Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/fd1d4d05e561462a85abe50e7eaed4ec/ap-hundreds-officers-lose-licenses-over-sex-misconduct

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Flashing lights pierced the black of night, and the big white letters made clear it was the police. The woman pulled over was a daycare worker in her 50s headed home after playing dominoes with friends. She felt she had nothing to hide, so when the Oklahoma City officer accused her of erratic driving, she did as directed.

She would later tell a judge she was splayed outside the patrol car for a pat-down, made to lift her shirt to prove she wasn't hiding anything, then to pull down her pants when the officer still wasn't convinced. He shined his flashlight between her legs, she said, then ordered her to sit in the squad car and face him as he towered above. His gun in sight, she said she pleaded "No, sir" as he unzipped his fly and exposed himself with a hurried directive.

"Come on," the woman, identified in police reports as J.L., said she was told before she began giving him oral sex. "I don't have all night."
The accusations are undoubtedly jolting, and yet they reflect a betrayal of the badge that has been repeated time and again.

Very long article, so much more to the story available by clicking the link. Didn't want to copy the whole text due to the length.

Another reason why cameras are a good idea both for the police and the policed.

I'm curious to see how this will be defended and minimized by those who believe please life can do no wrong.

So basically, so far, we know nothing about the case since it hasn't gone to court yet. He could be a sex offender, she could be a liar.

You could have read the article, you could not have read the article.

 Sigvatr wrote:
So basically, so far, we know nothing about the case since it hasn't gone to court yet. He could be a sex offender, she could be a liar.

Good read on the article.

I think it's becoming clear it's a matter of "when" that nationwide police bodycams are mandated. It can't happen soon enough - it's good for the police, it's good for the people.

Police lives matter. Om a real note guess we need all the information first.

The best thing any of these victims can do is IMMEDIATELY go to the hospital and get a DNA swab. I'm willing to bet that about .001% of the officers doing this are actually gonna throw on a condom before receiving oral sex. If even that many. The proof will be on the swab. Which it sounds like this woman had checked, so she did the right thing. If this officer is guilty, it'll show on her medical records.

Without a police cam, it's impossible to see what actually happened: maybe she offered oral, then accused him of rape after. Or maybe he raped her. But if the evidence is found, he still did his job poorly. One is just bad policing, the other is rape. So he's kinda up the creek if there's any proof. I guess we'll see, since it sounds like she went immediately to the hospital.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
The best thing any of these victims can do is IMMEDIATELY go to the hospital and get a DNA swab. I'm willing to bet that about .001% of the officers doing this are actually gonna throw on a condom before receiving oral sex. If even that many. The proof will be on the swab. Which it sounds like this woman had checked, so she did the right thing. If this officer is guilty, it'll show on her medical records.

Without a police cam, it's impossible to see what actually happened: maybe she offered oral, then accused him of rape after. Or maybe he raped her. But if the evidence is found, he still did his job poorly. One is just bad policing, the other is rape. So he's kinda up the creek if there's any proof. I guess we'll see, since it sounds like she went immediately to the hospital.

I am wondering myself if she offered. Who would geab someone then stick their private in a place that can be bit off...... Seems wierd to me, thats like saying i am raping you wrap this rope around my neck while i do you.

The officer in Oklahoma City has a pretty long and damming list of victims, so he doesn't seem to be the smartest tool in the shed. It's bad enough that there wasn't even an attempt at using the blue wall to protect him by the department.

And that is just that one officer and doesn't even touch the rest of the nation.

OgreChubbs wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
The best thing any of these victims can do is IMMEDIATELY go to the hospital and get a DNA swab. I'm willing to bet that about .001% of the officers doing this are actually gonna throw on a condom before receiving oral sex. If even that many. The proof will be on the swab. Which it sounds like this woman had checked, so she did the right thing. If this officer is guilty, it'll show on her medical records.

