Woman DUI suspect suing over being stripped by police

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Those are some valid points to look at Wrabbit. I would also be interested to see what led up to that. There are some fine lines in cases like these, and they seem to be getting crossed more and more often by the police. Thanks for the reality check.

reply to post by roadgravel


This actually is not unusual, although I am not proud of it I had a DUI in 2000 for driving while slightly intoxicated, that was the exact charge. It was eventually cleared from my record but as a man when I spent the night in jail I was forced to strip down in front of an officer first.

What does seem crazy is that she did it in front of four officers and one was a woman. Only the woman should have been there for that and no one else. When it happened to me it was one man standing there with me.

That it happened is not surprising but how they allowed it to happen with multiple males being present is completely unacceptable and unprofessional.

If a strip is required there, I would guess they didn't give her the option to do it. Going to make for an interesting civil trial.

reply to post by YodHeVauHe


Rape? Wow...... Show me what penal code or criminal code defines what they did for a *STANDARD STRIP SEARCH* that every single person being booked into a jail may, and usually DOES go through, as rape? Did they, at any time whatsoever, do anything to focus on her sexually? I didn't see even a hint of sexual contact or implied sexual contact.

I saw a woman triple the limit for being drunk ..as the attorney says at one point.. who I can't tell if she's resisting or not. Drunk people very often do though so this wouldn't be a shocker. I see a partial video entirely leaving out whatever led to the reaction to the leg lift.

I didn't even see them physically abuse her ...which I HAVE actually seen on MSNBC jail shows. It's rare...but occasionally they let slip through editing a piece where someone got an extra thump or two or maybe hit an object while being handled which wasn't really necessary. Where was even that much here?

She got a forced version of what she would have gotten as intake procedure anyway in many jails. She should have cooperated and it wouldn't have been done for her..... Although, it would be nice to see at least 1 more female available so drunk females can be handled more often without male help. Staffing levels for gender is what I'd say was the biggest issue....and all female cops would have done about the same thing, most likely.

@Klassified

Indeed... We need more detail that a civil case may bring out. For all I know, the 4 of them could have lengthy records of rough handling prisoners...which would change things. Or..the opposite, for what it would matter. I'll keep my eye out on Courthouse News for this case to pop up, anyway.

and so she should. this was despicable. who the #### do these rotten cops (i hope they are not all so) think they are?

Illinois law says officers can only conduct a strip search when there is "reasonable belief" that a suspect has a weapon or drugs. The law also states that an individual can only be searched by deputies of the "same sex" and that it "cannot be observed" by anyone not physically conducting the search.

Link

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Three guys took her cloths off, that sure sounds sexual. They should have a test to see if the officers were enjoying it. And some weirdos can't perform sexually unless they do something perverted, this may have been their thing.

reply to post by Merlynn

I'm glad you've never been into an American jail. The fact that scene can be construed as rape indictes that. It's not like I had more than one night myself and it was a charge which got dropped a long time ago. I didn't get to just "promise" I wasn't sneaking anything in a "body cavity" though ...they made sure. Ahem.. (cough).

Part of the humiliation and general shock of jail. It's a real good place to avoid and it really did only take me once. Short of protest I believe deeply in or.. God forbid.... some circumstance started beyond my control, I never plan to see the inside of one where I'm not a visitor again, either.

*I have no doubt, way back when, if I'd told them to shove it...I'd have gotten a lot worse than she did. Cops were worse before cameras were mounted on every other wall, I think.

reply to post by roadgravel


There you go, they might be able to justify doing it, as I said it is not uncommon. With the law from that state there is absolutely no justification for how it was performed. That law is basically the same everywhere regarding that only the same sex can perform the search, probably on the statement that no one else can observe also.

The state I was in it was actually required they perform that search for anyone that would spend any amount of time in jail. They could not do it there with the opposite sex though. Now if, they could prove justification for doing it, and if there were no females on duty, then and only then might they be able to justify one male performing the search.

As it is, they had a female present, there was no excuse for the others being there other than them getting their own free porn show. They abused their authority for their own personal pleasure and they absolutely need to be disciplined for it. It does not mean she wasn't wrong, but her being wrong does not justify their actions she was already paying for hers.

If she is like me that one experience alone will prevent her from ever considering driving because she thinks she is actually fine and hasn't had too much to drink. Those officers were out of line no matter how you look at it.

roadgravel
Illinois law says officers can only conduct a strip search when there is "reasonable belief" that a suspect has a weapon or drugs. The law also states that an individual can only be searched by deputies of the "same sex" and that it "cannot be observed" by anyone not physically conducting the search.

