Yes
No
We posted at the same moment.Originally Posted by Hazir
But take another look here. They were charged with Trespass, were found guilty of Trespass, and were dismissed for committing Trespass while on duty.
Think of it as Assault and Battery of a Person. That's not something a civil servant police force should condone. It's clearly grounds for dismissal.
They weren't dismissed for trespassing. That was Hazir's attempt to spin things. If it were mere tresspassing, they probably could have skated. They were dismissed for the three charges of official misconduct, specific problems including repeatedly going back to the drunk woman's apartment without cause or informing their superiors, laying in a mostly-naked drunk woman's bed with her, faking 911 calls to make excuses to go back to her, and sleeping in her apartment while they were supposed to be on duty. One cannot commit that level of official misconduct and remain an official.We posted at the same moment.
Think of it as Assault and Battery of a Person. That's not something a civil servant police force should condone. It's clearly grounds for dismissal.
Ooh, I didn't even know about the fake 911 calls.
Okay so they were dismissed for official misconduct, also quite acceptable cause for termination. Sleeping on the job is enough on its own! The laying in bed with a mostly-naked-drunk-woman seems to be grounds for the guilty of Trespass charge (assault and battery), though. These guys don't have to be convicted rapists to be considered really sleazy and sub-standard NYC police officers, exploiting the public and their positions of power. No matter how Hazir wants to spin things.
While all of the above appears true; you still haven't explained why the police department waited with sacking them untill after the verdict. A verdict that didn't really pertain to the reasons for dismissal. The notion that they needed to wait after these guys conduct became clear to me seems preposterous; the judge and jury were not there to evaluate their professional behaviour.
Congratulations America
And you keep mixing up the trial and the dismissal, which is understandable of course because of the spin the DA's office tried to put on the case and the 'wait and see' stance of the NYPD.Ooh, I didn't even know about the fake 911 calls.
Okay so they were dismissed for official misconduct, also quite acceptable cause for termination. Sleeping on the job is enough on its own! The laying in bed with a mostly-naked-drunk-woman seems to be grounds for the guilty of Trespass charge (assault and battery), though. These guys don't have to be convicted rapists to be considered really sleazy and sub-standard NYC police officers, exploiting the public and their positions of power. No matter how Hazir wants to spin things.
If these men acted in the way they did, and it seems that the facts that didn't suffice to convict them for rape, support the claims about their behaviour, they could have been sacked a long time ago.
Congratulations America
How about not prejudicing a trial?
Then if they'd been found innocent of all charges?
Call me old-fashioned, but I am not one of those people who thinks only a conviction in court is a good enough reason to sack a cop who's doing a lousy job. Aside from the naked in bed story (which might even have a perfectly logical explanation, but still is very iffy) they went back to her home several times, once after faking a 911 call. To me that sounds - in its own right - as reason enough to be thrown out of the police force.
How the NYPD deals with cops breaking their code of conduct is not really prejudicing a trial. I also wouldn't know why being charged with a real crime should protect you from disciplinary action about other things you - also - shouldn't have done.
Congratulations America
Are we abandoning any pretense that this is related to DSK now?
I won't claim to know for certain the logic behind the wait, but the prejudicing the trial reason is a good one. If they'd fired before hand, the prosecutor could have tried to convince the jury that this means even their own police department believed they were guilty.
They also can't just be fired. There has to be an investigation and a hearing. The police department may have decided it was just easier to let the criminal investigation and trial play out than run their own internal affairs investigation and hearing. It's also possible they wouldn't have been fired if they weren't convicted, merely been subject to disciplinary action, but once they were convicted of crimes that carry prison sentences, that was taken off the table, because you can't have cops with prison records, and they couldn't possibly carry out their duties from behind bars.
