The Degradation of Government Agencies

[jks9199]

Why you find the silence deafening, is beyond me. It simply means I no longer wish to converse with you.

A prisoner, in a cell, is handcuffed, is held down by upt to six law enforcement officers and is forcibly stripped.

And you expect her to be smiles???

If they weren't in uniform, we would call that Gang Rape!!!



Yes, she cried out. Yes, she attempted to remain clothed. Yes, she asked why such a thing was taking place. If that is "resistance" ... then I would resist too.

To justify strip search and six hours of forced nakedness, I just don't get.

I thought we were a better country than that. I thought my fellow citizens would show more decency than that.

No -- that is not gang rape. That's not even close to gang rape. Trying to equate the two is insulting to the deputies involved in this incident, and even more insulting to those who have truly been the victims of gang rape.

Let me make a simple observation. No matter why you're there... if you're in a jail, do what the staff there tells you to do, unless it's going to be physically harmful to you or another person. You're in their house, and you will lose if you don't go with the program. There are channels to address the appropriateness of an action later. Yeah, it sounds a lot like what I suggest you do if you're in a police encounter. For the same reasons.

 

[michaeledward]

I wonder why you choose to make this about me?

 

[michaeledward]

No -- that is not gang rape. That's not even close to gang rape. Trying to equate the two is insulting to the deputies involved in this incident, and even more insulting to those who have truly been the victims of gang rape.

Let me make a simple observation. No matter why you're there... if you're in a jail, do what the staff there tells you to do, unless it's going to be physically harmful to you or another person. You're in their house, and you will lose if you don't go with the program. There are channels to address the appropriateness of an action later. Yeah, it sounds a lot like what I suggest you do if you're in a police encounter. For the same reasons.

Disorderly Conduct ...

Stripped ... and left naked for six hours.

What a country !!!

 

[Archangel M]

Well I fail to see the point here anymore. the original poster apparently just wants to express his political opinion and not discuss or support it.

 

[michaeledward]

Well I fail to see the point here anymore. the original poster apparently just wants to express his political opinion and not discuss or support it.

It is not a political opinion, in any way.

The officers of Stark County police department, in my opinion, grossly mishandled a situation with a young lady. They took her into custody, forcibly stripped her (for what reason remains less than cogent) and left her naked in a cell for a protracted time period.

I find that behavior abhorrent.

If they weren't in uniform . . . . . what would be an accurate description of the behavior?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Assault.
Sexual assault maybe, if she was subjected to a cavity search by a male deputy, which if memory serves may be considered 'object rape' or aggravated sexual assault. Some definitions below.

Object rape: A person commits object rape when the person causes the penetration or touching, however slight, of the genital or anal opening by any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, not including a part of the human body, with intent to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to the child or with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

The United States Code uses two terms to distinguish between different sexual activities:

* Sexual act: contact between penis and vagina or penis and anus that involves penetration; contact between the mouth and genitals or anus; penetration of the vagina or anus with an object; or direct touching (not through clothing) of the genitals of an individual under the age of 16.

* Sexual contact: intentional touching of the genitals, breasts, buttocks, anus, inner thigh, or groin with no sexual penetration.


Here's some more reading on terms, etc.
http://pc.brooklyn.cuny.edu/sexaslt.htm

 

[LuzRD]

just to see if i understand what happened...

a woman (Steffey) was arrested after one of her cousins called the police for help citing that Steffey was assaulted by another one of their cousins. (this would be the first part that makes Steffy the victim)

Steffy accidentally handed the officer a license that she should not of had in the first place (with an excuse that i find stupid but plausible).

then suddenly (the article missed a few small bits here)...

Steffy was arrested for reasons not cited (only vague generalizations of crimes) in the article linked by the OP (the embedded video is no longer available).

then 7 jail workers (does that mean police, sheriff, deputy, janitor, other?) thought it would be ok to attack the bound woman on the floor (this is the second part that makes her a victim). sheriff said it wasnt a strip search. were they concered for her safety? well "During that time, she was not allowed to use a phone or seek medical assistance for injuries she accrued that night, including a cracked tooth, bulging disc, and bruises." she could have been restrained AND clothed at the hospital she wasnt allowed to go to.

now maybe the video made clear some of the logic missing from the story reported in the article (reason for arrest, reason it SEEMED ok to forcibly strip someone for no known reason, deny someone a phone call, deny someone medical attention), however this post has been in direct response to the article (and i trust the media about as much as i trust the government (not very much at all))


NOW did this sort of thing happen before 911? id bet it did.
is this sort of thing likely easier to get away with AFTER 911? ill bet it is.

are all cops jerks that hate everyone not wearing blue? nope
are some of them? yup

do alot of people have negative feelings about certain (or all) politicians? lol yup

does everyone need to run about online stating their opinions as fact? not really but sometimes theres nothing better to do i guess

IF (big if BTW) the events occured like the article says then im disgusted!
however its unlikely anyone but Steffy and the arresting officer will know the actual events (each with their own version im sure).

so whatever, im gonna go play tontie

 

[Archangel M]

I agree with all but the "its easier to get away with it since 9/11" part. 9/11 has changed virtually nothing about the way local LE operates. What is it that everybody thinks 9/11 has done to change the way their local cops do business?

One of the only things of note is that SOME departments get more grant cash from the feds or perhaps some equipment.

 

[Archangel M]

And as to the "what if they werent in uniform" question. THEY WERE in uniform and there are many things that can and have to be done when you are wearing it. What would you call someone not in uniform making someone place their hands behind their back and applying handcuffs to them? What would you call someone not in uniform pulling over a car driver and asking them for their license? Spraying someone in the face with pepper spray and forcing them to the ground? Its a weak argument. The story given by the cops here is that the woman was suicidal and refused to remove her clothes as per jail policy regarding suicidal subjects. What should they do, let prisoners have their way?