Exactly, the police didn't follow the law and should be held to a criminal standard. She wasn't the first - there were five others who came forward and there's probably more who don't want to go through the trauma.

The police don't get to decide how to teach someone a lesson. What if I thought it was a really good lesson for the cops from THEM to be stripped searched in front f strangers? If I did it I would spend decades in prison - it doesn't make it any better that they were supposed to uphold the law.

Just so everyone knows this took place in the burbs of Chicago - which has a very long history of corruption.

Partial quote:

Wrabbit2000reply to post by YodHeVauHe

 

Rape? Wow...... Show me what penal code or criminal code defines what they did for a *STANDARD STRIP SEARCH* that every single person being booked into a jail may, and usually DOES go through, as rape? Did they, at any time whatsoever, do anything to focus on her sexually? I didn't see even a hint of sexual contact or implied sexual contact.

For the sake of clarification and for the edification of the membership - The term 'rape' was used in a relative juxtaposition to the word 'tantamount'
ˈtantəˌmount/adjectiv: tantamount

1. equivalent in seriousness to; virtually the same as.
"the resignations were tantamount to an admission of guilt"
synonyms: equivalent to, equal to, as good as, more or less, much the same as, comparable to, on a par with, commensurate with "this is tantamount to mutiny"

Thank you for your attentiveness, which is tantamount to slavish obeisance

reply to post by YodHeVauHe


Well, that would be another way of saying the word rape was hyperbole and had no actual connection to events here, despite being one of the single ugliest and worst accusations that can be made in polite society today.

Err.. Thanks for that clarification. Given how widely rape laws do cover things far beyond intercourse or sodomy itself? I wasn't sure it was pure hyperbole.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Well, we could go on for days, but I hope this puts it to rest OK?

Rhetorical device it was, but 'hyperbole' it was not, insofar as your term is indicative of 'exaggeration' in any one of several forms - but I wasn't exaggerating, nor was I embellishing: "laying it on thick" as the say saying goes. By my choice of carefully chosen words I was being as true to the situation as the English language allows.

reply to post by YodHeVauHe


Agreeing to disagree is probably best. I've already gotten hate mail directly out of this thread so, I'm done with it. Some folks grow up around cops or are cops ..and see the world with benefit given to cops until proof carries otherwise. Proof all sides lack here. Others..grow up hating cops so much it vibrates and would find fault and evil with a cop helping an old lady cross a street.

Most, I suppose fall in between that ... I'm among that first group though by how I was raised. Cops are people too....and I don't look to find evil when a whole part of the primary piece of evidence being used is clearly missing from the discussion.

Indeed... Nothing much to agree on anyway, when so much is, on the face of it, missing from consideration and evidence.

I hope this piece of filth gets nothing and serves some jail time.
If your going to drink and drive then I have no sympathy for any mistreatment you would receive from the police.

I have no respect for half of the police actions, but i have no respect for DUI drivers as well.

reply to post by thesaneone


Sorry but that comment is just insane.

Why not take it a step further, just say if anyone does anything wrong that they have to be put in jail for than all cops get to do whatever they want to you. Yeah that would go over really well, leave absolutely no limits for the people with guns that are supposed to enforce laws.

Oh I'm sure we would get only people of the highest quality only interested in what their main duty is supposed to be, which is protecting the public. Sure give them free reign to do whatever they want to arrested drunk driving suspects and see how far that gets stretched. Before long those "high quality" people, that get encouraged to become police with policies like that, will start arresting anyone they want to see naked or do anything to while making up a charge.

Yeah that seems like a brilliant way to move forward, free reign for all cops to do whatever they want and screw the actual law and what they are authorized to do.

reply to post by inquisitive1977


I'll tell you what when you have had a drunk driver hit you when you where riding your motorcycle to work in the morning and he mistakes a bridge we are riding over for a turn off and smashes into your leg making it nothing more then a piece of beef jerky after 19 surgeries in 12 months that's only use is only good for a kick stand then you will understand my hate.

reply to post by thesaneone


That is wrong and horrible yes and anyone that would do that deserves to be punished.

It does not however justify cops abusing their authority for their own pleasure. When we start accepting that as ok then we better pray nothing we have would please those cops.

thesaneone
reply to post by inquisitive1977

 

I'll tell you what when you have had a drunk driver hit you when you where riding your motorcycle to work in the morning and he mistakes a bridge we are riding over for a turn off and smashes into your leg making it nothing more then a piece of beef jerky after 19 surgeries in 12 months that's only use is only good for a kick stand then you will understand my hate.

I'm sure the girl in the video feels the same way about those police officers as you do about your drunk driver, because they are all criminals.