It would still have been prejudicial and I imagine it would have violated either formal or tacit understandings of contract and union rules to dump them when they were being tried for actions supposedly related to their duties. I concede I'm whistling in the dark, I'm not particularly familiar with the case, but there are reasonable alternatives to it being because they weren't nailed for rape at the trial.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
I also find it ironic that someone is claiming that the NYPD is too quick to fire its police officers, given that it has a history of not firing officers involved in the killing of unarmed men.
Hope is the denial of reality
We're past that now, Loki. Now he's saying they're too slow to fire its police officers.
Yes Loki, please keep up. Its the same case they were too fast at last week, but this week they were too slow.
God, you guys really don t see the difference between disciplinary action and criminal case?
Congratulations America
A material difference as it relates to the primary topic of this thread?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
That is the essence of the problem; that virtually nobody differentiates between formal charges and that what they read about what transpired. Remember at what point the police case came up in this thread? That would have been at about the point where we were talking about how harmful (false) accusations of rape could be.
And the reason why I brought it up, was that I read a piece from the NYT where the connection was made and in which the press conference of the DA's office was described, AND in which the connection with the DSK case was made.
Congratulations America
You're having an argument with yourself?
You're speculating on US legal procedures, technicalities and formalities. Everything from NYPD policy, to what is prejudicial at trial. Based on what you read.
You mean that point when you were plainly seeking to plant a red herring?
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/wo...france.html?hpAfter Strauss-Kahn’s Arrest, Frenchwomen Speak Out
By STEVEN ERLANGER
PARIS — Claire Nini, now 25, was sexually assaulted as a teenager, and it took her seven years to file a complaint, she said, “because I feared the notoriety of my assailant, a well-known doctor in Nice.”
But the furor around the arrest in New York on attempted rape charges of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who had been considered a likely next president of France, has given Frenchwomen and the modest feminist movement here a chance to speak out against sexual oppression and push for a less chauvinistic relationship between the sexes.
“I hope this is going to help the victims to speak,” Ms. Nini said. “If D.S.K.,” the initials by which Mr. Strauss-Kahn is known here, “is really guilty, I think this affair is going to help women,” she said. But if he is found not guilty, she said, “there is a risk that women will not be taken seriously anymore.”
Mr. Strauss-Kahn, the former chief of the International Monetary Fund, was arraigned on Monday in New York and pleaded not guilty to all charges, a four-minute event covered live by the main French television channels, Web sites and bloggers. There were experts and court drawings and shots of uniformed hotel workers shouting, “Shame on you!”
The case has also sharpened the debate here about a French way of life, one of tolerance for a male-centric attitude in gender relations, an acceptance of all but the most egregious sexual assaults on women and a reluctance by the authorities to intervene, particularly in cases involving the powerful.
“This is a key moment, a watershed moment,” said Anne-Elisabeth Moutet, an analyst of French politics and culture. Women from across the political spectrum “have extremely unpleasant stories to tell, that men think women are all up for grabs, literally and figuratively,” she said. France is “a difficult country to budge,” she added. “But it’s an important step. Women are emboldened.”
One example of the habits of the past and of possible change inspired by the Strauss-Kahn case was the forced resignation of a junior minister, Georges Tron, who was accused by two women of pressing them to have foot massages that soon evolved into groping. The women said that they were encouraged to speak out by the arrest of Mr. Strauss-Kahn.
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has been known for his own roving eye, kept his glance on the politics of the matter, with a presidential election next year. He fired Mr. Tron within two days.
Natacha Henry, a French writer and feminist who has written books about the sexuality of young women and about domestic violence, is writing a chapter for a book about the Strauss-Kahn case, concentrating on the more discreet sexual discrimination prevalent in French life.
“Women are starting to speak out now,” Ms. Henry said. “Strauss-Kahn’s friends said he was always a womanizer, a ‘dragueur,’ but we are saying that this is not about seduction, not about ‘la drague,’ but about something else. This is not about sex, seduction, love or an equal relationship, but it is everything to do with power. A lot of attitudes that in America would be considered sexual harassment would be seen here as, ‘Oh, he’s so keen on women.’ ”
She added: “For the friends of D.S.K., feminism and equality hasn’t entered their brains or their political culture. It’s like they were building a sexual planet for themselves, without women.”
