The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.

Taya Graham:

Hello, my name is Taya Graham and welcome to the Police Accountability Report. As I always make clear, this show has a single purpose holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable. And to do so, we don’t just focus on the bad behavior of individual cops. Instead, we examine the system that makes bad policing possible. And today, we will achieve that goal by showing you this video of Border Patrol agents illegally detaining popular Cop Watcher Coroners News. A questionable example of law enforcement overreach that reveals how the federal agency that is tasked with protecting the border has expanded its reach to ensnare American citizens. But before we get started, I want you watching to know that if you have video evidence of police misconduct, please email it to us privately at par@therealnews.com or reach out to me on Facebook or Twitter @TayasBaltimore, and we might be able to investigate for you.

And please like, share and comment on our videos. It helps us get the word out and it can even help our guests. And of course, you know I read your comments and appreciate them. You see those hearts I give out down there. And I even do a comment of the week to show how much I appreciate your thoughts and to show what a great community we have. All right, now we’ve gotten that out of the way. Now, as we have all witnessed over the past two years, federal agents have been swarming American cities and streets purportedly in search of criminal immigrants and people in the country without permission. But as all of us who monitor law enforcement understand, the expansion of federal police powers also comes with unforeseen consequences, namely law, enforcement, overreach. And no video reveals this truism better than the border patrol with detainment I am showing you right now.

It is an exclusive video that we are featuring, which depicts Cop Watcher Corners News as he is accosted by Border Patrol agents in Laredo, Texas. It’s a fraught encounter that, as you will see, raises serious questions about the presence and evolution of this ever more powerful branch of federal law enforcement. And to help me break this down frame by frame, I’m joined by Corners News, Ismael Rincon. Ismael, thank you so much for joining us.

Ismael Rincon:

Thank you, Taya, for having me again. I really appreciate.

Taya Graham:

Now first, Ismail, can you set the scene for us? What were you doing when you encountered Border Patrol and why did they pull you over?

Ismael Rincon:

I was traveling from Laredo. I live in Laredo, which many of you all know already Laredo’s a border town, South Texas. And I do ride-share. I work as a ride-share driver. Since Laredo is a smaller city, roughly 300,000 people in Laredo, I travel a little bit north towards San Antonio, Austin, that area. There’s more opportunities. And when I travel on 35 headed north, there’s a checkpoint to go through. But in most cases or most border towns that have a checkpoint, you have to go through the checkpoint. In Laredo, on Highway 35, there’s an access road, which is completely open and legal to drive, which is adjacent to 35, which is the front edge road. And there’s no checkpoint on that road. And that’s the road I usually travel because I don’t want to make a line. I don’t want to go through the checkpoint.

Taya Graham:

Now, before we show what happens next, I just want to point out that this is the second time Border Patrol has pulled you over. How active are they in Laredo, Texas, and why do you think they’re targeting you?

Ismael Rincon:

They’re very active because there’s a whole bunch of activity in Laredo because like I mentioned, it’s a border town and there’s always smuggling going on. There’s chases on a daily basis by Border Patrol, DPS, Laredo Police Department. So I mean, there’s a whole bunch of federal agents driving around. And so that’s one of the … They are pretty active. They not only pull me over, not only me, but they are very active.

Taya Graham:

Okay. Let’s watch as the border patrol agent engages you. And as we do, could you talk about his justification for stopping you again? Because it seems to be changing, namely that you were driving on an access road. Now, exactly how is this illegal?

Police Officer:

Hey, no partner.

Ismael Rincon:

You going Caden? No,

Police Officer:

Mr. Caden.

Ismael Rincon:

How’s it going, man? Going

Police Officer:

Good. How about

Ismael Rincon:

Yourself? Then right. What’s the reason for the stop?

Police Officer:

It’s because you’re traveling on the access road. We

Ismael Rincon:

Okay

Police Officer:

Past all the ranch easements, so

Ismael Rincon:

To

Police Officer:

Me it looks like if you’re not going one of the local ranches, then it appears like you’re trying to circle an inspection of the checkpoints. We just have to investigate it. So it’s a public road, but

Ismael Rincon:

Like I said- Right, right, right. Yeah.

Police Officer:

If you’re not going into the local ranches-

Ismael Rincon:

Right. I’m not going to the ranches.

Police Officer:

That’s fine. Can you roll the window down on the back? I can’t see through the tent.

