North Brunswick NJ Edited Dashcam News Video

Note: Videos and commentary on those videos that are included within this post were shared with Nevada Cop Block by George MacGregor, via reader submission. If you have videos, stories, upcoming events/protests, or personal interactions with the police (and/or “justice” system) that you would like to share, send them to us and we will do everything we can to bring it to the attention of the world.

In addition, you can visit the Nevada Cop Block resources section for information and links to the rights of citizens when dealing with police, during which you should always be filming.

As everyone knows (or should know at this point), a common tactic among police officers during traffic stops is to claim that they “smell weed.” The intention behind that is to justify a search of the person and their car. Also, the reason it is such a common practice among cops is because it’s something that is close to impossible to verify. I.E. video doesn’t show a scent and therefore can’t be used to prove or refute that claim of having smelled something.

And, of course, if nothing is found then the officer was simply mistaken. Meanwhile, they’ve already successfully completed their fishing expedition and done what should be an illegal search (absent the unfounded claim of “smelling weed”). For the police, it’s convenient, it’s effective, and it allows them to violate the rights of someone they’ve decided they want to search.

Police Edit Video of Traffic Stop to Cover Up Lie

On September 13th, 2014, Leonard Cephas was pulled over by North Brunswick, N.J., police officer Richard De La Cruz, for a simple stop sign violation. But after Cephas turned over his license and registration, the officer decided to escalate what should have been an ordinary traffic stop by falsely claiming that he “smelled weed” coming from inside the car, and demanding that Cephas step out of the car so that they could search him and his property without his consent. Instead, Cephas decided to insist on his right to be free from unreasonable search, and began recording on his cellphone.

This is his recording, that went viral.

Police then broke his window, pulled him out of the car, threw him to the ground, and arrested him. Police claim that they later found 2 baggies of marijuana in the car, but this account does not seem credible since he was never charged with possession. Instead he was charged with driving under the influence (of marijuana apparently because they never said they smelled alcohol) and resisting arrest.

North Brunswick Police then released dash cam video of the incident to CBS channel 2 in New York to bolster their claim that the search and arrest was lawful, because the officer claimed he “smelled weed” (which of course cannot be disproved) Channel 2 did a news story that stated there was a “different side to the story”

Here is that news story:

And here is a longer dash cam video of the arrest:

On February 2nd, 2018, the department decided to upload that news video onto their YouTube channel. That channel can be found here: North Brunswick PD YouTube Channel

And the video that they posted can be found here:

When I viewed this video for the first time on February 20th. (which was yesterday as I am writing this story) I noticed something strange.

Here is what I wrote in the comment section of their video:

They never said they found any weed, They didn’t seem to charge him with possession either. Wouldn’t that mean that the cop lied about smelling weed as a pretext to search? If it was a pretext for a search, could that have been done because the driver was black? I think that these are at least valid questions to ask (in this day and age).

Also, is it my imagination, or does this video seem to be edited from what was in the original broadcast? (the suspect seemed to have more to say about the weed when the video sharply cuts) He says, “when they went in my actual car” and then cuts without ending the sentence. Notice when the video cuts, {1:50 on the video} the clock also changes from 6:15 pm to 6:16 pm, even though only 51 seconds has elapsed since the clock turned from 6:14 to 6:15. {0:59 on the video}

It appears that there is 9 missing seconds that were deliberately cut out of the video. I wonder if those 9 seconds reflected poorly on the police? Maybe reporting the fact that no weed was found?

After only nine minutes of research, I found the original, unaltered version of the news story and posted this:

Interesting, I just watched the original video to see what the police edited out. I was correct, it was the man stating that the police searched his car and there was NO WEED! Is this indicative of what police do all the time? That is to withhold evidence from the public? (and the jury) Shame on you for editing this news video to deceive the public.


I decided to take some photographs of my comments, because I had a sneaking suspicion that the police would not tolerate my free speech calling them out on their deception. Today (February 21st 2018) my suspicions were proven correct as my comments, and others, were purposefully deleted and the comments section turned off for this video. (Although they did not correct the video) I have also attached those pictures.

This all leads us to three very important, unanswered questions:

  1. If police did in fact find weed, then why wasn’t Cephas charged with it?
  2. Did police violate both copyright and “fair use” laws by selectively editing a news story to intentionally leave out statements contrary to their narrative?
  3. Did they violate the First Amendment of the Constitution by deleting my public comments on their public forum? (If anyone knows of a lawyer willing to help me with this, please contact me.)

Here is their public comment policy from their Facebook page:

This page is intended for increased communication between the North Brunswick Police Department and its residents and followers. It is not for personal banter, rage, or inflammatory content. At NO point will derogatory or insulting language be allowed. Any subject matter that can be viewed as explicit or demeaning by the page administrators will be deleted. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Now look at my comments. There was no personal banter, no rage, no inflammatory content, and I did not use derogatory or insulting language. No material was explicit or demeaning. Therefore there was no legitimate reason for my posts to be deleted.

Let them know what you think:

The North Brunswick Police did investigate themselves and, of course, decided that they did nothing wrong.

“I Smell Weed” – Other Examples

In this “Day and Age” we are seeing more and more videos where police are falsely claiming to smell weed, when none exists. Just a few more examples can be found here:


and here:

These actions by police are eroding the public trust in them, and must be rectified by increasing transparency and accountability. Deleting public posts that ask relevant questions, and editing news videos does nothing but further erode this trust. There should be some meaningful actions or punishment to send a loud message to the police social media administrators, that deception and censorship are not tolerated in the United States of America.

– George MacGregor

Related Content on

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *