Sex Work

Behind the Badge

|

police
Credit: Tony Webster / photo on flickr

Three undercover Minneapolis police officers have sued the city, the county, and the state after their names were revealed in court documents concerning massage parlor arrests. County judges and the district attorney's office threw out all charges stemming from the busts after it was revealed the officers had sexual contact with the suspects. The officers now say their reputations have been damaged and they and their families have received negative comments about their behavior. One of them also claims he that he was excluded from his religious community after his undercover work was revealed.

NEXT: How Did the Also-Rans Do?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So much wrong here.

    Were their names not going to be revealed open court when they testified during any trial? Aren’t law enforcement officers part of the accusers we’re guaranteed to face?

    Do they consider police blotter revelations to local media the names of those arrested but not yet tried also damaging and therefore unacceptable?

    Aren’t happy endings too important a law enforcement tool to be taken away?

    1. once upon a time…

    2. I’m not going to click on the link to find out what the damage to their reputation was, I’m just going to assume it wasn’t that now everybody knows they frequent shady massage parlors it was that now everybody knows they’re cops.

      1. Which is the bigger danger to a normal, everyday citizen:

        A) The sleazy sex addict who might have gotten a sexually transmitted disease along with his “happy ending”, or…

        B) A trigger-happy and self-righteously moronic undercover cop?

        … I vote for “B”, far and away, so your point is well taken! If I were a church-goer, I would sooner kick “B” out of my church, than “A”… At least “A” can be more honest than “B”, who makes a living off of deception……

        1. Unless maybe if the everyday citizen was one of the massage parlor workers railed and railroaded by one of these sleazy sex addicts with a badge.

    3. “Undercover”. Heh, heh.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.