Ismael Rincon:

No, that’s fine.

Police Officer:

What’s

Ismael Rincon:

That? That’s fine.

Police Officer:

That I can’t see through the tent?

Ismael Rincon:

Yeah. Yeah. Driving in the access or on the access road is not illegal. It’s a public road and it is not illegal. His justification or the justification that I get when I get pulled over when I’m traveling on the access road is circumventing the checkpoint. But in my case, or in this area, circumventing the checkpoint is not against the law. It’s not illegal.

Taya Graham:

Okay. Wait, let me interject here. So the agent says it’s a public road. So what’s the problem?

Ismael Rincon:

Yeah. Driving in the access or on the access road is not illegal. It’s a public road and it is not illegal. His justification or the justification that I get when I get pulled over when I’m traveling on the access road is circumventing the checkpoint. But in my case, or in this area, circumventing the checkpoint is not against the law. It’s not illegal.

Taya Graham:

All right. So the agent circumnavigates your vehicle apparently looking for a passenger. However, you ask again the reason for the stop. How does he answer and what did you think about the legality of his response?

Ismael Rincon:

So what’s the reason for the stop?

Police Officer:

I

Ismael Rincon:

Just told you.

I’m a US citizen, so what’s the reason for the stop?

Police Officer:

I told you what the reason was.

Ismael Rincon:

Okay. So-

Police Officer:

Because we’re over there on the access road watching traffic.

Ismael Rincon:

We observed your vehicle. Is this over?

Police Officer:

I’m sorry?

Ismael Rincon:

Is this over?

Police Officer:

Where are you from, partner?

Ismael Rincon:

Is this over? Did I say I’m a US citizen already?

Police Officer:

Yeah, you just did. Yeah.

Ismael Rincon:

All right.

Police Officer:

Do you have anything, anybody in the trunk or anything in the trunk?

Ismael Rincon:

Did I say I’m a US citizen?

Police Officer:

Do you have anything in

Ismael Rincon:

The trunk? Do you see anybody else here?

Police Officer:

Do people hide in trunks?

Ismael Rincon:

I don’t know.

Taya Graham:

All right. Let’s stop here for a moment. Do people hide in trunks? Let’s listen to him ask that question again, and then we’ll get your response on the other side.

Police Officer:

All right. Do you have anybody in the trunk or anything in the trunk?

Ismael Rincon:

Did I say I’m a US citizen? Do you have anything in

Police Officer:

The trunk? Do you

Ismael Rincon:

See anybody else here?

Police Officer:

Do people hide in trunks? Well,

Ismael Rincon:

My reaction at that time, I mean, it just sounded funny because no agent had ever asked me that question. Do people hid in trunks? Okay, what do I tell him? Do people hid in your trunks? So I thought that was funny.

Taya Graham:

Okay. So what do you think? Where is this leading? And what did you think of his line of questioning? And are you worried at this moment that the stop might actually escalate?

Ismael Rincon:

Do people hiding your trunks?

Police Officer:

Not mine, but I’ve seen it plenty of times.

Ismael Rincon:

Okay.

Police Officer:

So do you have anything in there?

Ismael Rincon:

What does that even matter, man?

Police Officer:

If you have anything

Ismael Rincon:

In the trunk, why would it

Police Officer:

Matter? Yeah.

Ismael Rincon:

Not even my wife is asking me your personal questions. I mean, that’s fucking personal. Is your body cam activated? Yeah,

Police Officer:

It’s activated.

Ismael Rincon:

Am I worried of escalation? Not at this point where I already know what to answer and how to deal with agents or how to deal with stops like this one without reasonable suspicion because he never claimed I committed any sort of immigration violation or any felony. I don’t know if you knew this border patrol can pull people over within a hundred miles from the border, but the only reason they can pull somebody over within the hundred miles is for immigration purposes. No,

Police Officer:

The reason why I’m asking is people smuggle in trunks all the time, man. Already find people in trunks.

Ismael Rincon:

Oh, you believe I’m a smuggler?

Police Officer:

I don’t know. We have to investigate. That’s the reason why I’m here on the stop is because I’m investigating to see what you’re doing here on the access.

Ismael Rincon:

Are those trainees or what?

Taya Graham:

Okay. Hold on one minute. I just want to replay a part of this clip. When you ask about trainees, and perhaps you can explain it on the other side.

