Home Videos Utah man records himself being a jerk to deputies, makes mistake of...

Utah man records himself being a jerk to deputies, makes mistake of quickly reaching into bag


A Utah man became belligerent when approached by Cache County Sheriff’s Deputies earlier this month and taped is interaction.

Posted by “Travis Heinze” on YouTube, the video shows the Travis refuse to give his personal information to the officers after being stopped for suspicious activity- a crime in the state of Utah.

Travis goes back and forth with the deputy in a childlike manner, eventually reaching quickly into his bag to retrieve ID. The primary deputy calmly draws his sidearm and warns him not to pull a weapon.

After he is checked for warrants, Travis is told he is free to go and waddles off into yet another chapter of “stupid cop block videos.”

If you have any problems viewing this article, please report it here.


  1. I can’t even listen to this guy. He makes me sick. It’s one thing to protect your rights, and another thing to just be a jerk. Ugh. People like this make me sick.

    • I tried to leave a comment but it got deleted. This man will harass residents so they call in a complaint. Then Travis will record the LE unit and post on You tube. He then calls into dispatch and bullies them. Calls them the “c” word. Asks if they like it a certain way by the officers……..it is unbelievable what he says. The followers he has makes me sick. A veteran that wanted to be a cop, gets arrested for child porn and then belittles anyone employed at a LE Office

  2. Here, I’ll say it for the officer, who can’t. “Is your name Dick? Oh, Travis, huh? You seemed like a Dick to me.”

  3. This article is extremely biased in favor of the Public Servant. Please by all means staff writer show me the exact Utah code which makes a purely subjective term as suspicious a crime in and of itself. Personally, I find your writing style to be suspicious. Based on your statement and the Fact I am viewing this page in Utah you must be committing the crime of suspicion.

    Here’s a few quotes from the Utah Supreme Court.
    “Such unbridled discretion . . . is inherently unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment and article I, section 14.”

    the right not to be “subject to arbitrary invasions solely at the unfettered discretion of officers in the field.” Brown, 443 U.S. at 51 (citing Prouse, 440 U.S. at 654-55).

    We likened this lack of guidance on how to conduct the checkpoint inquiries to the “much hated and feared general warrants issued by the British Crown in colonial days, where British officers were given blanket authority to search wherever they pleased and for whatever might pique their interest.” Id. at ¶ 26. Ultimately, we concluded that “a free society cannot tolerate such a practice.” Id.

    Furthermore: Ok Here’s the situation. A request followed by a question.

    This is an excellent document please read\analyze\comprehend completely. If you are successful with this request, ask yourself if you would be willing to add your signature to the list. Furthermore, ask yourself if we as United States Americans should require 100% of ALL elected officials and public servants to read this thoroughly and also add their signature as well in order to serve us? We hire our servers to be our alleys NOT our adversaries. Personally, I feel their signature addition should be a requisite prior to being sworn in to defend the Constitution. The Constitution in my humble opinion along with ALL subsequent rules\laws can never permit any of the atrocities listed within this document. /Ponder

    • The United States is not a land mass, it is a corporation and it existed before the Revolutionary war. See Republica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43. and 28 U.S.C. 3002 (15)

      Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520 which states ” But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution, the Constitution, it is true, is a compact but he is not a party to it.”

      These court decisions spell it all out very clearly. I can explain it to you but, I can’t understand it for you.


    • (Stands and golf claps) pheeeewww! He’ll I thought I might be alone here in my distaste for the article. It’s obviously some kinda blue line gang erotic literature or something with a great deal of creative license taken. I mean I spit my drink out all over my phone when I read the bit about suspicious behavior being a crime. I wonder if it’s a felony or a misdemeanor. I feel like I should read then next article this guy writes, as I suspect it may be part of an advice column where he suggests that white male officers marry minority women so that when they beat their wives they can beat a minority at the same time and save a lot of hassle with getting that taken care of for the ďay. Or maybe top ten things to say when they ask “you look familiar, have I talked to you before” and the citizen responds with “I used to do gay porn, that’s probably when you know me from” this is some hard hitting journalism man. Keep up the good work.

  4. The cop was the one violating Utah law. Failure to identify is not grounds for detainment. Under 77-7-15, a cop must have reasonable articulable suspicion that a crime has, or is being committed before they can require ID from a person. This was an unlawful detainment by a criminal cop.

