Wow, just wow…1) there is no proof he was trying to enter a bar to drink as a 20 yr old. He presented an ID with his correct age on it, so how was he “trying to enter the bar to drink?” From what I understand there are no bars. Restaurants have to make a certain amount from food and a certain amount from alcohol in order to continuously operate. 3) I can see why he was yelling, I attend UVa, hoping that they may not see him as a common criminal which unfortunately, is some law enforcement view us. 4)There is no evidence he was drunk. I dont know that this was about race, but more about ABC being over zealous. They should stick with enforcing the rules for selling alcohol as opposed to ■■■■■■■■ for drunk students.
Questions. Lot’s of questions. One thing that is known is that the establishment wasn’t strictly a bar, but a restaurant licensed to sell alcohol, a pub. Because such establishments admit patrons of all ages, including small children in the company of their own parents, they must check the ID of anyone ordering alcohol if there is any doubt as to whether they are of legal drinking age. Martese Johnson was turned away at the door, even though entering the establishment was not illegal. He could have been there to grab a late night meal or snack. In any case, state law requires that establishments serving alcohol must also serve food. He would have to have provided state approved identification to verify eligibility to consume alcohol regardless of his intent.
There are conflicting reports as whether or not he presented ID to employees at the door, whether that ID was authentic or fake, whether or not he stated a zip code that contradicted that which was written on the ID he presented (though for the life of me, I’ve never heard of a person being asked to provide his/her zip code in the service of ascertaining that person’s age). What we also know is that ABC agents DID NOT charge him with being in possession of a fake ID.
Why was Martese not allowed in the establishment? What was the criteria used to approve patronage? Had other UVA students under the age of twenty-one been admitted before him? Had some members of his group been allowed in and others not?
Was Martese Johnson intoxicated at the time of his arrest? How intoxicated? Did ABC officers perform an on-scene breathalyzer test to determine this? If he was intoxicated, were there also in that vacinity other alcohol impaired, under-age college students celebrating St. Patrick’s Day (as college kids have been wont to do since virtually the dawn of time)? Were they also confronted and/or arrested by ABC officers? Was a blood-alcohol test performed on Mr. Johnson at the hospital? If so, what were the results? There seem to be conflicting reports as to whether or not he was actually intoxicated.
ABC officers charged Martese with non-physical resistance of arrest. If he did not physically resist arrest, what legal criteria was used to charge him with “resisting arrest”? Was his use of profanity in addressing ABC officers illegal?
I’m glad this case is being thoroughly investigated, as at the very least, it seems C-Ville assigned ABC agents have shown a critical lack of judgement in at least one encounter with a UVA student suspected to have been in violation of Virginia’s alcohol laws (the unfortunate young woman found to have been in possession of mere bottled water). They are also being criticized for focusing their enforcement efforts in the wrong area (individual college students) instead of upon establishments potentially in violation of state alcohol laws. Only good can come of obtaining ALL the facts.
@poetsheart there are some establishments that prefer to limit the crowd to 21 and older late at night so that the bartenders/waitstaff don’t have to waste time checking IDs, and don’t have to do it while in a hurry, or in poor lighting. It is not illegal for them to do that, but as you pointed out other places allow those under 21 to get in and just don’t issue them a stamp etc. I am not sure what Trinity’s policy is.
Johnson’s lawyer says that a breathalyzer showed that Martese was NOT drunk. I can’t imagine him lying about that. There is a report going around that he blew a .02 (which is probably less than 1 beer).
If he blew a 0.2 on the breathalyzer, why did ABC officers say they arrested him for, among other things, intoxication? Any legally performed test would be admissible in a court. If he was not intoxicated, exactly what law(s) did he break that constituted grounds for arrest?
@poetsheart They arrested him for “public intoxication OR profane swearing”. Apparently there is a law that covers either/or. And since the courts have struck down laws against swearing where the words were not intended to incite a riot etc, I am not sure why they would do that either in this case.
BTW- not a 0.2 like you said, but a .02 (point 2 is very drunk)
If they were limiting the crowd to 21 and older late at night, there would have been no reason to question whether Johnson’s ID was false. He showed them an ID with an age of 20. No need to ask if it’s fake, if it wouldn’t be good enough even if it was his own (which it was).
^^^
Exactly CF. I am not sure though why you would even have someone at the door checking IDs if there wasn’t an age requirement.
Did they not officially charge him with resisting arrest, then? Were the only charges intoxication or profane swearing? How are those charges either/or? One either did one, the other, or both. But, either/or? What is that, like one from column A and perhaps one from column B? Does that even make sense? If he was within his Constitutional rights to swear like a sailor at them while they arrested him, and if he can be medically shown not to have been illegally impaired, what remains of the ABC’s case against Martese Johnson?
They did not charge him with resisting arrest but with a very similar count of “obstruction of justice without use of force”
The either/or part is just nuts. I used the example earlier of “murder or jaywalking”.
Obstruction of Justice without use of force? What the heck does that even mean in this case? Is it just me, or does it look from this standpoint as if ABC agents might be grasping at straws in an attempt to cover their own asses after the extent of their error dawned upon them? After all, they might have looked at the rather dramatically bloodied face of this black male college student while bystanders engaged in shocked commentary, and thought, “Uh-oh, this might be a problem.” It seems that some law enforcement agencies have still to ascertain the potentially negative implications of impromptu cell phone video recording by ordinary citizens (as well as video surveillance implemented on public streets and roads, the backs of Paddie’s wagons, etc.), coupled with the speed at which such video can be disseminated via social media. The default claim that suspects were combative/beligerent/resisting arrest, etc. when charges of over zealous policing are leveled, no longer affords them instant and unquestioned credibility (except by stalwart social conservatives—Thank goodness for Fox News!). Interesting how law makers in some states are now trying to make it illegal to video record law enforcement activity without prior authorization. But what’s that old saying about the genie in the bottle? Then there’s also that pesky Constitution…
Only time I came across an Alcohol Control Police with the power to physically assault students, I was visiting Teheran.
Va has some interesting ways of naming crimes. Jesse Mathews was charged with abduction with intent to defile in HG case. Ever hear that before?
I read somewhere that he gave a zip code other than that on the ID, which would be easy to do if one had a “home” address and a local address, or if one had recently moved. Logically, of course, this shouldn’t have made any difference since his ID showed him as too young to drink anyway, but it’s probably just a routine, very automatic thing the bouncers apply to everyone to detect fake IDs. Especially late at night on St. Patrick’s Day. So they might not have stopped to think it through before telling him he couldn’t go in.
If he were visibly angry about this, the, shall we say, overzealous ABC guys might have pounced on him as a result. Using it as an excuse to take someone down, to assert themselves. The lack of any charges that pass a sniff test points in that direction.
To me, unless evidence to the contrary shows up, it sounds like a classic case of testosterone poisoning, mixed with a dose of racism, conscious or unconscious.
^ I read in a Washington Post article that the zip code he gave was his mom’s current address. She had moved since he was issued his ID. Sounds like an honest and believable situation.
So, apparently Johnson was not drunk, was very respectful, and tried to get in a restaurant that normally lets under 21 year olds inside at night, but which on this night was limiting admission to 21 and over. When he was informed of that he calmly left the pub. 30 seconds later he was on the ground badly injured.
Martese Johnson was characterized in court papers as “very agitated and belligerent.” I can see how he might have been so after having been tackled to the ground for seemingly no reason. After all, from his own standpoint, be had merely walked away after a polite exchange at the door of Trinity Pub during which restaurant staff had explained why he would not be allowed to enter. No big deal. He’d just go somewhere else. So now, why were “law enforcement agents” arresting him? After all, this wasn’t Ferguson, Missouri, he wasn’t Michael Brown, and he’d done nothing illegal. Despite the fact that he’d probably been given “the talk” virtually all parents of black males have to have with their sons concerning law enforcement, it likely still didn’t prepare him for that out of the blue encounter with ABC officers. So, I can’t say as I blame him for being outraged, and yes, “agitated and belligerent” that night. As someone whose son was accused by police of slashing tires in a parking garage, even though he’d been sitting in a bookstore reading all evening, I’m aware of the sense of injustice he must have been feeling.
I am glad the report has exonerated this young man. I hope that the ABC officers receive much needed training, and they get back to what they were supposed to be doing, which is checking restaurants/bars to make sure they are reporting properly.
http://richmondfreepress.com/news/2015/may/01/state-police-find-uva-student-falsely-charged/
The much needed training should be quite short:
“OK, guys, you know you are habitually abusive and dishonest. That’s gotta stop”.
How about:
“You’re fired.”