Ismael Rincon:

Are those trainees or what? I’m

Sorry?

Police Officer:

Are

Ismael Rincon:

Those trainees? They’re board

Police Officer:

Patrol agents.

Ismael Rincon:

Trainees? They’re

Police Officer:

Board patrol agents.

Ismael Rincon:

Trainees? They’re

Police Officer:

Board patrols.

Ismael Rincon:

Why can’t you answer a simple question? My concern, and I think it’s a pretty serious concern, is that this agent, he is a FTO. The reason I know he’s an FTO, which is a field training officer. One of my best friends is a retired FTO from border patrol. So they train the new recruits for the new agents, and that’s the reason why there were so many agents on a single SUV. So the reason why I’m asking their trainees is because he’s training them to pull people over without reasonable suspicion, without any justification, valid or lawful justification. Even though I had already, a couple times, I had already answered that I was a US citizen. All right,

Police Officer:

Partner. I would just feel more comfortable if I knew if there was anybody hiding in your trunk, Matt.

Ismael Rincon:

Right. I don’t answer questions.

Police Officer:

That’s fine. I’m going to call a

Ismael Rincon:

Canine

Police Officer:

Up here. They’re just going to run it. If the dog’s 19-

Ismael Rincon:

Rodriguez versus US, you cannot detain me beyond the scope of your detainer. It’s within the

Police Officer:

Scope of my duties, man.

Ismael Rincon:

Of your detainment, why did you detain me for?

Police Officer:

I already explained why I detained

Ismael Rincon:

You. All right. That’s irrelevant to whatever I have in my truck.

Police Officer:

I’m

Ismael Rincon:

Sorry? That’s irrelevant to whatever I have in my trunk.

Police Officer:

How is that irrelevant?

Ismael Rincon:

Did you pull me over because you suspect I have somebody in the trunk?

Police Officer:

I’m a border patrol agent.

Ismael Rincon:

I understand. I’m an

Police Officer:

Immigration official, right?

Ismael Rincon:

Right. So immigration,

Police Officer:

Right? And immigration stop, right?

Ismael Rincon:

Did I inform you I’m a US citizen?

Police Officer:

You did.

Ismael Rincon:

You have reason to believe

Police Officer:

I’m not? United States citizen smuggle?

Taya Graham:

Okay. Let’s set up the next clip and maybe you can discuss why you continued to ask him if he had reason to believe you were not US citizen. Is this a probable cause question?

Ismael Rincon:

This is not a probable cause question. It is a reasonable suspicion, which is the lower standard. Reasonable suspicion doesn’t mean they saw me committing a crime, but they believe I might have because of the facts he had already or he has already collected or gathered. But in this case, that’s why my line of questioning is very specific. What facts do you have to believe that I have somebody in the trunk? What facts do you have to believe that I am not a US citizen? Because without those facts, he doesn’t have anything. You have reason to believe I am smugly. You have reason to believe I am not. I am not a US citizen.

Police Officer:

I have reason to believe that you are not from one of these local ranches.

Ismael Rincon:

I am not.

Police Officer:

Okay.

Ismael Rincon:

That’s fine. I’m not. I’ve never claimed I am. So

Police Officer:

If I see someone driving on the access road at this time of night, you’re not from one of the local ranches,

Ismael Rincon:

You’re

Police Officer:

Not oil field.

Ismael Rincon:

I am not. I never claim I am.

Police Officer:

Okay. Then to me, it looks like you’re circumventing inspection at the

Ismael Rincon:

Checkpoint. I did to convey the inspection, yes. Okay. Yes.

Police Officer:

So I’m investigating that.

Ismael Rincon:

All right. I am a US citizen. You’re an immigration officer. That’s

Police Officer:

Right. And I’ve caught plenty people before that smuggled people in

Ismael Rincon:

Their trunks. Okay. You have any facts to believe or any reason, legitimate reason to believe that I have somebody in the trunk?

Police Officer:

Sir, tell

Ismael Rincon:

You what. Rodriguez versus United States. You’re detaining me beyond the scope of whatever you claim initially. No,

Police Officer:

I’m not, sir.

Ismael Rincon:

You are. So we didn’t claim any facts regarding having somebody in the trunk. He just said people have … I have caught people with people in the trunk.

Taya Graham:

Okay. So now I have two questions. I’m assuming he keeps bringing up the trunk as a way to justify and prolong the stop. And why is he limited, according to the law, as to how long he can detain you?