Without a police cam, it's impossible to see what actually happened: maybe she offered oral, then accused him of rape after. Or maybe he raped her. But if the evidence is found, he still did his job poorly. One is just bad policing, the other is rape. So he's kinda up the creek if there's any proof. I guess we'll see, since it sounds like she went immediately to the hospital.

I am wondering myself if she offered. Who would geab someone then stick their private in a place that can be bit off...... Seems wierd to me, thats like saying i am raping you wrap this rope around my neck while i do you.

Are you for real? Not only did he have a gun, which would certainly have a chilling effect on resistance, but forced oral sex is an extremely common sexual assault with very few cases of biting. Are you going to blame allllll the victims?

However, there are still exceptions.

It just seems like a pretty bad idea. I think if I got mine bit off I wouldn't be in any position to further restrain someone. That would have to be the most intense pain ever.

Generally, it isn't something a rapist does until he is sure there won't be any (more) resistance. Unfortunately, I've known enough survivors to have some idea how and why resistance is abandoned typically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
It just seems like a pretty bad idea. I think if I got mine bit off I wouldn't be in any position to further restrain someone. That would have to be the most intense pain ever.

I'm not sure. Shock or adrenaline could delay the pain. Also, there are fewer nerves in the shaft, so the pain might actually be relatively small, with the severed nerves sending no sensation. The pain might not be crippling, but it would certainly motivate an attacker to new heights of brutality, which is an awful huge risk compared to the alternative.

I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

Fifteen posts before we hit Blaming the Victim . Actually reasonably impressed.

 LordofHats wrote:
Fifteen posts before we hit Blaming the Victim . Actually reasonably impressed.

It is certainly not unreasonable to consider both sides of the story. You may be upset to hear that when resolving a conflict half of that process usually includes "victim blaming" as both sides of the story or thought about and looked into.

Are they blaming the victim? Or are they merely questioning the possibility of something else going on?

I would say victim blaming is saying someone dived into the bullet rather than saying did the person provoke the bullet.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

And the number of dead people who would otherwise have been living rape victims would also be higher.

I'm missing your point.

Crystal-Maze wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

And the number of dead people who would otherwise have been living rape victims would also be higher.

I'm missing your point.

The point is resisting is what you should do. Don't just roll over and let them win.

Because being a brutalized corpse is better than being a living rape victim? Right. When someone who is armed with a firearm, a canister of pepperspray, a tazer, and a billy club has indicated the intent to rape you, there is the very real, and very human, fear that active resistance is going to be all the perpetrator needs to use any of the tools of violence at their disposal.

As far as going to the hospital and getting tested with a rape kit? Well, as is currently making the news-rounds, we see that those rape kits, in many communities, go unchecked for years.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Crystal-Maze wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

And the number of dead people who would otherwise have been living rape victims would also be higher.

I'm missing your point.

The point is resisting is what you should do. Don't just roll over and let them win.

A lot of people don't like dying.

 Psienesis wrote:
Because being a brutalized corpse is better than being a living rape victim? Right. When someone who is armed with a firearm, a canister of pepperspray, a tazer, and a billy club has indicated the intent to rape you, there is the very real, and very human, fear that active resistance is going to be all the perpetrator needs to use any of the tools of violence at their disposal.

As far as going to the hospital and getting tested with a rape kit? Well, as is currently making the news-rounds, we see that those rape kits, in many communities, go unchecked for years.

We are talking in general terms here. And no, being a corpse isn't better than being a living victim. But given the high suicide rates among victims I don't think either is preferable from their perspective. If you resist you have a chance of being neither.

Are you advocating that any victim should capitulate immediately?

Innocent people who get beaten or killed by the police are at fault because they resisted instead of complying, people who get raped by the police are at fault because they didn't resist and complied.

Meanwhile police are the real victims because YouTube makes it hard to be a cop.

Thanks Obama.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Because being a brutalized corpse is better than being a living rape victim? Right. When someone who is armed with a firearm, a canister of pepperspray, a tazer, and a billy club has indicated the intent to rape you, there is the very real, and very human, fear that active resistance is going to be all the perpetrator needs to use any of the tools of violence at their disposal.