    • First off that is not “law” it is Statutory Regulations. When did Travis agree to Utah Statutory Regulations? Where is that contract? or is that an invisible contract which Travis, nor anyone else wastes,are not required to agree to, and government simply attempts to bamboozle individuals into acceptance of these statuary regulations in which they were never asked whether they agreed, were legally valid or legally binding upon a subject? Who chose this government, and what power do these “people” have over other individuals? is everyone their slave that they can make another man master over a freeman?

      Food for thought!

      “Free your mind and your body will surely follow.” me

      • Bob Davis, your point is well taken and I believe a reasoned opinion, however, as interpreted by the courts, our entry into a state constitutes de facto agreement to being subject to the laws in that state. None of us ever formally agreed to comply with any particular law, just like we did not agree to which nation we were born in, but we may face consequences for not following the law. At least most of us can agree on the mala in se laws that are there to protect society as whole. Unfortunately we are dominated by a huge body of mala prohibita laws which too often seem arbitrary. If we disagree with a specific law then we have the right to attempt to change that law. Jurors can change the enforceability of laws simply by deciding guilt or innocence, establishing legal precedence. There is a difference in Statutory Law and Statutory Regulations, but my take is Travis Heinze did not break either or any. A person does not legally obstruct the duties of a police officer by concealing one’s identity if there is no underlying reason for the officer to believe that the person has or is breaking a law; even in a so-called “stop and i.d.” state.

        • I believe you’re arguing with a “sovereign citizen” here, who has no concept of law. And whilst it is, indeed, true that LEOs and judges are the only true sovereign citizens in the United States, the aforementioned “believes” he is a sovereign citizen, thereby making any argument with him wholly and completely pointless.

    • Thanks. Nobody seems to care about our rights anymore and let cops violate them whenever somebody’s feelings are hurt.

  5. Just FYI, this man is a veteran, and spent years in service of his country overseas. Let’s give him some respect, homeless or not.

    • Homeless is a broad interpretation. Because he does not reside in an immobile structure does not make him homeless. He is traveling and documenting his journey.

      If you are leaving one location with your possessions and traveling to another location but have not yet secured a specific new residence, are you considered homeless?

    • You are incorrect. I love Travis, but he is no veteran, and certainly did not spend “years in service of his country overseas.” Get your facts straight. He’s a homeless guy on the spectrum who has trouble integrating into society, has received unacceptable amounts of grief because of it (and for no valid, legally justifiable reason), and has figured out a way to make a living by showcasing the injustices that seem to follow him everywhere he goes, in the hopes of effecting change that can benefit everyone.

  6. The state, as a virtual entity, comprised of a group of citizens (all citizens of the state) that make up this virtual entity, is representative of the citizens that comprise it. As a representative of the citizens that make up the population of the state, those same people (all citizens of the state), having agreed upon a set of stipulations that are designed to further our liberty and justice, and our pursuits of happiness, have enjoined the task of maintaining those stipulations onto the law enforcement officers that have been hired for that task. Their job is to make sure that no citizen, or representative thereof, through malicious intent or otherwise, shall impede on those stipulations. The authority given to law enforcement has been borrowed through the power of the very citizens they were hired to protect. This is why it is very important for them to not feel as though they can metamorph into a singular and separate entity outside of the powers that have been afforded them, or outside of the limits of the task that has been given them. Through these types of endeavors has, throughout history, been the avenue to dictatorship, where the virtual entity steals the power from it’s very citizens and lords it over them. Checks and balances must be maintained in order to cause rogue law enforcement, acting as their own representatives and not representative of the citizens, to refrain from utilizing more powers than they have been afforded through the very mechanisms of the stipulations they are protecting.

    • That is a fallacy. No one has ever seen, read or agreed to the Constitution of the United States of America, and yet it purports to be “We the people.” As a legal contract all of the signers are dead and that agreement died and went into the grave along with them.