Ismael Rincon:

Right. As far as the time, there’s no specific time. It just has to be reasonable. So there’s no specific, let’s say, 10 minutes or it has to be 15 minutes or it has to be 20 minutes. No. They have to stay focused on their initial traffic, in this case, a violation, which it was not a violation. So legally, he could have pulled me over for an immigration inspection, which it would be, “Hello, sir, I’m pulling you over because you’re traveling on the access road. Are you a United States citizen?” Yes, I am a US citizen, so that’s going to be it. He can answer questions after that, but that doesn’t mean I have to answer or that doesn’t mean he can still detain me beyond his immigration stop.

Police Officer:

You are. That’s

Ismael Rincon:

Fine.That is my legal opinion.

Police Officer:

I’m sorry?

Ismael Rincon:

That is my legal opinion and you actually are.

Police Officer:

That’s your legal opinion?

Ismael Rincon:

Yes, sir.

Police Officer:

Well, are you a judge?

Ismael Rincon:

A judge.

Police Officer:

Oh, you said it’s your legal opinion.

Ismael Rincon:

It is my legal opinion.

Police Officer:

Okay. Well, I’ll call a supervisor right now.

Ismael Rincon:

All right. Are you a rookie?

Police Officer:

I’m sorry?

Ismael Rincon:

Are you a rookie?

Police Officer:

I’m sorry?

Ismael Rincon:

Are you a rookie officer?

Police Officer:

A rookie? No, I’m not a rookie, sir.

Ismael Rincon:

You’re

Police Officer:

Not? All right. What would the relevance of that be anyways?

Ismael Rincon:

So beyond that, that would be violating Rodriguez versus United States, which states that you cannot extend the traffic stop. You cannot extend it specifically in this case for a canine.

Taya Graham:

Okay. Now, canine arrives on the scene and inspects your car. Let’s watch and then talk about it. Okay. So I’m used to bomb snipping dogs and drug sniffing dogs, but what type of dogs are these and what’s their role in these types of stops?

Ismael Rincon:

Well, they detect the scent of humans and narcotics.

Taya Graham:

Okay. And now something totally unexpected happens. I mean, it actually caught me by surprise. Let’s watch and discuss it after.

Police Officer:

All right, sir. K9 did it search. You’re free to go unless you want to wait for the supervisor.

Ismael Rincon:

Are you staying here?

Police Officer:

I’m sorry?

Ismael Rincon:

Are you remaining here?

Police Officer:

Am I going to remain here after you leave?

Ismael Rincon:

No, when your supervisor gets here.

Police Officer:

Yeah, I’ll stay here. Okay. You want to wait for a supervisor still? Okay, that’s fine. You’re free to go though at any time.

Taya Graham:

Okay. I just have to ask, why didn’t you just hightail it out of there? Why did you stay? I mean, they said you were free to go. Why didn’t you?

Ismael Rincon:

I didn’t just take off because I wanted to advise a supervisor of what the agent did or what was his thoughts on the actions of the agent detaining me beyond his initial stop.

Taya Graham:

But see, then when I watched through the rest of the video, when you actually talked to a supervisor, I was pretty shocked by what he said. Let’s take a listen and discuss after.

Ismael Rincon:

Said

Because they messed up. Unfortunately, man, honestly, even when I go through the checkline, even though I worked there,

I still

Get

Checked. And I don’t have a problem with that.

Taya Graham:

Okay. So let me make sure I understood. The supervisor says that he also gets searched or stopped, even though he works for Border Patrol. Is he talking about the checkpoint and what did you think of what he said?

Ismael Rincon:

I just want to clarify. This guy I was speaking with is not the supervisor. He is a canine handler. And he had seen me or he knew who I was from previous interactions. That’s why his attitude towards me was different than the other agent that I had never encountered before.

Taya Graham:

Now, you’ve been stopped twice by Border Patrol. What are the thoughts and concerns about the agency and how it’s expanding its powers?

Ismael Rincon:

My thoughts are, I mean, if they’re going to do their job, just do it the right way. I don’t have a problem with the immigration officers per se. The thing is, I don’t have a problem with immigration officers. Just do it the right way. You’re going to do your immigration job, just do it the right way. Follow your laws, follow your policies, and leave the people alone. If you don’t see you unsuspect regular people of committing any sort of crime, just leave them alone. Just verify they’re a US citizen, that’s what you’re allowed to do, and that’s it.

