Posted on 02/07/2018 6:28:17 AM PST by JP1201
She can't prove it. Two witnesses against one that it was consensual. Problem, there's nothing against it while on duty. Breathalyzer, sure--no drinking on duty. Rapealyzer? Not yet invented.
It’s Buzzfeed. No truth & the stench is foul.
At this point, it would be foolish for her to accuse them of rape if it was consensual. They gave her the evidence to convict themselves.
Jail them for stupidity
Not helpful. No arrest here, just a convenient arrangement: two reliable witnesses to say so. Later remorse of one participant won't work.
Oh great, another cop thread to draw out the cop hating stormfront trolls.
...
Yep, and the trolls ruin what could otherwise good be a good critical article. It didn’t take them long to post either. I guess they know who posts all the good cop hating articles these days.
It’s NYS. Albany is a cesspool. So do you really need to ask?
The buddy buddy blue wall of silence, I worked with some cops before and they spoke of it and you are right, other professions would get rid of the bad apples, but cops, they do not for some reason, and they need to, other wise they all look bad.
I can’t recall a single officer testifying against another no matter how egregious the crime under color of authority.
I know of a couple of cases personally where cops did testify against another cop. In one case both cops where childhood friends.
You are completely wrong. Most of the time cops pursue bad cops with a vengeance. Are big city departments in cesspool cities like Chicago or NY more likely to be corrupt? Probably. But still, even there, almost all cops do the right thing and no “good and decent cop” as you put it will lie to cover up any wrongdoing, no matter who the perp is.
F*:’( that! Where are all the upstanding officers who are outraged and calling for their heads?!
Crickets....chirp chirp.
Both cops should get the death penalty. Sanctimonious idiot.
It’s NYS. Albany is a cesspool. So do you really need to ask?
Touche.
“Sanctimonious idiot.”
I assume this was directed at me. No point in pursuing this.
There are many more rapes reported by victims of cops than the victims of plumbers or mail men. Every state should add a little paragraph to their requirements forbidding the rape of a person in custody, male or female. That’s not hard to do.
I’m sure there’s lots more to the story, which is supposedly what trials are supposed to be about.
Personally, I think it should be a very swift trial: Were the officers on duty? Check time sheets. Were they in an official vehicle? Check vehicle logs. Did they take the woman into custody? Officer statements already say yes. Did they report the encounter (file an arrest report, bring the person in custody to jail)? Check the jail logs.
Seems like the indisputable facts support the charges of kidnapping and official misconduct. If you believe the victim, it was rape. If you believe the officers, it was rape and bribery. I do not believe under any circumstances that a kidnap victim consents to sex.
Um, rape is already a crime.
I apologize if I sounded snarky.
A poster who joined FR just to bash cops——has no interest in anything else.
.
Not at all, point taken.
FWIW, if the contact took place, consensual or not, these men don’t belong on the force. I’ll leave in jail up to a jury.
Are they exempt from the laws they are supposed to enforce?
So much for equal justice for all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.