Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ike_tyson t1_iy4nm4b wrote

So a fellow officer raped her and he "dates" her?

You have to be a certain type of person if you do this shit.

145

BrieGoneThot t1_iy4ui0f wrote

>You have to be a certain type of person if you do this shit.

Yup, oink oink. Actually I think Jailers might be worse than Cops.

62

Rtn2NYC t1_iy58nai wrote

They are, at least the men for sure.

13

FullMetalFist t1_iy5pub6 wrote

There was a story that came out a few months ago where the female guard had sex with an inmate, while 10 other inmates watched. So there’s that.

13

Rtn2NYC t1_iy72aq3 wrote

That’s awful. I worked in a jail once (as a medic) and the men COs were much much worse than the women COs. But that was 20 years ago now

2

The_Razielim t1_iy8e4ia wrote

>You have to be a certain type of person if you do this shit.

It's a feature, not a bug.

3

2StrikesBorn t1_iy75qev wrote

And the victim has to be a certain type of person for the system to allow an officer to get away with it.

2

carmansam123 t1_iy8o8ce wrote

Unchecked power with no oversight. Government will no longer step up until the people are literally at war with police.

See how protests at least got us body cams that are on some of the time.

1

Yourgrandsonishere t1_iy8dnod wrote

He never dated her, its like telling a girl you really like her to get the cookie jar. Plus the rush of doing it at work, etc.

In other words, unfortunately, she was an object

0

UbiSububi8 t1_iy4mz79 wrote

Now I finally know what their union refers to NYC Correction Officers as New York’s Boldest

134

k1lk1 t1_iy4cztj wrote

Fucking get rid of these unions, holy fuck. Everyone agrees.

88

metafunf t1_iy4skzx wrote

You want to get to rid of unions but also support unionize of Amazon and Starbucks? It’s almost like union protect workers rights or something. Weird huh?

−61

BrieGoneThot t1_iy4u3rb wrote

It's almost like labor unions protect the workers, but law enforcement unions protect the violent enforcement arm of the oligarchy.

79

DelTeaz t1_iy5v5r8 wrote

It’s about public vs private sector unions. Public sector unions are wayyy worse.

2

cC2Panda t1_iy5nzwo wrote

When private unions protect rapists and murders like police/prison guard unions you'll have a point, but as of now Starbucks unions won't be protecting baristas from murder charges so they aren't even in the same ball park. The only real reason people have problems with these unions isn't because of pay and benefits but because they are shield from prison time for crimes they commit, if police were held accountable then very few people would care.

18

ThepunfishersGun t1_iy5vopm wrote

Get rid of the laws that protect the murders and rapists and police unions become moot in terms of this nonsense and simply become collective bargaining representatives for cops, like they're supposed to be. For example, drastically change or get rid of qualified immunity for LEO. For heaven's sake, finally make all sexual encounters with those in custody illegal and prosecute sex with those in custody as rape. Uniformed cops should be held to at least the same criminal standards as everyone else, and for damned sure off duty cops who commit a crime shouldn't be given any special protections under the law and should be treated like a civilian.

3

cC2Panda t1_iy5w920 wrote

On top of that I think that we should increase polices total annual pension/benefit contributions, but every single lawyers fee and lawsuit should be paid out by the police as a whole. When an abusive asshole is costing every other cop their year end bonus they'll whip him into shape really fucking quick.

6

ThepunfishersGun t1_iy63wm7 wrote

I would also include higher ranking officers' pensions/benefits funds in that pool of lawsuit funding. Imagine some sargeant or lieutenant having to pay out because the idiots under them couldn't keep it together when interacting with the public. Do you think they'll stand for having money coming out of their pockets?

Edit: grammar

1

fafalone t1_iy7a5jm wrote

Qualified immunity is only for civil lawsuits. There is no legal immunity, just corrupt traditions and union contracts treated like law.

