My cousin works for the Public Defender's Office for Santa Clara County, and some of the horror stories she has told me about them are frankly disgusting and terrifying. I'm going to focus on this one story, however, that really caught my attention. San Jose Mercury released a story today that talks about how a San Jose Police Officer came to the home of a 15 year old boy and handcuffed him and drew his gun on him. The boy's crime? Having sex with his 14 year old girlfriend. The "arrest" turned out to be false, and the officer was just trying to scare the boy, as his girlfriend is the officer's stepdaughter. If you thought THAT was bad, when the boy's parents reported this to internal affairs to the SJPD, they charged the boy and the girl with unlawful sexual intercourse, a charge that is essentially never, ever enforced (by the way, the sex was consensual and the two have been dating "forever" allegedly).
This, to me, is so disgusting. Let's break it down, shall we?
1. The officer abused the boy. A police officer, regardless of relation to the suspect, cannot cuff and draw his gun on an underage boy that is of no immediate threat to himself or anyone else. You don't cuff someone for having sex. It sinply does not work that way. ON TOP OF THAT, a uniformed officer is abusing his powers and duties as a policeman by trying to "teach the kid a lesson" though the use of his municipally enforced badge. Talk about using the state to achieve personal gains. If cops are carrying out their personal issues while on duty and while in uniform, what's to say that they won't arrest someone for disagreeing with the City under the pretense of an alleged crime?
2. SJPD is transparently trying to cover it up. The SJPD is now trying to cover their tracks by claiming as though the cop was performing actions endorsed by the SJPD which is a clear case of avoiding the real issue at hand. This isn't exactly what I would call great PR work.
3. The cop has not right to enforce a private moral viewpoint. I don't care whether or not you believe premarital sex is wrong. I don't even care if it is illegal. I know from many of my friends who have had run-ins with cops for consensual underage sex that they DO NOT enforce that law. Why the officer suddenly decided to enforce this archaic and mundane law is clear: he was pissed that the guy was sleeping with his daughter and used the law to back up his anger. This is clearly wrong.
I'm sick and tired of people forcing their private moral views into the law. The officer should have handled it like a normal civilian and had a confrontation with the boy when not in uniform. That would make me feel more comfortable. But the fact remains that the officer abused his powers as an officer for his own personal issues. That's just plain immoral.
Love, The Power Gay
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I agree with you, Jason. I think the cop should've confronted the young boy while he was off-duty. He has no right to arrest the boy just because he was having sex with his daughter. I also agree with you in your statement about the police officer enforcing a moral view as a law. I think that police officers and those who serve for the law are WRONG in thinking that they could do whatever the heck they want just because they wear a uniform and carry a gun. I hope that someday, in the near future this problem could be minimized so that those working for the law don't get carried away just because they have a title and they think they could flaunt it in any which way they desire.
Yea I agree with you Jason. Cops use their uniform and power to get their way in several instances. They constantly receive support for doing the wrong thing and even when convicted for wrongdoing, they get minimal punishments. It happens all the time regarding White police officers abusing minority's. Yet most of the time the police officers are nearly untouchable. Ie: Oscar Grant case. And if they felt they were ready to have sex and it was consensual then nobody should have the ability to tell them "No".
I completely agree that bringing personaly issues into the law force is very wrong. And agree that the cop should havbe ahd a private talk with the boy and not try to scare him and then actualy charge him with unlawful sex or what ever it is called. I think its very unjust that a cop did that and he should be punished for doing that instead of the sjpd trying to cover it up for him!
Laws are made by people. Any law must have some moral principle. Does science tell us what is right and what is wrong? Do morals do the job? What is fair? What is law? Can't the same argument be used for murdering someone? Does society define for us what is right or wrong? In the United States, a 14 or 15 year old does not take responsibilities for their actions. The guardians would be in charge of the child. From a freedom perspective, it is wrong for a police officer to step in, but from a moral perspective is it not okay? From a parent perspective is it not okay? Is a 14 or 15 year old able to make wise decisions that are able to take into account the future? Our police officers risk their lives to protect our livelihoods (safety). We may not like when police take one step out of their bounds, but in a more totalitarian government this would exist every day. We, as members of the public, would not even know what went on. We live in a country that allows us certain freedoms. No country is perfect; no law is perfect. But, sometimes we must take a step back and appreciate. Unlike other parts of the world, we do not take buses that could potentially carry bombs on them; we are not met with harsh resistance every day; we exist in a world that has generally been good to its citizens. Taking a step back is really important to realize the amount of progress our country has made. We may not be happy with what one officer or even many officers do or what one person says, but it is important to appreciate. Sometimes, the officer has had a bad day. These officers have to deal with the fear of getting shot every day. They are never thanked just complained about. When was the last time you said thank you to a police officer instead of complained about one?