As far as going to the hospital and getting tested with a rape kit? Well, as is currently making the news-rounds, we see that those rape kits, in many communities, go unchecked for years.

We are talking in general terms here. And no, being a corpse isn't better than being a living victim. But given the high suicide rates among victims I don't think either is preferable from their perspective. If you resist you have a chance of being neither.

Are you advocating that any victim should capitulate immediately?

Victims who are already at the mercy of a police officer because they committed some sort of crime, who are forced to sexually gratify the person with a gun and complete power over the situation, are not exactly in the best position to fight the assault.

Unless you are suddenly advocating violence against police officer excercising unjust power.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
Because being a brutalized corpse is better than being a living rape victim? Right. When someone who is armed with a firearm, a canister of pepperspray, a tazer, and a billy club has indicated the intent to rape you, there is the very real, and very human, fear that active resistance is going to be all the perpetrator needs to use any of the tools of violence at their disposal.

As far as going to the hospital and getting tested with a rape kit? Well, as is currently making the news-rounds, we see that those rape kits, in many communities, go unchecked for years.

We are talking in general terms here. And no, being a corpse isn't better than being a living victim. But given the high suicide rates among victims I don't think either is preferable from their perspective. If you resist you have a chance of being neither.

Are you advocating that any victim should capitulate immediately?

Unilaterally advocating that victims should resist is irresponsible. Factors like percieved agressiveness and likelyhood of victory would have to be weighed in individual cases - which it would be reasonable to assume is what is already happening.

Plus, its a really easy thing for some guy to say from behind their keyboard, which is much harder to do in reality.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

I wouldn't say they aren't resisted, so much as that the game is rigged to defeat resistance before it gains momentum. Most of the survivors I know we're raped when they were too drunk to resist effectively, or by a family member and/or trusted babysitter, which is a much more complex situation. I know a woman who was pulled off her bike and raped, and she says she was too confused to know what was happening until it was essentially too late to find leverage. Another woman was raped by a gang of teenagers, and was quickly overpowered and beaten just enough to get the point across that it would get worse if she resisted further.

Typically, rape prevention classes stress that a woman should be aware of her situation and essentially cause enough trouble early on for a rapist to give up before he is committed. If a rapist has already achieved power over her, either with a weapon, surprise, violence, or the power of the law, resistance is going to look like a much more risky option. Rapists try to stack the deck so that resistance isn't an option.

 Grey Templar wrote:

Crystal-Maze wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

And the number of dead people who would otherwise have been living rape victims would also be higher.

I'm missing your point.

The point is resisting is what you should do. Don't just roll over and let them win.

Resisting a police officer? Doesn't work out so well for some people.

 Torga_DW wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

Crystal-Maze wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I've heard that merely the act of resisting is often enough to deter an attacker, its just that most rapes aren't resisted or reported. I think if everyone fought back the numbers would be better.

And the number of dead people who would otherwise have been living rape victims would also be higher.

I'm missing your point.

The point is resisting is what you should do. Don't just roll over and let them win.

Resisting a police officer? Doesn't work out so well for some people.

Again, I was talking in general. Of course the specific situation will inform your decision.

Swastakowey wrote:Are they blaming the victim? Or are they merely questioning the possibility of something else going on?

Gee, you tell me.

Grey Templar wrote:The point is resisting is what you should do. Don't just roll over and let them win.

As always, firmly on the side of whatever the worst possible argument is. Your dedication and consistency is breathtaking, and I applaud you for it.

That is not victim blaming. As much as you'd probably like it to be. Resisting when appropriate and being aware of your situation would go a long way towards solving the rape problem.

Advocating for techniques that can help people not be victims is I think better than just saying "lay there and be a victim and we can solve the issues afterwards!"

 Grey Templar wrote:
That is not victim blaming. As much as you'd probably like it to be. Resisting when appropriate and being aware of your situation would go a long way towards solving the rape problem.

Not putting genitals into non-consenting orifices helps a little though...