Return to “DPS performing roadside cavity searches!”
Cedar Park Dad wrote:Agreed. This is an excellent instance where the DOJ could do some real good to investigate, including the disparity between the two cases.
To the point I also agree one is free to pursue all legally available means of recourse, and that someone can and should emphatically NOT CONSENT repeatedly with any search of such a manner and in that location.
Can you show me where anyone advocated that? The way people are being beaten and tased lately, one can die while being detained with minimal resistance.Cedar Park Dad wrote:I recommend not advocating lethal combat/shooting/whatever on this site with police officers. I certainly wouldn't recommned that for my kids. Righteous lawsuits are so much more better. One can strongly object without getting violent (and losing).bdickens wrote:I recommend dying as a free man or woman rather than living as a slave.
My wife is of the same mind. She said she would go to jail first and then we'd retire off the settlement from the tasing and violation of her civil rights.paperchunker wrote:Yep, If a LEO wants to do that to me he is going to have to cuff hands and legs or tase me into submission.Cedar Park Dad wrote:Oldgringo wrote:I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't agree to a roadside cavity search.
And? Are you going to fight?
That is a hill I will die on.
Weren't they originally cleared by the Texas Rangers? I want to hear the names of the public servants who originally excused them without disciplinary action and see some accountability.VMI77 wrote:texanjoker wrote:They weren't just fired, they are being prosecuted...Abraham wrote:Just being fired isn't justice for those they preyed upon.
I seem to be in the minority, but I'm a little uncomfortable with both the firing and the prosecution. To me it looked like they were following an established policy. It's hard to believe they did something like this without command approval in one form or another. If so, their punishment, if any, should be light in comparison to whomever made the policy.
I agree...He told Helleson "they're acting weird", when any reasonable person could see that the women were acting perfectly normally. I still maintain that "acting weird" was code for "bring out the Gimp".gemini wrote:I agree. Trooper David Farrell should have been fired too.Redneck_Buddha wrote:Helleson should NOT have been the only fired in this situation. Is there a civil rights case being made of this?Abraham wrote:Only fired - not prosecuted because 'she was only following orders/policy'?
If her actions were carried out as per orders/policy are higher going to roll?
Or, is this a case where DPS thought they'd find out how far they could push the public...?
Helleson should NOT have been the only fired in this situation. Is there a civil rights case being made of this?Abraham wrote:Only fired - not prosecuted because 'she was only following orders/policy'?
If her actions were carried out as per orders/policy are higher going to roll?
Or, is this a case where DPS thought they'd find out how far they could push the public...?
Wish I had this same feeling, Keith.Keith B wrote:Standard procedure during investigation. I have a feeling they will not be back and will not be receiving any kind or severance pay.Bitter_Clinger wrote:Sorry I can't get off my soapbox about this, but what is this little paid vacation teaching these rogue officers? I resent that my taxpayer dollars are funding two criminal cops to stay on the state payroll.
Or remove them from law enforcement altogether.schufflerbot wrote:the article reads that the officer (not sure which one) has a long history of misconduct including inappropriate strip searches, cavity searches, etc.
this was a huge foul up on the part of those in charge, if that is the case. once an officer develops a pattern of this type of behavior it's time to pull them off the street and glue them to a desk chair.
Yeah that 10 second lingering around the second woman's nether region couldn't have possibly been digital penetration.Texas Sheepdog wrote:I watched it again and it doesn't look like a cavity search to me and for the record Trooper Helleson is female.Keith B wrote:Digital cavity searches or strip searches for contraband (not weapons) is not approved by any department I know of unless the subject was being placed in custodial confinement, and then they are to be performed by a licensed physician unless it is an extreme emergency.
She did NOT just stick her hands down the victims' pants! There was digital penetration!! Do you just see what you want to see or are you a hopeless apologist for authoritarian, police-state tactics??mikedude wrote:From what I saw, sticking a hand down the pants is not a cavity search. As I stated, I await the facts. IF she did this, she will be dealt with.