Cop At The Center Of A ‘Controversial’ Stop Is No Longer With The Department, But There’s ANOTHER Side Of The Story MSM Is Ignoring

I’m really sick and tired of these punks doing Facebook live videos of their “run-ins” with the police. More times than not, they prove THEY’RE the ones blowing everything out of proportion.

Perhaps you’ve heard about the “incident” involving Winfield Officer Sean Skov. Long story short, he pulled a man over for failing to use his turn signal. During the stop, Skov noticed “vegetation” in the window. He asked the man, Rudy Samuel, what it was, and he said “tree stuff.”

Out of an abundance of caution, he put on gloves and grabbed the “vegetation stuff” from the driver’s window. Samuel said he didn’t smoke. Things escalated.

When the officer returns, he tells Samuel to get out of his car, the video shows. Samuel said the officer has to test it first, but the officer replies that, “I’ll test it here in a little bit, OK, I ain’t got to test it right now.”

The officer repeats that Samuel must get out of the car, and as Samuel asks why, the officer forcibly removes him, video shows.

The video goes dark, but the microphone picks up the officer saying that Samuel is being detained so police can search the vehicle. Samuel replies that he does not consent to a search, saying police must test the vegetation first.

The video abruptly ends after someone picked up the phone.

Samuel recorded the entire thing, because he was clearly ready to be a victim. Stop and think about it. More often than not, these people record their interactions because they’ve already decided that– no matter what happens– they’re a victim. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying it’s wrong to have a record of these interactions. How often are we thankful for body cams these days? I think you get my point, though.

Notice how much he complains in the beginning of this live video. It sounds like he’s convinced it “took so long” because he’s black or something, which is bogus because anyone who has ever been pulled over– REGARDLESS OF SKIN COLOR– has gone through the same process. You hand the officer your info and wait.

No drugs were found in the car, which is great.

The officer didn’t mistreat Samuel. He did his job. If an officer saw something “suspicious” in my vehicle and asked me to step out, I would because I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE. Sure, it’d be inconvenient, but there is literally nothing to gain by sitting there and yelling at a cop who’s simply doing his job. Even if he or she is wrong, understand that they’re just trying to do their job and keep the community safe.

That’s my take, anyway.

End of story, right? WRONG.

Officer Skov is no longer with the police department, and the department failed to give anyone an explanation as to why. But don’t feel bad, because he wasn’t given an explanation either.

We actually spoke to Officer Skov’s wife, and we feel like their side of the story hasn’t gotten enough exposure, if any exposure at ALL. She explained that Skov has been in law enforcement for 14 years and has NEVER had any trouble. He “has never been verbally reprimanded, written up, nothing within the department.” However, that didn’t seem to affect the way they treated him last Thursday.

According to his wife, he was called into the office Thursday and was told that he needed to resign or be terminated. When he asked for an explanation, the HR person told him for “violation of policy.” Naturally, he asked for the specific policy he supposedly violated, and the HR person said he didn’t know. He was just told to cite this mysterious “policy.”

Skov was told he needed to make a decision on the spot, but he said he wanted to consult an attorney first, because he didn’t do anything wrong. He was told he couldn’t consult an attorney and needed to give an answer on the spot. He refused to resign, because HELLO. Why would he? Because of that, he was terminated without explanation.

Skov’s wife added, “The city manager, Jeremy Willmoth and the city commissioners apparently made this decision in the middle of this investigation.”

The media coverage has been so unfair to him and his sweet family. Most outlets have only focused on the “victim’s” side of the story. By the way– here’s a bit more background on Rudy Samuel. From a quick look at his Facebook profile, he’s really into posting pictures of wads of cash and memes about weed. Oh. And sometimes he posts obscure warnings.

Listen. I just point all of that out, because I’m looking for FAIRNESS in this process, and I’m not seeing it here. If they want to examine Officer Skov– who as far as we know has a clean track record– MSM should also dig into Samuel.

Why is MSM more concerned with the supposed “victim” (who’s completely fine, by the way) than the officer who’s now being put through the wringer for doing his job? (At least, we think that’s the reason. Once again, we still don’t have much of an explanation.)

What policy did he violate?

By all accounts, it sounds like Officer Skov has a good reputation and years of “scandal-free” service. In the very least, why didn’t they give him a warning about what was going down? They totally blindsided him.

No warnings. No explanation. That’s not right.

What kind of society have we become when we start treating good cops like bad guys?