Taya Graham:

Thank you, Corners News, for discussing this video with us and for all the excellent work you do. We really appreciate you. And now to discuss what we witnessed and the implications for the growing power of Border Patrol and ICE, I’m joined by my reporting partner, Stephen Janis. Stephen, thank you so much for being here.

Stephen Janis:

Taya thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Taya Graham:

So Stephen, what are your general concerns after watching the video? What aspects of the stop do you think are the most problematic?

Stephen Janis:

So Taya, what causes concern for me is the kind of sketchy circumstances of the stop. I think you need a better threshold for probable cause if you’re going to be pulling people over. When you’re border patrol, I mean, you’re not traffic enforcement, you’re not local police. You really shouldn’t be doing this only in extenuating circumstances, and I don’t think they met that.

Taya Graham:

So Steven, how does probable cause work with Border Patrol? I mean, I thought they were primarily limited to border enforcement, not traffic stops. How exactly does this work?

Stephen Janis:

Well, Taya, these are the questions I’ve asked Border Patrol to answer because I think it’s really important to establish what their probable cause are. I mean, really they’re immigration police, so it should be immigration circumstances. In this case, I think it was deficient, but we have asked border patrol for comment and we’ll see what they say.

Taya Graham:

Now, you reached out to the Department of Homeland Security. What did they say about car stops and how they’re approaching them? And what concerns, if any, do you have from their response?

Stephen Janis:

Yesterday, I sent them a very detailed email about all these questions. Whether or not they can pull people over for traffic enforcement, what are the probable cause threshold they need to meet to pull people over? I will let you know what I hear. I have not heard back yet. They said they would get me a response. As soon as I get it, I will post it.

Taya Graham:

Thank you, Stephen. As always, I appreciate your reporting on this critical topic and of course, your insightful analysis. Now, certainly reporting on cop watchers, turning their cameras on federal agents is an intriguing development in a community that used to almost be entirely focused on local policing. And it’s something we will continue to monitor and report on across the country as it unfolds and bring you updates on critical developments when they happen. Now, please, let me just share a few thoughts about what we just witnessed. First, as the video he shared with us demonstrates, it’s certainly very important to know your rights and the law in this most recent phase of American law enforcement overreach. Now that border patrol agents are conducting traffic stops and even effectuate searches with questionable probable cause, it’s never been more important to understand the constitutional rights and how they apply when federal officers try to ignore them.

But the encounters between coroners, news and border patrol also raise questions about something a little less obvious. An aspect of this expansion of enforcement powers worth examining in further detail, a trend that has emerged to the actions of ICE and border patrol that is reminiscent of some of the worst historical practices of American policing that I want to break down for you today. I’m talking about the rise of generalized universal suspicion, meaning the act of controlling space based solely upon general suspicions and assumptions about who we are, not the facts of what we actually did. Now, Stephen talked about this in the parlance of his concept of blanket criminality. That’s the idea born of American wealth inequality where a neighborhood that suffers from poverty or disinvestment is not worthy of justice. In fact, police assume without cause that anyone who lives in it is always to certain extent a suspect.

It’s a method of enforcing the unequal economics of a country that is more effective at creating billionaires than providing healthcare for the working class. But what we’ve learned with all the extreme actions of IACE and border patrol also prescribes another lesson worth considering, something akin to the idea of blanket criminality, but much more insidious and to a certain extent, more brutally destructive, the great American punishment regime. The expansion of Department of Homeland Security Powers is part of this idea, a long and extensive effort to punish us simply for being American, a push by the elites to punish first and ask why leader that has grown more alarming as it’s expanded to be tough on all of us. Please let me explain what I mean. Consider how our current federal government treats the citizens of this country. Think how widespread the threats to punish or to extort have been used against all of us regardless of ideology or political persuasion.

I mean, never in my life have I witnessed such an entrenched disconnect between voters and our government, especially a system that is designed to work at the consent of the people subject to it. Instead, we have born the brunt of a succession of policies that explicitly contradict the needs and most important desires of the American public, decrees outlined in executive orders and intrusive legislation that are designed to prohibit and punish we, the people in the most obtrusive and constraining ways possible. Let’s just run down a list. Are you a person who obtained the ability to see a doctor due to Medicaid expansion courtesy of Obamacare? Well, you’re set to be punished by the big beautiful bill, which has restrictive work requirements that will be difficult to fulfill and eventually lead to millions losing healthcare simply by virtue of not being rich. And while we’re talking about healthcare, were you an Obamacare recipient who benefited from the credits that reduced your monthly payments, but have since expired while Congress has done nothing, literally nothing to reauthorize them?