2

Emotional_Age5291 t1_iy4ugss wrote

There’s a difference between breaking the law and not having to wake up 5am every morning to goto statbucks

14

ChornWork2 t1_iy53lyq wrote

Meh, imho there is a very credible basis to oppose public sector unions but support private sector ones. If the public doesn't like how the govt is treating its employees, they can act directly by voting. We don't vote who is in charge of private companies. If we allow govt to set & enforce the laws, no clue why we can't allow it to set & enforce labor terms for govt employees.

Further, elected officials don't have strong accountability for long-term economic situations. In public sector, imho unions have more power because people will feel pain of labor action for public services more acutely than they will general bad budgetary decisions.

And that is before considering issues specific to police unions...

7

headphase t1_iy5adjb wrote

>oppose public sector unions but support private sector ones.

I don't think it's as simple as this; let's consider less-contentious examples like FDNY or Sanitation. Both groups are public servants, and both derive huge (justified) protections for their members.. which arguably would not otherwise exist without representation. No mayor will campaign on buying indoor truck exhaust rigging for every fire station as a cancer prevention measure, because frankly the public doesn't give a shit about (or vote based on) that.

Maybe you'll say "ok, then oppose law enforcement unions only" which is a fair reaction, but I think the argument can still be made that without law enforcement unions, we (the citizens) would endure even worse outcomes in criminal justice and public safety. Consider things like training standards/pay, off-duty support infrastructure (mental health, medical, financial, etc), and protection from improper discipline. It's easy to imagine a city where unrepresented cops/guards act with greater violence, worse competence, and less discretion.

(Disclaimer: private sector union member who sees value in representation for all workers)

7

ChornWork2 t1_iy5d2fz wrote

overwhelming majority of workers aren't unionized, including presumably those that work with vehicles in an indoor setting. If it is a serious issue, likely should change workplace safety rules generally.

Yeah, zero chance on convincing of the value of police unions. Utterly corrupt against the public interest and they feel no shame in making that clear. Hell, look at how cops have corrupted prosecutorial process (look at grand jury indictment rates when a cop is the accused) as an example...

5

headphase t1_iy5mf0n wrote

>overwhelming majority of workers aren't unionized

Huh? That's just wrong. For the examples I gave, DSNY is Teamsters 831 (93% membership) , FDNY is IAFF 94 (82%+ membership)

>If it is a serious issue, likely should change workplace safety rules generally.

The example I gave is just one of many which go beyond the scope of basic OSHA compliance. With even an ounce of critical thinking, you can surely appreciate the amount of protections a labor group can gain for themselves through the collective bargaining process.

By the way, who do you think spent the 20th Century fighting to earn the most basic workplace safety rules (and beyond), if not unions?

1

ChornWork2 t1_iy5q4tp wrote

I meant majority of workers in general, including peeps that have to work in indoor settings with vehicles.

Public unions don't make any sense. If wanted to say had a rule to incorporate best practices around safety or whatever, so be it.

2

MurrayPloppins t1_iy54v0e wrote

Strongly agree with this. Private sector unions work to support the interests of labor, against those of capital owners. Public sector unions work for the interests of labor, against the interests of the public in general in the form of the government (provided you believe the government works generally for the benefit of the public, which…. Kinda?).

0

NetQuarterLatte t1_iy5d025 wrote

In order words:

  • If employees working for me (or for you) form an union: bad
  • If employees working for other people form an union: good
0

MurrayPloppins t1_iy5dtiq wrote

Close! Unions of employees working for me as a business owner are good, because the only person who suffers from that situation is me, and everyone in the union benefits. But you replace “me” in that arrangement with the general (tax paying) public, then the benefit to the union members has the potential to be entirely offset by the detriment to everyone else. And, to the point of the guy I replied to originally, the public has the choice to change policy on public labor if needed.

3

NetQuarterLatte t1_iy5gi0h wrote

>Unions of employees working for me as a business owner are good, because the only person who suffers from that situation is me, and everyone in the union benefits.

Your employees can just quit and find a better job, no?

