• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NYPD force women to undress while handcuffed and sexually assault her

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Commodus said:
I can't believe you just said that. I went out of my way to dig up multiple pieces of evidence outside of this forum, to construct a case based purely on facts and logic, not peer pressure, and now you're spinning this bullshit lie about my methods. My point about a majority is not that majorities are automatically right, but that you should double-check your beliefs and leave your ego at the door if you're clearly in the minority. You need to have an airtight case if you want to be seen as anything else besides ignorant or contrarian. So far your position is "of course everyone else is wrong... because they're not me," and that's not good enough.

Also, you do know you're still proving my point, right? That when confronted with evidence that you're likely wrong, you do whatever you can to dance around that fact? You conveniently didn't address any of my points, you just shifted the topic to -- you guessed it -- pedantry. I'm still waiting to hear how there's no coercive influence whatsoever when a police officer has sex with a non-partner. So go on, tell us.
Click to expand...
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aliquam nulla nibh, luctus accumsan tempor sit amet, mollis finibus turpis. Sed ut nulla nec diam cursus ultrices a nec leo. Nulla ut pulvinar arcu, id condimentum lectus. Donec venenatis commodo dui. Cras vitae augue a tellus bibendum sagittis in eget metus. Aenean porttitor placerat leo a sodales. Sed fringilla faucibus porta. Fusce at finibus erat. Nam commodo varius velit pharetra ultricies.

If you want to post nonsense just use: http://www.lipsum.com/

This constitutes trolling.

Perknose
Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J.Wilkins said:
How would that even be legal?
Click to expand...
How would what be legal?

The shielding of police records? There is a law on the books in NY that handles that.

If you're talking about the leaking of a private citizen's record of interactions with the police or justice system, I have no idea about the legality, however, it is something the NYPD have been known to do in the recent past.
 
Brainonska511 said:
How would what be legal?

The shielding of police records? There is a law on the books in NY that handles that.

If you're talking about the leaking of a private citizen's record of interactions with the police or justice system, I have no idea about the legality, however, it is something the NYPD have been known to do in the recent past.
Click to expand...

No, the police releasing private criminal records. Over here that would lead to more jail time than the original action.
 
Leftists demand diversity of all kinds in Police Departments across the nation. The departments comply but to do so they must lower standards such that previously undesirables are now admitted in.

Then, leftists get themselves all in a twist when the less than desirables can't or won't conform to acceptable practices.

What's the root cause of the problem? Somebody please explain it to the leftists. It won't sink in so I'm not interested in wasting my time.

The highlighted by me crosses the line into dog whistle racism.

Perknose
Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:
boomerang said:
Leftists demand diversity of all kinds in Police Departments across the nation. The departments comply but to do so they must lower standards such that previously undesirables are now admitted in.

Then, leftists get themselves all in a twist when the less than desirables can't or won't conform to acceptable practices.

What's the root cause of the problem? Somebody please explain it to the leftists. It won't sink in so I'm not interested in wasting my time.
Click to expand...

Today, Boomerang admitted he's a cowardly bigot, because he assumes that including anyone who isn't a white male means 'lowering standards.'

Seriously, what the hell? What does promoting diversity have to do with this case, especially when there are plenty of instances of white cops abusing their power to extort sex.
 
boomerang said:
Leftists demand diversity of all kinds in Police Departments across the nation. The departments comply but to do so they must lower standards such that previously undesirables are now admitted in.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's not really an issue. if anything police departments struggle as it is to find qualified candidates, talk less of being able to even let diversity factor in.

What people want isn't diversity in police departments (though that would be nice and having a culturally diverse police force may help prevent some of the tragedies we see on the news every day). What we want is accountability. Currently there is none. We have the inmates running the asylum essentially. The police completely police themselves and there is no accountability to other police officers and certainly not even to the public.

I personally believe a law should be passed that mandates that the top 2 or 3 position of every major police department be filled by a civilian as a means of putting some accountability and common sense back in policing. Because these guys didn't wake up one morning and decide it was a good day for rape. More likely, they've been doing this for some time and it's no secret in the department.
 
jmagg said:
There can be no consensual sex for a cop on duty.
Click to expand...
Though a bit late to address this, that's completely false. And it doesn't even have to involve a prior relationship. Just that there was no threat of official action, or reasonable belief of that. I personally know of several cases of "booty on duty," that were referred to a State's Attorney for investigation that resulted in a legal finding that no indictable offense occurred, so long as the conduct was not related to a custodial situation. (Even a traffic stop where you're technically being detained for a brief period could have triggered it, as you're not free to go at any time you wish)

What many (most) are failing to look at, is that.... Brace yourselves.... There is a segment of society that is attracted to men and women in uniform. They have been known to pursue "flings" with police officers, or in my case firefighters/medics. I've never "engaged," on duty, but I've seen it happen with both police and fire/EMS.

Several of them ended up losing their jobs for "conduct unbecoming", but there was no criminal act to pursue, unless they failed to perform some required official function (other than wasting a few minutes of duty time). Say they were also assigned a specific security detail and their "fling" caused them abandon it. But, if it just happened to be a waitress at Denny's late at night that got lonely, and asked a cop for what turned out to five regrettable minutes in the back of his car that she won't get back.... Well that's not rape.
 