      May I suggest you read: Lysander Spooner’s No Treason: Constitution of No Authority

      It can be found on the Mises institute’s website



    • Two of the Worst Fraud-Words: “Constitution,” and “Law”
      If you think about it, you will realize the role of language in practically all coercion: be it parents or teachers coercing the young; or those masquerading as (so-called) “state” or “government” coercing (so-called) “subjects.” Politicians and bureaucrats have an armory of weapons they use to coerce their victims. I put it to you that fraud-words are the most formidable weapons in their armory – not guns and explosives. Do politicians and bureaucrats use guns or words? I further put it to you that next to “government,” two of their most powerful fraud-words are “law” and “constitution.”
      Most people believe that some of the noises and scribbles emanating from the mouths and pens of the lawyers, politicians, and bureaucrats (masquerading as “government” so-called) are somehow special and constitute “the law.” This is a grotesque superstition.
      The criminals who masquerade as “government” use “the Constitution” as their shield – they claim that “the Constitution authorizes or empowers them” to perpetrate their destructive acts. They use the word “law” as their sword. Because you broke their so-called “law,” therefore they are authorized or empowered to punish you as they see fit.
      “It is illusions and words that have influenced the mind of the crowd, and especially words – words which are as powerful as they are chimeral, and whose astonishing sway we shall shortly demonstrate,” wrote Gustave le Bon in his classic The Crowd, a hundred years ago. About two hundred years ago, Jeremy Bentham wrote, “Out of one foolish word may start a thousand daggers” – Bentham’s Theory of Fictions by C.K. Ogden. And 160 years ago Jonathan Swift wrote in Gulliver’s Travels:
      “There was another point which a little perplexed him… I had said, that some of our crew left their country on account of being ruined by ‘law’… but he was at a loss how it should come to pass, that the ‘law’ which was intended for ‘every’ man’s preservation, should be any man’s ruin. Therefore he desired to be further satisfied what I meant by ‘law,’ and the dispensers thereof… because he thought nature and reason were sufficient guides for a reasonable animal, as we pretended to be, in showing us what we ought to do, and what to avoid… I said there was a society of men among us, bred up from their youth in the art of proving by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white, accordingly as they are paid. To this society all the rest of the people are slaves.”

      “Government” is Kept In Place by Superstition
      The first superstition that keeps “government” in place is the belief that because practically all of us use certain words without any thought as to their validity and the consequences they produce – Duckspeak – therefore these words are valid and represent reality.
      The second superstition is the notion that certain words constitute “the law” (so-called). This is a most grotesque absurdity.
      The third superstition is that because certain naive and gullible people put pieces of paper into “ballot” boxes, this action transforms, transmutes, transubstantiates, or transmogrifies, certain people into “presidents,” “congressmen,” etc. This is primitive magical “thought.”
      The fourth superstition is that because some people call themselves “government” – or organize themselves into structures called “government” – therefore they acquire magical powers to perform miracles.

      Excerpted from – The Nature of Government



  7. As much as I detest the past actions of Travis William Heinze relating to his child pornography conviction, I can appreciate the way in which he responds to officers demanding his ID, although he hadn’t, was not in the process nor was he suspected of committing a crime when confronted by the officers. Sorry to inform you dear “staff writer”, but mere suspicion is not a crime in Utah nor in any other state for that matter. And to refer to Heinze being belligerent could not be further from the truth. He’s apparently aware of his rights and calmly asks the officers to be as equally willing to share their personal information. Very rarely does Travis wind up on the losing side of the incident. Lastly, you accuse Travis of reaching quickly into his bag giving justification for the officer drawing down on him with his service weapon. That too is pure dis/misinformation. Travis told the officer that his ID was in that bag and offered the officer the opportunity to retrieve it. When the officer declined, Travis asked if the officer if he would permit him to do so and the officer responded in the affirmative. You are doing nobody a favor by attempting to conceal the officer’s lapse in judgment. Honesty in reporting please, if you have any desire to be a legitimate and credible journalist.

    • Agreed, on all points. Travis was more than polite & courteous with these officers, and calm as well, and asked for no more from the officers than he was being asked to provide himself, which are perfectly reasonable requests. Good for the goose, good for the gander as they say. Travis is attempting to demonstrate that the system is not fair, even and forth coming as they would like John Q. Public to believe. And he does so very eloquently, all while appearing to be a folksy hillbilly, lacking education. The violation of rights is more commonplace than people would care to admit. But, that tired refrain from which we all have suffered when the police have a car pulled to the side of the roadway, or highway, “wow, glad that isn’t me!”. No one cares if it does not happen to them. Surrendring your “rights” under the guise of cooperation is a fallisy in which the common man seems all to willing to participate. There is none more hopelessly enslaved, than those who falsely believe they are free.”