That's what they do with government jobs, for example:

>Among larger agencies, vacancy rates were highest at the Department of Buildings, at 24.2% (489 vacancies), the Department of Health at 19.1% (1,189 vacancies) and the Department of Social Services at 17.3% (2,256 openings).

https://www.thecity.nyc/2022/9/6/23340069/health-housing-buildings-public-sector-unemployment-rate-high

​

>But you replace “me” in that arrangement with the general (tax paying) public, then the benefit to the union members has the potential to be entirely offset by the detriment to everyone else.

How so? You seem to be framing unions as a strictly zero-sum thing.

​

>And, to the point of the guy I replied to originally, the public has the choice to change policy on public labor if needed.

If this sub is any indicator, our government would only employ people at minimum wages and fire people at a whim. Like https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-20221111-hihcpddocrfb3jq6toftxj5nee-story.html

1

Topher1999 t1_iy563l2 wrote

You definitely still try to put the square in the triangle hole.

3

marshall_project OP t1_iy49occ wrote

Seven years after a detainee at Rikers alleged she was in a consensual, but prohibited, relationship with a correction officer who also pressured her to cover up a rape — the guard has finally been fired.

The officer, Leonard McNeill, began a four-month-long sexual liaison with an incarcerated woman in 2015, as she awaited trial on drug charges. He gave her contraband food and clothes. He also told her to delay reporting that she had been raped by another officer who was later criminally charged, according to a judge's ruling.

The detainee, who asked not to be named, hailed the firing: "I'm a nobody, but somebody actually believed my words," she told The Marshall Project and The City. "It felt vindicating."

Dori Lewis, the former supervising attorney at The Legal Aid Society's Prisoners' Rights Project, said there's no good data to indicate how often staff enter into supposedly consensual relationships with people in their custody — in part because there's often no good way to measure it separately from other sexual misconduct. "Sexual relationships that take place inside a prison are inherently coercive," Lewis said.

The lack of immediate repercussions for sexually abusive staff can have a "devastating effect on the person who's been sexually abused and a chilling effect on anyone else who wants to report abuse," said Julie Abbate, the national advocacy director for Just Detention International.

McNeill's firing is the coda to a case that first surfaced seven years ago.

Read our full report with The City (no paywall)

73

Dan_Dead_Or_Alive t1_iy4nq5a wrote

Not that it really needs to be said cause it’s fucking obvious but there no way for that relationship to be consensual. She might have thought it was at the time, but with the power dynamic between guard & prisoner it’s just manipulation. Another thing on the list of abused justice powers.

What if she said no at some point? Good chance she thought about it at some point and the consequences.

63

Excuse_my_GRAMMER t1_iy4fj0h wrote

That a good union right there lol

52

DifficultyNext7666 t1_iy8cgc5 wrote

So now we're on the page that all unions are good. Except the police union and now the corrections union.

And let me check my notes, they're bad for doing what unions are supposed to do.

0

Excuse_my_GRAMMER t1_iy8m5bi wrote

All union are good

even those who you disagree with are good.

This is a tricky situation because under the law it consider rape even if it was 100% consensual

Apart from that But the point is that this person wasn’t fired without proper investigation and due-diligence

3

dman928 t1_iy58tje wrote

Raped a detainee

Raped

29

Delaywaves t1_iy5gg2q wrote

The detainee did say it was consensual. Obviously you can argue there's no real consent with this kind of power dynamic, but for journalistic purposes, don't think you can fault them for using this headline as the most accurate summary.

9

dman928 t1_iy5qikg wrote

There is no such thing as consent in this situation.

19

OutrageousGarbage743 t1_iy5rylp wrote

Detainee SAID it was consensual! Learn to read or not !

−23

DryGumby t1_iy649jw wrote

You can't have consensual sex with your prisoner. That's rape.

14

dman928 t1_iy5sh55 wrote

The 4 year old said it was fine that OutrageousGarbage743 touched his weiner

See how stupid you sound?

