Virginia police won’t release video of Paul Richardson traffic stop

Getty Images

Virgina State Police said this week that they were reviewing the details, including in-car video, of a traffic stop involving Redskins wide receiver Paul Richardson after Richardson said the officer asked him if he was in a gang or a drug dealer.

They will not be releasing the video to the public, however.

The police declined a public records request from the Associated Press to release the video. The video is able to be released under state law at the police’s discretion, but an police spokeswoman said they have chosen not to in this instance.

Richardson, who signed a five-year deal as a free agent this offseason, was ticketed for having improper registration for his new car.

31 responses to “Virginia police won’t release video of Paul Richardson traffic stop

  1. Wow. The tape must confirm Richardson’s account, or portrays the trooper’s behavior in an ever worse light than Richardson’s account.

  2. Richardson is dry snitch to even speak on this. Should of just kept it moving instead of stirring the pot and creating a distraction for his new team.

  3. Not surprised. Police have gotten away with far worse. Appears there needs to be a review and adjustment of the state law. This should not be left to the discretion of the perpetrators.

  4. defscottyb says:
    April 27, 2018 at 2:12 pm
    Richardson is dry snitch to even speak on this. Should of just kept it moving instead of stirring the pot and creating a distraction for his new team.
    ————-

    Yeah, because football is so much more important than our Constitutional rights. BTW, it is “should have” not “should of.”

  5. They might still release it. But now I suspect there is something on it that they want to get out ahead of first. If the cop’s behavior was not appropriate they will want to take the appropriate action first because then it would be easier to speak to it. I would be shocked if it just went to the vault forever because a) that looks even worse because it indicts an entire department rather than just one officer and b) because leaks happen and if they took such a whitewash cover up approach and tht risk became real they are then in the worst possible of positions.

    I do think if it completely absolved the cop they would not have even bothered waiting for the request to come they would have pushed it. I could be wrong, but thats what my gut says.

  6. Whats the point of the cameras if they release footage only when it benefits them? Oh yeah that whole tyrannical government thing going on that we were supposed to have guns for when they push the boundaries a bit too far. “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” -Ben Franklin

  7. Wait. Where are all the Yahoos that were throwing Michael Bennett’s name around??

    Police misconduct is wrong no matter who it affects. They are public servants, and we the public, deserve the best of the best….regardless of what you look like.

  8. chawkup says:
    April 27, 2018 at 2:18 pm

    Yeah, because football is so much more important than our Constitutional rights. BTW, it is “should have” not “should of.”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    What constitutional rights were violated? Surely, some cops are corrupt but when people take stories like this and exaggerate them into some sort of heinous hate crime it detracts from the stories of actual corruption. The cop asked a couple of awkward questions. That’s it. That may be inappropriate but it isn’t a crime. The driver was not arrested or jailed. He was simply given a ticket that can be challenged in court just like EVERY other ticket issued to ANYONE by any cop.

  9. What a terrible law. The police are public servants. The public has a right to see the video if this is how the police are treating the citizens.

  10. And now we can surmise for ourselves the veracity of Richardson’s account. He apparently didn’t imbellish his Report of what happened.

  11. Not a surprise at all coming from the VA police. What’s funny though if it came out that the story was the over way this story would already have over a 100 comments, but seeing that it’s showing that the officer likely was in the wrong majority of the people went ghost.

  12. Remember when everybody was saying the players had no reason to kneel, it was all for attention and creating a distraction? Hilarious times. Where are those posters now?

  13. As a rule I’ve found that the police release video immediately if it makes them look good. If it makes them look bad, they either never release it or release it way after the event and usually only by court order.

  14. FinFin68

    “What constitutional rights were violated? Surely, some cops are corrupt but when people take stories like this and exaggerate them into some sort of heinous hate crime it detracts from the stories of actual corruption. The cop asked a couple of awkward questions. That’s it. That may be inappropriate but it isn’t a crime. The driver was not arrested or jailed. He was simply given a ticket that can be challenged in court just like EVERY other ticket issued to ANYONE by any cop.”

    Well FinFin, he HAD temporary tags so he SHOULDN’T have been stopped in the first place so YES, THAT PERSONAL RIGHT,

  15. You are obviously having a hard time with attention to detail. I asked what CONSTITUTIONAL rights were violated? The ticket can be challenged just like all other tickets as I stated above and the fact that he could win means that you think he shouldn’t have been stopped at all. By that logic, every successfully challenged ticket could be grounds for some sort of rights violation. Even as a strictly civil rights issue your point is shaky. IF that cop’s experience has been that the majority of drug dealers happen to be young black men who drive expensive cars was the stop based on the fact that the driver was black or that the driver fit a specific profile? Surely that is a debatable premise that could go either way but the implication by the player and many of his supporters is that it MUST be a racial thing.

  16. Actually, I don’t. The Constitution guarantee’s us from unlawful search, seizure, stopping without a LAWFUL Cause, i.e., profiling and unwarranted harassment and infringement upon our rights. Since he HAD temp tags, there was no LAWFUL reason to stop him.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!