Viviane Meunier, a lawyer, noted an important effect. “The simple image that any woman can report what she suffered, that her word can be taken seriously against a high-ranking public figure, is already enough to convey a message to all victims,” she said. “I do not think it will mark the birth of a new feminism, but it will contribute, I hope, to the long evolution of gender relations.”
For Ms. Moutet, the misuse of male power “meets an echo everywhere,” not just in politics or in the capital. She cited a 1990 film, “Promotion canapé,” a title that refers to a casting couch. “It exists in the civil service, in companies, in the post office,” she said. “This will definitely impact women, it will filter down.”
She and others pointed to interviews with nine female politicians published May 31 in the daily Libération, under the headline, “Sick of the machos.” They described “incredibly gross jokes” in the National Assembly and feeling the need to wear trousers to make a speech. But some, like Cécile Duflot, leader of the Greens, noted that “there is a quite sharp difference between people under 40 and those who are older,” while Roselyne Bachelot, a minister, said that “in 30 years of political and feminist engagement, of course I saw real transformations. But the battle is never won.”
Not everyone is optimistic. Marine de Tilly, a journalist and book critic, said nothing would change in France. “There is nothing new under this sad sun,” she said. “To me, this affair is only another sordid story on the long list of sexual aggressions perpetrated against women by men.”
Many women, even those outraged by the Strauss-Kahn and Tron cases, still see a difference between France and America that they do not want to lose, including both flirtatiousness and discretion about the private, noncriminal lives of adults.
Flora Saladin, 28, a Socialist who works in government pressing for women’s and minority rights, says that flirting does not bother her at all, “so long as it stays respectful,” she said. “It doesn’t bother me if someone tells me I look more attractive with my hair a certain way. You can’t stop men from making compliments, and there’s nothing wrong with it anyway.”
Ms. Henry says there is a problem with the image of French feminism itself. “If you’re a feminist, it means you are not feminine,” she said. Even the tolerance of sexualized compliments is a form of power play, she said. She told of a friend being called into the chief editor’s office at a radio station. The editor shut the door and said: “Oh, I see you’re in a skirt; I can see your legs. Please wear a skirt every day.”
To Frenchmen, she said, “it’s a way of maintaining a reputation of being nice to women.”
“But it’s all about power,” she said. “At that moment the woman cannot answer and thinks: ‘He wants to talk about my skirt; I want to talk about work. I’m stuck, I’m stuck, I’m stuck.’ ” But Ms. Henry says she, too, values French discretion about the private lives of public figures.
Sylvie Kauffmann, the first woman to become editor of Le Monde, wrote in an editorial that “suddenly tongues are untied,” and women are sharing stories of sexual harassment. “Without falling into puritanism,” she wrote, “there is a remedy for those excesses: male-female parity.”
Emeline S., 24, works as a junior manager at an international company and asked that her surname not be used out of concern for her career. She finds that a degree of flirtatiousness and seductiveness helps her in the job. “I think you can manage to make many things happen by playing on seduction,” she said. “Smiles, that sort of thing, it really works on men,” she said, adding: “I have the feeling that I put myself in a seduction relationship with both men and women.”
For ordinary people, she said, “I don’t think that it’s going to change anything at all.”
Hope is the denial of reality
Looks like the French are catching that darn Anglo-puritanism.
Wrong DSK thread?
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Oops, you're right.
Hope is the denial of reality
I'll move 'em...but where is the right thread? Can't seem to find it. Mild Rule 12.
Hope is the denial of reality
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/ny...agewanted=1&hp A story about the woman's character.
Hope is the denial of reality
There's a joke about Western financial interests repeatedly raping Africa in there, but rape jokes are bad, right?
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
You could try one about the Greeks being sodomized.
Congratulations America
Condition of debt forgiveness?
Hope is the denial of reality
Oh the irony.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