Last edited:
FirNaTine said:
Though a bit late to address this, that's completely false. And it doesn't even have to involve a prior relationship. Just that there was no threat of official action, or reasonable belief of that. I personally know of several cases of "booty on duty," that were referred to a State's Attorney for investigation that resulted in a legal finding that no indictable offense occurred, so long as the conduct was not related to a custodial situation. (Even a traffic stop where you're technically being detained for a brief period could have triggered it, as you're not free to go at any time you wish)

What many (most) are failing to look at, is that.... Brace yourselves.... There is a segment of society that is attracted to men and women in uniform. They have been known to pursue "flings" with police officers, or in my case firefighters/medics. I've never "engaged," on duty, but I've seen it happen with both police and fire/EMS.

Several of them ended up losing their jobs for "conduct unbecoming", but there was no criminal act to pursue, unless they failed to perform some required official function (other than wasting a few minutes of duty time). Say they were also assigned a specific security detail and their "fling" caused them abandon it. But, if it just happened to be a waitress at Denny's late at night that got lonely, and asked a cop for what turned out to five regrettable minutes in the back of his car that she won't get back.... Well that's not rape.
Click to expand...

I think your post is valid, however, this incident is in the context of a detainment in the line of duty. Agreeable or not, there is an implicit power differential and threat that makes consent impossible in this situation. The officers need to not be officers anymore, and charges will depend upon the evidence.
 
Sunburn74 said:
Yeah that's not really an issue. if anything police departments struggle as it is to find qualified candidates, talk less of being able to even let diversity factor in.

What people want isn't diversity in police departments (though that would be nice and having a culturally diverse police force may help prevent some of the tragedies we see on the news every day). What we want is accountability. Currently there is none. We have the inmates running the asylum essentially. The police completely police themselves and there is no accountability to other police officers and certainly not even to the public.

I personally believe a law should be passed that mandates that the top 2 or 3 position of every major police department be filled by a civilian as a means of putting some accountability and common sense back in policing. Because these guys didn't wake up one morning and decide it was a good day for rape. More likely, they've been doing this for some time and it's no secret in the department.
Click to expand...

The police want lower standards themselves, someone too smart might start asking too many questions and be a thorn in their side.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-court-ruled-you-can-be-too-smart-to-be-a-cop/5420630

Can a person actually be “too smart” to be a cop in America?

A federal court’s decision back in 2000 suggests that, yes, you actually can be.

Robert Jordan, a 49-year-old college graduate, scored a 33 on an intelligence test he took as part of the application process to become a police officer in the town of New London, Connecticut. The score meant Jordan had an IQ of 125.

The average score for police officers was a 21-22, or an IQ of 104. New London would only interview candidates who scored between 20 and 27.

Jordan sued the city alleging discrimination, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld that it wasn’t discrimination. “Why?” you might ask. Because New London Police Department applied the same standard to everyone who applied to be a cop there.

And the theory behind it?

ABC News reported back then. While at least acknowledging the basic fact that such a policy might be “unwise,” the court deemed it had a “rational basis” because it was put in place to lower cop turnover.

The police department went on to continue automatically disqualifying anyone whose IQ was “too high.” Jordan went on to become a prison guard instead.

And there you have it.

Considering all the police brutality and officer-involved shootings in the news these days, here’s a rhetorical question for you: how well does this hiring practice bode for cops actually being able to follow the Constitution or use proper discretion while “protecting and serving” America?

Does this snapshot from the past at least partially help explain how we got to where we are as a nation today — a total police state? Wow, and the Pentagon has been giving these guys tanksstraight off the battlefields in the Middle East to drive down American streets, too.

Recent public opinion polls, just by the way, show trust in police is pretty abysmal; 65% feel that our police departments do a poor job of holding officers accountable for misconduct.

Well America’s local law enforcement agencies — of which there are 18,000-plus, more than any other country in the world — aren’t exactly encouraging geniuses to apply to be officers here; in fact, geniuses don’t stand a chance even if they wanted to (which, I guess if they are geniuses, they probably don’t).
Click to expand...
 
It's at least a mildly interesting argument.

You can spend 3+ hours at the precinct while we book and process you, or you can go home free if you have sex with us. She "chooses" sex, they think they are in the clear because it is consensual, and later get charged with rape. The defense is going to leave everybody in the court room feeling really slimy that's for sure.
 
boomerang said:
Leftists demand diversity of all kinds in Police Departments across the nation. The departments comply but to do so they must lower standards such that previously undesirables are now admitted in.

Then, leftists get themselves all in a twist when the less than desirables can't or won't conform to acceptable practices.

What's the root cause of the problem? Somebody please explain it to the leftists. It won't sink in so I'm not interested in wasting my time.

The highlighted by me crosses the line into dog whistle racism.

Perknose
Forum Director
Click to expand...
what is wrong with this guy
 
Jaskalas said:
I would simply explain that other cultures have an even lower opinion of women and minorities.
Click to expand...

Not everyone person in every culture, and it's just as discriminatory to assume people in a given culture will be sexist/racist as it is to perpetrate sexism or racism itself.

And let's not sugarcoat it: Boomerang was just champing at the bit waiting for a chance to let his bigotry out. There wasn't any kind of subtlety or compassion involved.
 
sactoking said:
officers should be fired for dereliction of duty solely because THEY WEREN'T FUCKING
Click to expand...

Oh, they were fucking, alright.

But I agree. I don't see in any circumstance in which this behavior would be acceptable by an officer, and it's very likely rape.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
A BJ is getting your ass pounded?
You need help Son
Click to expand...

You need education dude. According to the Clinton definition of sex neither oral sex nor sodomy would count as "sexual relations". They were equally excluded from the narrow definition of "sexual relations" that he was allowed to legally use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top