9

[deleted] t1_iy5sos2 wrote

[removed]

−24

Silver-Hat175 t1_iy7g3w8 wrote

obnoxious right winger reporting someone for hurting their feelings. that checks out all right

7

TeamMisha t1_iy91c3w wrote

I don't believe it matters under the law. As the other responder alluded to, if a minor said (even if they do not understand) that they consented to sex with an adult, that's still against the law as it's implied a minor cannot consent, same as how someone imprisoned cannot truly give consent due to the power dynamic and often under duress

1

RecoveringFcukBoy t1_iy4lki0 wrote

The thing about Unions is that they help employees but also keep the worst ones employed too. Alot of them still have Mob ties as well as massive political power.

16

stewartm0205 t1_iy4xn9j wrote

I thought a guard screwing a prisoner was always rape even if consensual.

13

ChornWork2 t1_iy55wsr wrote

Yes, it is a Federal Crime even if not a crime under state law. Certainly in NY, inmates cannot legally consent to sexual relations with prison guards.

Apparently this guy was investigated (as part of the investigation that led to the conviction of his buddy), but the grand jury failed to indict this PoS. Which goes to another major issue in our justice system -- grand juries being used to whitewash crimes of police officers and others. If you look at indictment rates in general, they are almost a foregone conclusion (the old ham sandwich trope). However, if it is a cop or similar accused, they are much lower... the reason is obvious, prosecutors are dependent on cooperation of police to secure convictions in cases as a general matter and they appear to not want to risk that by going after cops. The grand jury is the most opportune time for them to throw in the towel, because the hearings are in secret and they can 'blame' the grand jury for not wanting to move ahead. No better example of that than here in NYC with the killing of Eric Garner by an NYPD officer.

>Grand Juries Should Not Hear Police Misconduct Cases: Grand Juries will Indict Anything, but a Police Officer

https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context=lawjournalonline

14

stewartm0205 t1_iy9sa9w wrote

I believe in the grand jury system even for cops. Grand Juries members could be more active though and don’t let the ADA lead them around.

1

ChornWork2 t1_iy9tbjs wrote

For everyone other than cops, they're a formality. For cops, they're a corrupt opt-out by prosecutors who are afraid to piss off cops.

Could there be a better system that still involves grand juries? Sure, but as-is we're better off without them imho.

1

stewartm0205 t1_iy9zizc wrote

Don’t they usually appoint a special prosecutor when cops are involved?

1

Something_Berserker t1_iy4xp89 wrote

Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon...

7

Captaintripps t1_iy5g7k4 wrote

I notice our regular crime posters aren’t all over this one for some reason.

6

blakthorn t1_iy73y2u wrote

I posted above and then scrolled down to read this. I noticed you deleted my other thread about the shooting that took place this weekend. I recall a few months ago you said that a story must be vetted by the news/media before it can be posted here and even when the stories are released you still delete them, how come? People who live in this community have a right to know about what is happening around them on a daily basis.

0

NatLawson t1_iy5esat wrote

It's sad when the basic rules of decency are habitually violated. What messages do we send when we don't take an inmate's accusation of rape - seriously?

After 7 years, that inmate would have had to decide to conform to sexual predation or live with the violence of dominance by criminals in uniform. It is depraved indifference. This is inhuman and cruel. Anyone confined on Rikers must have the instruments to report violent predation. The corrections officers must police themselves.

Even those who could have aided the victim would have been silenced and further stifled. Now is the time for a truly in-depth investigation. You know, for sure, there's got to be other victims.

3

ResidentPriority954 t1_iy5rq3z wrote

The women are just as bad as the men , I guess some people are lonely, I worked on Rikers for 21 years and I have seen some things in my career.

2

dman928 t1_iy6a14u wrote

Looking forward to it garbage man

Living up to your name

1

bklynzboy t1_iy6fpzr wrote

Their shield still had a shine Lol

1

Janus_The_Great t1_iy89u5m wrote

gotta love the absolute incopetance of US administrations. We are the laughingstock of the world. and deservingly so.

1

TitsanGiggles t1_iy8ake9 wrote

A Rikers Officer Raped a Detainee. FTFY

1