Are you a farmer who can’t afford fertilizer because the government decided for reasons that are still unclear to launch a foreign war or have your overseas customers vanished and left you unable to pay for next year’s crop due to extractive tariffs? Are you a former federal worker who was summarily let go from a job without actual cause and had your career torn asunder and your social security data leaked by a 21-year-old Doge College dropout? Are you one of the tens of millions of Americans who can’t afford a $1,000 unexpected expense and who now have to pay over $4 for a gallon of gas? A person teetering on the edge of financial ruin as America spends an estimated 200 billion, that’s a billion with a B again on a foreign war of choice. And finally, are you someone who’s been harassed, illegally detained, falsely arrested, or perhaps even worse, part of the 30,000 people charged for no reason due to a flawed $2 drug test that is known to be highly inaccurate, but is still widely used by law enforcement despite its flaws across the country.

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you’re subject to the great American punishment machine. And believe me, I could have kept going. We’re a country that incarcerates at a higher rate than any other nation on earth. We’re the only first world nation that does not guarantee healthcare for all of its citizens, and this is a place that is better at minting billionaires than providing for the basic needs of its citizens. The point is punishment is required if you’re going to tout yourself as the greatest nation on earth, but not provide for your people. I mean, ask yourself, why can’t you afford to go to the doctor? Why a car costs more than the average annual salary of an American worker and why higher education is simply unaffordable for the majority of working class people? This confluence of inequitable events exists for a reason, namely a body politic fixated upon punishing us.

I mean, how else could the apherementioned bad policies flourish in a purported democracy if other extra electoral barriers had not been erected? How could we be subject to such punitive measures if truly, collectively, we had a seat at the proverbial table? That’s the big question here. Yes, we currently have an administration that seems dead set on subjecting us to punitive policies and yes, Congress has failed to act to help us, like when they allowed the Obamacare tax credit to expire, leaving millions of Americans without health insurance. But why? Why do they get away with it? Why don’t things change? I think the answer to that question can in part be found in the video we just watched. It’s an idea embedded in the central purpose of people like Corners News and the world of cop watching he represents and that shows what needs to happen for justice to prevail.

And that is, we need to push back. We need to reject the great American punishment regime. We need to demand new ideas and fresh thinking, and more importantly, solutions to the problems which ail us, not slogans, not platitudes, not more restrictive laws or more powerful law enforcement. No, we must demand policies that make our lives better, make us healthier and happier and more equipped to address the vast technological challenges of the future. In other words, we must demand a government that serves all of us, not just the few, not just the richest and not just the most powerful, all of us or none of us. That is our demand. I want to thank our guest, Coroner’s News for his time and for his continued work. Thank you, Ismael. And of course, I have to thank Intrepid reporter Stephen Janis for his writing, research, and editing on this piece.

Thank you, Stephen.

Stephen Janis:

Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Taya Graham:

And I have to thank mods of the show, Noli D and Lacy are for their support. Thanks, Noli D. And a very special thank you to our accountability report, Patreons. We appreciate you and I look forward to thanking each and every one of you personally in our next live stream, especially Patreon associate producers, John E.R., David K. Louis P. Lucid Garcia, super friends Shane B. Kenneth K. Pineapple Girl Matter of Rights, and of course, Chris R. And I want you watching to know that if you have video evidence of police misconduct or brutality, please share it with us and we might be able to investigate for you. Please reach out to us. You can email us tips privately at par@therealnews.com and share your evidence of police misconduct. You can also message us at police accountability report on Facebook or Instagram or at eyes on police on Twitter.

And of course, you can always message me directly at Tayas Baltimore on Twitter or Facebook, and please like and comment. I really do read your comments and appreciate them. And we do have a Patreon link pinned in the comments below for accountability reports. So if you feel inspired to donate, please do. We don’t run ads and we never take corporate dollars, so anything you can spare is greatly appreciated. My name is Taya Graham and I’m your host of the Police Accountability Report. Please be safe out there.