      • Not really true, he was arrested for child pornography, he made a plea deal with the DA and turned in the child pornography ring so that he could stay out of jail. he can’t get a govt job because of this arrest which i believe would make him a sex offender under the law. He was living with his father when he was arrested for the child pornography and his father disowned him and kicked him out. he begged his father to let him come back to the home and his father, being a good father told him he could come back but he was not to have any computers and no internet. Travis wouldn’t do that because of his perverted addiction and started living in his car. He has real mental health problems and the police should have had him held for a 48 hour mental health check.

  8. Let’s see: Police violating an individual’s rights, demanding ID absent a criminal offense, with the resulting pulling of a loaded weapon on the individual when he complies with the demand to produce said ID. I am sure if the police investigate themselves, they will find no wrongdoing in the case. Government authority stems from the barrel of a gun, violence is who they are, what they do, and what they represent, nothing more. Anyone who believes this statement to be false, I would invite you to simply disregard, even an illegal demand from government, as this individual Travis Heinze demonstrates in the video, and find out what the ultimate consequences will necessarily be, and the outcome of such civil disobedience. I can assure you of this, you will come out on the short end of the stick to be sure. Travis could have been wrongfully shot, and possibly killed by this tyrant, who is clearly violating his rights. “Government is the disease masquerading as the cure.”

  9. I find this article a pitiful representation of “news.” No factual dissemination occurs. Blatant disregard for factual truth leaves no one informed. Every claim made here is easily debunked by simply watching the public recording of this encounter. How stupid to publish this! The guy is odd, yes, but he is honest, fair, and calm, and the direct opposite of what we see in these deputies. He’s a veteran, he’s sharing his experiences on the road, and being a better American through his actions than these deputies. He didn’t need to show ID, he wasn’t belligerent, he did not abruptly grab his ID from the bag, and these officers blatantly lied to him repeatedly with the sole intent or goal to find him in violation of a warrant, suspension, law, or any other infraction. The behavior of these deputies is despicable.

  10. Seems the cop was being lazy and trying to infringe the man’s constitutionally protected rights as laid out under the 4th ammendment. There is no law in Utah giving an officer the right to ID a citizen without cause. To quote the officer in the video:
    Deputy Nelson: “You need to stay right there for now.”
    Travis: “Am I being detained?”
    Deputy Nelson: “No, I’m just talkin’ to ya.”

    At this point the gentleman is free to leave as the officer said he’s not being detained. Just a few moments later:
    Travis: “Am I being detained?”
    Deputy Nelson: “You are for now.”
    Travis: “I AM being detained, what’s the crime?”
    Deputy Nelson: “Failure to disclose identity at this point.”

    By the officer’s own admission, he is now unlawfully detaining this man, as that is not a crime and thereby not the basis by which he can legally request identification. Keep in mind also that Travis was minding his own business and the officer approached him. He wasn’t one of those “cop blocker” idiots that go around filming police stations from the sidewalk because they know it’ll incite the police to come and ask them what they’re doing in the hopes that the officers will infringe their rights so they can go viral. Sounds like you’re just a bootlicker that doesn’t understand the law and the rights that citizens have to not be unlawfully detained and searched in violation of the 4th ammendment without any suspicion of a crime.

  11. This man harasses local residents by cursing at them and refusing to leave properties to cause LE to respond. Then posts his videos. He then proceeds to call the local dispatch and bullies them. Calls them the C word, says the most obscene comments. He claims to be a disabled veteran on the phone but never says it to the responding LE unit. He clearly doesn’t have any family, cause I can’t imagine how he would feel if someone said these things to a family of member of his. Of course he won’t record and post the phone calls that HE makes.

    • You know absolutely nothing about which you blindly type. You don’t even understand the interwebs, so you have zero understanding of who is calling and bullying dispatch, calling them “the C word.”

  12. I am a victim to this man. He is a bully. He will call you the “c” word just because you are employed at a Law Enforcement Office. He needs to be shut down off social media. All because, I’m assuming, he wanted to be a cop but got arrested for child porn instead.

Comments are closed.