no right to resist being raped by a cop?

[SmarterthanYou]

i agree with you.

thanks.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Do we still believe we must submit?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...the-cop-who-came-to-help-raped-her.print.html

When the brick crashed through her bathroom window and somebody began kicking in her front door, the 19-year-old single mother of two in Milwaukee dialed what are supposed to be the most trustworthy three numbers.

“I called 911 for help,” she later said in court. “I didn’t call 911 to be the victim.”

Within minutes, two police officers responded. One took her 15-year-old brother outside to speak to him. The other cop, Police Officer Ladmarald Cates, gave her boyfriend $10 and told him to go the store and get some water. She told him that he was welcome to chilled water from her refrigerator.

“I only drink bottled water,” Cates said.

Cates asked to see the broken window and she led him down a narrow hallway to a bathroom in the back.

She now stood on a floor littered with broken glass and pointed to the brick. The cop she had summoned to protect her instead chose this moment to grab the back of her head by her hair and sodomize her. Then he raped her.

Her revulsion in the aftermath was so visceral that she vomited as she ran outside. The cop’s partner had become concerned when he did not immediately see Cates and called for back-up. Other cops began arriving and saw a woman screaming incoherently about being raped.

Cates appeared and grabbed her by the waist, spinning her around. Her swinging feet may or may not have struck the partner. She was handcuffed and taken in, told at the stationhouse that she was being charged with assaulting a police officer.

She became more coherent but no less outraged and vocal as she continued cry out from a holding cell that she had been raped. She also continued to vomit. The other cops dismissed her as a liar.

After 12 hours, she was interviewed by internal affairs and taken to a hospital, where a rape kit was used to collect evidence. She was then taken to the county jail and held for four days before being released without actually being charged.

She took her story to the Milwaukee District Attorney’s office. A prosecutor subsequently wrote, “While I did find the victim’s version of events credible, I did not believe that her testimony would be strong enough to successfully prosecute Officer Cates.”

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Do we still believe we must submit?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...the-cop-who-came-to-help-raped-her.print.html

When the brick crashed through her bathroom window and somebody began kicking in her front door, the 19-year-old single mother of two in Milwaukee dialed what are supposed to be the most trustworthy three numbers.

“I called 911 for help,” she later said in court. “I didn’t call 911 to be the victim.”

Within minutes, two police officers responded. One took her 15-year-old brother outside to speak to him. The other cop, Police Officer Ladmarald Cates, gave her boyfriend $10 and told him to go the store and get some water. She told him that he was welcome to chilled water from her refrigerator.

“I only drink bottled water,” Cates said.

Cates asked to see the broken window and she led him down a narrow hallway to a bathroom in the back.

She now stood on a floor littered with broken glass and pointed to the brick. The cop she had summoned to protect her instead chose this moment to grab the back of her head by her hair and sodomize her. Then he raped her.

Her revulsion in the aftermath was so visceral that she vomited as she ran outside. The cop’s partner had become concerned when he did not immediately see Cates and called for back-up. Other cops began arriving and saw a woman screaming incoherently about being raped.

Cates appeared and grabbed her by the waist, spinning her around. Her swinging feet may or may not have struck the partner. She was handcuffed and taken in, told at the stationhouse that she was being charged with assaulting a police officer.

She became more coherent but no less outraged and vocal as she continued cry out from a holding cell that she had been raped. She also continued to vomit. The other cops dismissed her as a liar.

After 12 hours, she was interviewed by internal affairs and taken to a hospital, where a rape kit was used to collect evidence. She was then taken to the county jail and held for four days before being released without actually being charged.

She took her story to the Milwaukee District Attorney’s office. A prosecutor subsequently wrote, “While I did find the victim’s version of events credible, I did not believe that her testimony would be strong enough to successfully prosecute Officer Cates.”

