I get what you are saying, in theory, but…
I can’t imagine, as the victim, valuing a phone so much that rape is a-ok in my book.
That’s putting a lot of faith in the captivating ability of Snapchat.
If I didn’t want someone to report what I’ve done, I think the last thing I would give them is a phone.
Again… not sure what phone I could be given to think of my rapists as “good guys”… “Sure, I was raped, but look! Snapchat! Those were some swell guys, for rapist cops.”
The only way I can think of that would work is if, in his defense, he said she agreed to give him oral sex in exchange for the phone, turning it into a case of exchanging goods for services instead of straight up rape, but even if that was what is happening, that would still be illegal. Doubly so – in my opinion – since he is a cop that was supposed to be taking her to her house, not arranging sex for trade. And he needed help paying for the phone! Plus, nothing else was mentioned about the phone in the article, or how it fits into everything.
It’s just so weird to me. If it makes sense to you, great I guess?
ETA this was mentioned in another post thread, and it further supports what you are saying:
I can’t imagine why a cop who plans to rape someone would bother trying out marketing psychology. Maybe I’m just prejudiced, but I feel like a cop’s go to tactic would be coercion and threats.
