They did a terrible job of it. We already know that Daniels is a stripper. If anything it reinforces the view that Trump makes bad decisions.
1 Like
Have you ever noticed how tolerable people never demand to be thanked?
6 Likes
Is Detective Shana Keckley going to smack them with her bare breasts?Why thank her “in person”? Is she desperately proving herself to the boys as a member of the He-Man Woman-Haters’ Club?
1 Like
Since when did we start saying police can’t lie? They lie all the time. What law or statute exists saying they must be truthful? As far as I can tell their only mistake was misapplication of the law.
Wanna take a guess as to who Mayor Ginther voted for last presidential election?
3 Likes
law enforcement had shown up specifically to target Daniels
$130K ain’t going to cover this one.
2 Likes
the law that prohibits performers touching patrons only applies to dancers who perform regularly at the club. Stormy was a guest performer.
That’s not the only problem. The law prohibits performers from touching patrons, and defines patron as:
any individual on the premises of a sexually oriented business except
…
A public employee or a volunteer firefighter emergency medical services worker acting within the scope of the public employee’s or volunteer’s duties
So, touching on-duty cops appears to be fine.
Also, the law as a whole is a goddamned mess. Terms are defined, but never used, apparent copy paste errors, etc…
The specific section Ms Clifford was charged under is an impossible to read sentence that includes:
No employee […] shall knowingly touch $thing1 or $thing2 or $thing3 or $thing4
Thing 1 and thing 3 are both the same text.
They’re clearly not sending their best when these laws get written.
3 Likes
Not gonna happen. It’s Ohio, and outside of Chicago, the Midwest is Trump-country. The mayor, the police, and the vast majority of anyone chosen for a jury are all Trumpheads.
Are you suggesting that lying to a suspect during an investigation is the same thing as lying to the public during a PR shitstorm? Pretty different things in my opinion.
2 Likes
Actually [pushes glasses up]… If you read “a member of the employee’s immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee’s immediate family” instead as “An Acceptable Person To Touch”
Then the and section reads:
It’s still a terribly written sentence, but there are only 3 things. On-duty cops still don’t appear to be patrons, though, and patrons are only discussed in this section, so it’s not like they reused a definition from another place and accidentally excluded more people than intended.
Why family members of nude performers should be specifically allowed touching though… Eww.
The point being not to thank her in any way that might involve a paper trail.
The funny part being that this request was placed in writing.
Nope. I’m not suggesting it’s the same thing. I’m just saying we have placed no burden on our police to be honest. Unless it’s in court, there are no laws against lying - even if you work for the people as a member of law enforcement.
We are truly corrupt then.
Seems oddly specific that they are targeting these guys
3 Likes
Phew. Okay, I think I understand what you’re saying. I was originally parsing this as:
No employee ... shall knowingly
touch
a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
the clothing of a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
4 things, where #2 and #4 are the same.
But you’re suggesting that last “or” attempts to expand the universe of un-touchable clothing to include other employee’s clothing in addition to patron’s clothing:
No employee ... shall knowingly
touch
a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
the clothing
of a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
or
another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family
I think you’re probably right, it makes more sense that way. An oxford comma might have helped here. And this is strangely appropriate:
4 Likes
I now want to print special business cards with my job title as “An Acceptable Person To Touch”.
But I won’t give them to just anyone.
1 Like
The only silver lining in the rot occurring within our government is that so many of the pawns are incompetent at this cloak and dagger shit.
3 Likes
As much as I hate this state, it is far from reasonable to say that everything outside of Chicago in the Midwest is Trump country. Wayne county Michigan (Detroit) went 2-1 Clinton over Trump. The four largest counties in Ohio all went Clinton over Trump. Those four include Franklin county where this took place which went for Clinton by a margin of 150,000 votes. Franklin county came out as slightly more Democratic than the state of California and you rarely hear California called Trump country.
3 Likes
Let me introduce you to the wonder that is gay Asian porn, where the genitals, by law, must be obscured but other than that, absolutely anything goes. Well, most anything…
“Mayor Ginther’s office is pissed that people are critical of the police over this.”
So… not pissed at what the police have done, but pissed that people are being critical of it. Got it. Shine on you crazy diamonds.
2 Likes
Unless they are chaff and we aren’t finding out about the ones that are actually competent.