They did a rape kit, there had to be DNA, how could the case not be strong?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

They did a rape kit, there had to be DNA, how could the case not be strong?

are you sure you don't believe her story also? or do you find it impossible that the DA would protect a cop who left evidence of a rape?

 

[Phyllis Diller]

her mindless belief in authority figures is starting to crack. good job sty!

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Oh there was DNA evidence and the cop was eventually convicted. So that first prosecutor should be fired as well.

I hope he gets life.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

are you sure you don't believe her story also? or do you find it impossible that the DA would protect a cop who left evidence of a rape?

No I believe her story. The granny with the crack in her car was not believable though. Do you believe everything every accused criminal says?

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

her mindless belief in authority figures is starting to crack. good job sty!

LOL

Yeah that's me.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Was 12 hours later too late? Did Cates use a condom?

No he was eventually convicted and is in prison Rune.

STY cut that part of the story off, for his own reasons.

go to the link.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Do we still believe we must submit?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...the-cop-who-came-to-help-raped-her.print.html

When the brick crashed through her bathroom window and somebody began kicking in her front door, the 19-year-old single mother of two in Milwaukee dialed what are supposed to be the most trustworthy three numbers.

“I called 911 for help,” she later said in court. “I didn’t call 911 to be the victim.”

Within minutes, two police officers responded. One took her 15-year-old brother outside to speak to him. The other cop, Police Officer Ladmarald Cates, gave her boyfriend $10 and told him to go the store and get some water. She told him that he was welcome to chilled water from her refrigerator.

“I only drink bottled water,” Cates said.

Cates asked to see the broken window and she led him down a narrow hallway to a bathroom in the back.

She now stood on a floor littered with broken glass and pointed to the brick. The cop she had summoned to protect her instead chose this moment to grab the back of her head by her hair and sodomize her. Then he raped her.

Her revulsion in the aftermath was so visceral that she vomited as she ran outside. The cop’s partner had become concerned when he did not immediately see Cates and called for back-up. Other cops began arriving and saw a woman screaming incoherently about being raped.

Cates appeared and grabbed her by the waist, spinning her around. Her swinging feet may or may not have struck the partner. She was handcuffed and taken in, told at the stationhouse that she was being charged with assaulting a police officer.

She became more coherent but no less outraged and vocal as she continued cry out from a holding cell that she had been raped. She also continued to vomit. The other cops dismissed her as a liar.

After 12 hours, she was interviewed by internal affairs and taken to a hospital, where a rape kit was used to collect evidence. She was then taken to the county jail and held for four days before being released without actually being charged.

She took her story to the Milwaukee District Attorney’s office. A prosecutor subsequently wrote, “While I did find the victim’s version of events credible, I did not believe that her testimony would be strong enough to successfully prosecute Officer Cates.”

Could you possibly explain why you left off the part that the cop was convicted or was it just detrimental to your agenda?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Oh there was DNA evidence and the cop was eventually convicted. So that first prosecutor should be fired as well.

I hope he gets life.

the cop was never charged with rape. he was fired and charged with civil rights violations only.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

the cop was never charged with rape. he was fired and charged with civil rights violations only.

A jury on Wednesday found fired Milwaukee police officer Ladmarald Cates guilty of violating a woman's civil rights by raping her after he responded to her 911 call in July 2010.

Despite being acquitted on a second count, Cates, 44, faces a maximum penalty of life in prison when he is sentenced April 11. He will likely serve far less time under federal sentencing guidelines.

The victim in the case cried as the verdict was announced. Afterward, she said she was glad her ordeal had ended.

"I really appreciate the federal government helping me," she said. "It means a whole lot to me that I don't have to deal with it anymore, and no other women will have to deal with it. I'm happy he won't hurt anybody else."

The jury deliberated for just three hours. In their split verdict, they found Cates not guilty of using a firearm in a crime of violence. They also found that although Cates committed a rape that qualified as aggravated sexual abuse, it did not result in bodily injury to the victim.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Could you possibly explain why you left off the part that the cop was convicted or was it just detrimental to your agenda?

