Portland police officer accused of 7-hour sexual assault gets paid vacation


#1

[Read the post]


#2

And so it begins again. Cop did a bad thing, cop gets paid vacation, cop is reinstated with a slap on the wrist.


#3

Good. I’m glad he’s getting a paycheck. You know why?

IT’S A PENDING INVESTIGATION

Maybe he’ll be indicted from the results. Maybe he won’t. Regardless of how you feel about it then, right now, while they’re still figuring out what went on, he’s not been convicted. So no, you don’t get to take away a man’s paycheck just because you’ve accused him of doing something wrong.


#4

“Paid Vacation”? Maybe. but name another solution that 1) gets the officer off the streets while he’s being investigated but also 2) does not penalize the officer prior to the accusation being proven correct.


#5

I imagine a lot of employers in the US would fire an employee under those circumstances. However, it doesn’t mean they should.

This is another case where the police have rights that everyone else should have but doesn’t- the solution isn’t to take those rights away from the police.


#6

Even more than this, when cops are put on suspension like this, they are supposed to be at their home, on call, pretty much ready to answer the phone at any moment. They aren’t to be out on the streets during their suspension and can get fired for doing so. I have no clue about how well this is enforced, and I would like to see asshole cops fired immediately too…but glad that they get their rights too.

My only concern is that in ANY other job, if you are falsely accused of something and being investigated, you would probably be fired while it happens. We should be fighting to have the average citizen protected the same – because until you are proven guilty, you shouldn’t have guilt assumed.


#7

That’s never been true at any company I’ve worked when an accusation has been made. HR does an investigation and gathers all the data, makes a decision, and then takes action. Suspensions are called for if the accusation is serious enough, but any professional shop needs to do their due diligence before taking action.

Same for any union shop - you’ll get suspended, reassigned, or just off the work list, but employees have protection from being fired on the spot for an accusation.

(I’m NOT saying this accusation was false, but your generalisation is just incorrect).


#8

Exactly. We already kill “terrorists” without proof. And we’ve got 116 men still in Guatanamo who have been there for 12 years without trial.

As much as the rule of law has been abused, it needs all the help it can get. If not for this police officer, for others who do no believe in fair trials.

GOP presidential candidate Lindsey Graham, I’m looking at you: It is not ok to support extra-legal killings for thoughtcrimes: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/lindsey-graham-president-isis-drone/
“If I’m president of the United States,” Graham said, “and you’re thinking about joining al-Qaeda or [the Islamic State] … I’m not going to call a judge, I’m going to call a drone, and we will kill you.”


#9

Cool. So its never happened to you, so it apparently doesn’t happen. I guess case closed.

But a lot of poorer people…they don’t have all the benefits that come with being in a union. Spend a few nights in jail, and are fired…only to have charges dropped or or to win in court. Doesn’t matter. Lose jobs. Happens to poor people all the time. I have a number of friends that work with the courts as social workers or otherwise, friends that do child custody evaluations…and they see this. Often times with custody battles, false accusations will fly…will get the person in jail…fired…and even when it is dropped, the person no longer has a job which…means the other person is pretty much going to get custody.

It happens and happens a lot more than you think. Just because it doesn’t happen to you, don’t fall in the rabbit hole of believing it must not happen.


#10

Dear Sgt: Simpson: I believe you misspelled "rape."


#11

Once upon a time, I worked the month of October at a local amusement park as an actor in their haunted house. They had a problem with absenteeism for that job and had an innovative solution. The stated pay rate for the job was minimum wage, but if you made it a whole week without an absence, there was a rather generous “bonus” in your paycheck that effectively doubled your pay.

We can’t, and shouldn’t give up protections against pre-emptive punishment of those who have not been convicted of crimes, no matter how much it galls for Officer McRapey to be sitting home collecting a paycheck. And the abysmal rate of convictions for police “misconduct” is a problem orthogonal to his being on administrative leave while the investigation is pending.

Maybe we could put police on a pay schedule such that if they’re not convicted of a felony during some calendar interval they get a bonus in their paycheck. Please note the emphasis on convicted; accusations alone should not figure into the equation.


#12

Please BoingBoing, can we get a follow up when there is a finding in this case? I always wonder how these sorts of stories turn out. Danka.


#13

The Portland Police Union has a long history of getting cops who have done very bad things reinstated. I expect it will happen with this case as well.


#14

Pleasantly happy with the comments section here. I agree with the consensus - if the dude DOES get convicted, then fire the motherfucker, but we should let justice run it’s course first, as we don’t know the whole story.


#15
  1. Portland police officer accused of sexual assault suspended with pay pending investigation
  2. Portland police officer accused of sexual assault fired without inquiry or investigation
  3. Portland police officer accused of sexual assault still armed and on patrol

Which outcome seems most just?


#16

Plus disgorgement. (Having to repay earnings accrued during investigation.)


#17

Umm, and serious fucking prison time, right?


#18

there are two possible solutions, and I’m a pessimist.


#19

I assumed this was obvious. But that part is, strictly speaking, up to a jury.


#20

I thought disgorgement meant being vomited up by some giant reptilian monster in a Robert Howard book. I think that sounds fine.