Now was that what was actually going on here? Who knows? I dont? There is the one side of the issue being presented and some are making ASSumptions out of themselves. If this is not the case, then someone needs to be punished. If it was than I have no problem with it.

The issue here is that someone is taking a little bit of data from the press and making a grand implication with it.

 

[The Last Legionary]

2 comments

1 - LEO abusing their positions should be removed from those positions and subjected to the highest possible penalty

2 - Smart Asses need to wake up and not be smart asses

3 - Does anyone know where the uncensored video is?

4 - The above is not a smart *** question. Some scenes appeared to involve improper contact, however without clear footage it is impossible to tell.

5 - 5 looks like 2 after a couple beers.

That is all.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I wonder why you choose to make this about me?

I'm not. But it is your thread and your hypothesis, after all.

At least others a making more coherent and plausible statements, rather then venting.

 

[BrandiJo]

I do not see any reason why this woman should have been treated the way she was. IF they felt she was likely to harm herself they should have allowed her proper medical attention AND proper supervision while she remained clothed. I do not care how combatant she was or "dangerous" she was 2 men and 4 women should not have held her down and undressed her, that should be a female only task, (or male only if the victim here was male) Also having a chipped tooth and bludding disk are two very painful injuries one that should be treated as soon as possible, yet she was denied care for 7 hours... why? unless the officers involved where hiding something or getting a kick out of it some how. It makes me sick to think that in our country we would allow such a crime to take place and have so many defend it.

I have nothing against police officers, or jail house guards i have family who work in both fields and neither of them would ever come close to doing the things described in this artical or in the video.

 

[michaeledward]

I'm not. But it is your thread and your hypothesis, after all.

At least others a making more coherent and plausible statements, rather then venting.

You most certainly are making this person, and personal toward me.

So you say she wasn't resisting, and now you seem to be saying that she may have been. And because of that you no longer wish to converse. That just means you are arguing just to argue, not engage in a discussion.

You sir, in my opinion, have no intellectual integrity.

WEAK!!!

And now, you are arguing that people should resist the police whenever they do something that you simply don't like. Seems like you would prefer anacrchy.

The phrase, specifically 'intellectual integrity', is about a close to calling a person a "liar" without using that word.

Cheers!

 

[michaeledward]

3 - Does anyone know where the uncensored video is?

[yt]6Ku7pbvOr2Y[/yt]

[yt]iw8GIyF91Xk[/yt]

 

[Archangel M]

Whos "defending it"? We are just not jumping to conclusions based on the little snippet given here. If they did this to punish a mouthy prisoner [which indeed could be what happened here] then yes they do deserve to be punished. I dont think anybody has said otherwise. Most of us "defenders" are just objecting to the implication that in some way LE in total has become "degraded" because of post 9/11 policy, and this is an example, which was the initial statement on this thread.

As to "friends and family" in LE or corrections. Unless you go to work with them everyday, you really dont know what they do [or have done or seen] out there, you will just have to believe me on that one.

 

[Big Don]

Why you find the silence deafening, is beyond me. It simply means I no longer wish to converse with you.

A prisoner, in a cell, is handcuffed, is held down by upt to six law enforcement officers and is forcibly stripped.

And you expect her to be smiles???

If they weren't in uniform, we would call that Gang Rape!!!

Gang Rape? Were you not the poster proclaiming words have meanings? Gee, I guess they don't when you want to exaggerate and place blame while only hearing ONE SIDE OF THE STORY.

 

[BrandiJo]

As to "friends and family" in LE or corrections. Unless you go to work with them everyday, you really dont know what they do [or have done or seen] out there, you will just have to believe me on that one.

Nah but i talk to them almost daily, so i have a pretty good idea about the day they have had, what they have seen( some pretty nasty stuff) and had to put up with from people it can get ugly and it can get rough but my male relatives would never hold down and strip a woman unless her harming herself was immanent and then they would do the best they could to relax the situation BEFORE it came to that point.

As for defending it, anyone who has said anything along the lines of this is what happens after 9/11 is in some way defending it. You all are saying because some people few some plains into a building it is ok for our LEO to do this because we dont know the whole story. What is there to know the video, i think tells it all pretty clear.

 

[Archangel M]

I dont think you have really read this thread. Nobody is saying that.

If you believe that any media presented here tells "all there is to say" you are naieve. In defense of the LEO's or against them.

If you think that you hear everything from these "relatives", you are mistaken.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

You most certainly are making this person, and personal toward me.

So stating that this is your thread, and contradicting your arguments (and their form, or lack thereof) is an attack upon you personally?

The phrase, specifically 'intellectual integrity', is about a close to calling a person a "liar" without using that word.

Cheers!

And I am not calling you a liar. I am saying that you know you have no basis for your argument, and you still insist on your propsition without addressing the arguments to the contrary. That is intellectuall weak. And I have seen you do much better.

And how else am I to address a comment by you without commenting about what you say?

Anyway, this is pointless. If you want to comment or not upon my arguments against your position, that is your choice. But that says more about you then me.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

[yt]6Ku7pbvOr2Y[/yt]

[yt]iw8GIyF91Xk[/yt]

I'm sorry, but the video presented looks edited and cut to me. And the fact that the "news" casters have made judgements as to the "fact" that she is a victim, could cause one to believe that the editing is done in such a way as to prove their bias.

And you are presenting this as "uncensored video" why?