or races. That’s it, nothing more. A simple yes or no question. I believe you would be a yes, along with many others here.


Just curious how many people can tell the race of a person coming up behind them in the evening. Did the deputy drive by, notice the POC, and then pulls him over? No, the tags were bogus and the deputy checked the situation out.


This writer clearly shows what is so glaringly foolish with her position in her letter!

A flat tire on the side of the road is an obvious, identifiable and visible situation of someone IN DISTRESS.

Hagan ASSUMED someone was in distress because he/she was a Black person and pulled over by a cop. So, he interfered with a law enforcement official in the course of his normal enforcement duties.

If the pulled over driver was White, he would not have stopped. Why would he? What would he have observed so distressing? I bet he blows by police cars that have pulled over individuals dozens of times a month in Maryland, just like I do.

HUGE DIFFERENCE HERE. When are people gonna wake up?


No, he did not assume that. He only checked for the possibility, which is real. While I agree that what Kai did was wrong-headed, as long as people like our sheriff deny that racism exists in America, we continue to have a problem.


Threecents, nice try at diversion. Not buying your off ramp. Today's topic is Kai and the traffic stop he inserted himself into. Let's stay in our lane today, no smoke and mirrors, please.


Pickles, you are delusional. Where do you get this stuff??? You are hilarious!


Happy, You caught me trying to use a teachable moment. Congratulations for not falling for it.


FYI well for everyone

Happy and Gab are the same poster....same person, same everything ...I proved it yesterday (the mods disappeared my proof yesterday after Happy/gab saw it and reported it) so and if this comment gets posted then you will know I'm correct.


Hagen did not assume he saw racial profiling, Ms. Breiling? The only reason he stopped was because a White, FCSO deputy had pulled over a black motorist. So the idiot most certainly did assume he saw racial profiling. And if you think he should be commended for that, you're one of a minority of those who do.


Mr Hagen’s agenda had little to do with concern for a black citizen His intention was political harm to a rival If the Deputy had been African-American stopping a pickup truck with a confederate battle flag flying, does anyone think Mr Hagen would have pulled over to make sure the Deputy was o.k.?


EXCELLENT shoe on the other foot example, BigAl.

Kai would have passed right by and probably not even waved.


What about a pickup truck with a Swastika? Just curious, because a lot of people don't seem to see the historical similarities.


BigAl...Happy/gab one in the same....I had never thought of doing that, making up people that I can agree with or vice versa making up people who agree with me? But whatever floats someone's boat, right?


Because you are a RRR(RadicalRightRepublican) member Happy. You all believe that the White Race is superior to ALL other races. Do you deny that?


I see what you did there Happy by writing Gabe's full pen name, instead of just Gab. Very good. Too funny.

How many people are you going to pretend to be today Happy/gab?


When are you going to post again under your other name of NewMarketParent, PP?

Who knows Butch? Stay-tuned? Soon maybe? I just haven’t felt like NMP lately? I feel more like a polite white woman, not a POC .. ..I’m always real never fake…,


Purple, are you OK? I have no idea who garbrielshorn2012 is, but yes, we do agree a lot.


“ If the Deputy had been African-American stopping a pickup truck with a confederate battle flag flying, does anyone think Mr Hagen would have pulled over to make sure the Deputy was o.k.?” Was the driver of the pickup truck with the confederate flag, male or female, black, white, Asia,.. what was their gender identity?🤷‍♂️



But there has been far from silence. And that is a good thing. We all know injustices still occur. But overreactions never help.

You mentioned George Floyd. We have heard his name thousands of times and witnessed his death on video countless times. But contrary to your intimation this is not typical. Of the thousands upon thousands of arrests and extremely dangerous encounters that LOE experience there are few George Floyd tragedies. And that is a good thing.

How many times will we hear the name of the police officer shot in the head yesterday in Louisiana? Or the names of those that die weekly? And due to initiatives like "defund the police" or thoughtless overreactions of individuals like Kai Hagan the job is even more dangerous.

Regardless of his intentions Mr. Hagan's action was foolish. disrespectful and unlawful. Thankfully this was not a drug arrest, or felony warrant violation. That could have been highly volatile and dangerous. Mr. Hagan did not know.

Just for your knowledge:

2010 Maryland Code



Subtitle 4 - Harboring, Escape, and Contraband

Section 9-408 - Resisting or interfering with arrest.

§ 9-408. Resisting or interfering with arrest.

(a) "Police officer" defined.- In this section, "police officer" means an individual who is authorized to make an arrest under Title 2 of the Criminal Procedure Article.

(b) Prohibited.- A person may not intentionally:

(1) resist a lawful arrest; or

(2) interfere with an individual who the person has reason to know is a police officer who is making or attempting to make a lawful arrest or detention of another person.

(c) Penalty.- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $5,000 or both.

(d) Unit of prosecution.- The unit of prosecution for a violation of this section is based on the arrest or detention regardless of the number of police officers involved in the arrest or detention.

[2004, chs. 118, 119.]


His name is Hagen, Drama Queen.


I'll keep this comment of yours in mind next time you post a simple, little typo, Aw. [thumbup]


Thanks, poor boy from Ceresville Manor.


" poor boy from Ceresville Manor?" How's that, Aw?


Gerald Thomas Titus, Jr. v. State of Maryland

No. 6, September Term 2011, Opinion by Greene, J.



The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following

elements of the common law offense of obstructing and hindering a law enforcement officer

in the performance of his or her duty: (1) a police officer engaged in the performance of a

duty; (2) an act, or perhaps an omission, by the accused which obstructs or hinders the

officer in the performance of that duty; (3) knowledge by the accused of facts comprising

element (1); and (4) intent to obstruct or hinder the officer by the act or omission constituting

element (2). A conviction for this offense requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of

actual obstruction or hindrance of a police officer. The four-part test for obstructing and

hindering applies to all categories of the offense

It was the State’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Petitioner

committed the offense of obstructing and hindering a law enforcement officer. To meet this

burden of proof, the State should have introduced evidence at trial to show how Petitioner’s

conduct actually obstructed or hindered that investigation. By failing to even question

Devivio about how he was actually obstructed or hindered in performing his duties, or to

establish the manner and degree of obstruction or hindrance, there was insufficient evidence

presented at trial for the trier of fact to conclude that Petitioner’s conduct actually obstructed

and hindered Devivio. In the absence of any testimony from Devivio, or other evidence

presented by the State, regarding how Petitioner’s actions actually obstructed or hindered

Devivio in the performance of his duties, Petitioner’s conviction for obstructing and

hindering a law enforcement officer must be reversed."



Good post but not apples for apples. The officer was never questioned to show how he was obstructed so no evidence. It is clear that this case is different.

I truly think a judge should decide. It is an important issue. By inference, you and others appear to think this was an acceptable act. There in lies the real problem


Look at all the horrible stuff Trump did that you felt was acceptable jsk, like sending a mob of Insurrectionists to storm and loot and kill LEO’s at the Capitol. Are you demanding that DJT be tried for his crimes? I hope so.


Not only acceptable, but a right we must protect. And to me an obligation to do so, even at risk to myself.

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!