Ok so I just wrote out a long-winded and inflamed comment, but I remembered that this is a CLASS assignment and thought it prudent to NOT say everything that came to mind when I read this post. I'm not going to address your issues because I don't respond when someone claims that I "Always complain about cops," a tragic and baseless accusation. FYI, my cousin-in-law is a DEA Officer who does drug busts of drug lords who put hundreds of millions of dollars worth of heroine in the street. I know the dangers associated with being a cop. So "When was the last time you said thank you to a police officer instead of complained about one?" Actually last week. When I saw my cousin's husband.
Yes, Jonathan, you have indeed hit several key facts on the head. If the boy were to be lawfully punished in the first place (which he very well could have been--it's not legal for minors to consent to sexual intercourse) then his parents (as well as hers) would take the blame, being legal guardians. Although this policeman did wrongfully pretend to arrest the boy, he technically would have been within the law to arrest but not punish the boy had he been on duty. With ulterior motives, this cop stepped over the line.
I want to make myself perfectly clear: The police force is one of the few things between our suburban equilibrium and anarchy. They risk their lives on a daily basis to make sure our lives are peaceful, and for that we are all grateful. However, it's instances like this that raise the question: who polices the police when the police cross the line? In this case, I sincerely hope the boy's parents took action against the cop, because this is a form of police brutality.
I agree with you too Jason; I think this is a complete abuse of one's power as a police officer. The boy's actions may be somewhat controversial, but this is no reason for a police officer to point his gun at him. Police officers are supposed to serve the public; society gives them authority that they are expected to use responsibly. This is clearly an irresponsible use of the police officer's power, and there definitely should be consequences for how the police officer acted in my opinion.
I agree with you ,also, Jason. The cop was abusing his powers and using it to scare off his daughters boyfriend.This is not just unlawful, it's crude in a way. Perhaps, if he had-the cop , actually saw the couple having sexual intercourse, while on duty, this wouldn't be as bad. But the father had been using his uniform as a way to pretend that he has the higher advantage over the boyfriend, when really, their status' were about equal. Let's hope that there will be a way to stop Enforced Law Workers to not use their uniforms as a way for them to act as if they are higher in power than the civilians.
OMG! This is so true Jason! I think that if anything...at least it wasn't rape! What bothers me is that this is what the cop was using his paid time to do...!?!?! This just goes to show that cops aren't always the trustworthy lawful people that they are perceived as...as Chris says...the uniform is just a uniform and it shouldn't be the uniform causing intimidation and threatening others. I think that there are more pressing problems...especially in a big city such as San Jose to be worrying about rather than this. This is baby stuff...and if anything, the privacy of those 2 individuals was completely revealed to everyone. Whether premarital sex is wrong or right, that is not the job for the police department to determine. Gross...I think the police officer was just doing it to watch...
Just to reiterate: I do not mean to slam cops in general, but merely hope to highlight the immoral and wrong actions of this particular cop. So I would be wary of using this post to start a discussion on the dictatorial nature of the police as an institution. The post was used to comment on THIS cop and the subsequent actions of the SJPD, NOT cops in general.
I am not saying what the cop did what right, infact I think what he did was wrong. But, being in the cop's place with such a touchy subject might press some buttons that normally would not be pressed. Again, i am just playing devil's advocate, maybe him being so angry and mad with this boy caused so much distress to build up, he took action that would not normally happen. what I am trying to say is put yourself in his shoes with the same stipulations. I do think he should be punished in a severe way, but I do not think he should be publicly crucified(how angry all the bloggers are with him).
John: I appreciate your looking at the other side, because that is much needed. And if the cop was to be compared as a normal person, I would agree. People have bad days and when the fecal matter hits the fan, people tend to do things out of life. But civil officers are not afforded such liberties. It may sound harsh, but I don't want officers acting on emotion. They should act with impartiality while on duty and should be level-headed. But if you want to look at it froma cop's perspective, how about this: this is a clear case of him not losing it, but a clear case of pre-meditated assault. Given thew fact that he had so much time to change into uniform, get in the car, drive over the the guy's house, and enter the house, he had time to reflect on what he was doing, and it was clearly wrong, no matter what way you look at it.
Yes, I agree with you that people are people. But cops are essentially knighted with the responsibility to be above that. If they are not able to do that, we end up with tragic cases such as that of Oscar Grant and others that are not reported frequently.
Post a Comment