I focused on the local DA, not the federal trial afterwards, which had been discussed previously in this thread. Get that? the LOCAL DA went out of his way and concocted some bullshit excuse to avoid charging one of his cops. it took FEDERAL charges of civil rights violations to exact some measure of justice.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

A jury on Wednesday found fired Milwaukee police officer Ladmarald Cates guilty of violating a woman's civil rights by raping her after he responded to her 911 call in July 2010.

Despite being acquitted on a second count, Cates, 44, faces a maximum penalty of life in prison when he is sentenced April 11. He will likely serve far less time under federal sentencing guidelines.

The victim in the case cried as the verdict was announced. Afterward, she said she was glad her ordeal had ended.

"I really appreciate the federal government helping me," she said. "It means a whole lot to me that I don't have to deal with it anymore, and no other women will have to deal with it. I'm happy he won't hurt anybody else."

The jury deliberated for just three hours. In their split verdict, they found Cates not guilty of using a firearm in a crime of violence. They also found that although Cates committed a rape that qualified as aggravated sexual abuse, it did not result in bodily injury to the victim.

the feds are unable to charge someone with 'rape' unless the crime crossed state lines. that screwy constitutional thingy we like to say we know about on this board.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Just out of curiosity, who said you are not allowed to defend yourself from a cop trying to rape you? Did someone here make that argument? I would like to see the thread.

You are most likely not going to be successful in defending yourself against a cop. But I don't see how anyone can say you have "no right" to defend yourself against a cop.

I think there might be a slight difference between believing you have a right to defend yourself against a cop and talking about stock piling weapons so you can shoot cops.

But that could be crazy thinking on my part - I took sudafed this weekend!

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

the feds are unable to charge someone with 'rape' unless the crime crossed state lines. that screwy constitutional thingy we like to say we know about on this board.

But they did find that he was guilty of rape and aggravated sexual assault so you are just using semantics here. What is your point? I honestly do not get your point? Do you believe that people don't know cops abuse their authority and commit crimes sometimes? There was just a very high profile case of cops in NY, two of them, raping a woman in her apartment. I am unsure why you believe no one knows about these things?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I focused on the local DA, not the federal trial afterwards, which had been discussed previously in this thread. Get that? the LOCAL DA went out of his way and concocted some bullshit excuse to avoid charging one of his cops. it took FEDERAL charges of civil rights violations to exact some measure of justice.

So I was correct. It interferred with your agenda, so you decided to not include it.
Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I focused on the local DA, not the federal trial afterwards, which had been discussed previously in this thread. Get that? the LOCAL DA went out of his way and concocted some bullshit excuse to avoid charging one of his cops. it took FEDERAL charges of civil rights violations to exact some measure of justice.

I totally understand that and that prosecutor in that office should be fired. If it's the DA himself I am certain whoever runs against him is going to use this and hopefully he will be voted out, though this seems like malfeasance to me and if other steps can be taken against him, I hope they are.

But I still do not get your point? What do you want to come from this?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Just out of curiosity, who said you are not allowed to defend yourself from a cop trying to rape you? Did someone here make that argument? I would like to see the thread.

You are most likely not going to be successful in defending yourself against a cop. But I don't see how anyone can say you have "no right" to defend yourself against a cop.

I think there might be a slight difference between believing you have a right to defend yourself against a cop and talking about stock piling weapons so you can shoot cops.

But that could be crazy thinking on my part - I took sudafed this weekend!

read the OP, where a michigan DA made that argument to the state supreme court.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

But they did find that he was guilty of rape and aggravated sexual assault so you are just using semantics here. What is your point? I honestly do not get your point? Do you believe that people don't know cops abuse their authority and commit crimes sometimes? There was just a very high profile case of cops in NY, two of them, raping a woman in her apartment. I am unsure why you believe no one knows about these things?

they found him guilty of violating her civil rights by raping her. It's not the same. penalties will be different.