Police Abuse

Maryland Cop Accused of Raping Undocumented Immigrant at Traffic Stop

Officer First Class Ryan Macklin has since been arrested and suspended without pay.

|

Prince George's County Police Department

A Maryland police officer is facing multiple criminal charges after he allegedly raped a woman during a traffic stop last week. The alleged victim is reportedly an undocumented immigrant.

Officer 1st Class Ryan Macklin was assigned to the Prince George's County Police Department Bureau of Patrol prior to his arrest late yesterday, according to a department press release. Macklin, a six-year veteran of the department, has since been arrested and suspended without pay. "He is no longer a police officer. He can't act as a police officer. His police powers have been suspended," department spokesperson Jennifer Donelan said at a press conference last night. She also said Macklin's badge, gun, and police cruiser have been taken away from him.

The alleged rape occurred early last Thursday. Macklin, who was on duty at the time, "pulled over the driver" and is then "accused of forcing the victim to perform a sexual act while they were both seated in her car in a nearby parking lot," the release says. Surveillance video released by police shows Macklin turning on his emergency lights prior to making the traffic stop:

Prince George's County Police Chief Hank Stawinski said last night it appears Macklin randomly targeted the woman, who reported her allegations "several hours" after the incident occurred. "The investigation has led me to believe, based on the victim's statement, witness statements, the totality of the circumstances, that he saw this individual and chose to target her simply because she was a woman driving at a late hour in Prince George's County. There is nothing that leads us to conclude there was anything further," Stawinski said.

Unnamed sources "close to the investigation" told WRC-TV that the alleged victim is an undocumented immigrant. Stawinski wouldn't confirm that the woman was in the country illegally, but he did say the crime affected the "Latino community." He also said investigators "believe that there may be additional people impacted by this officer's conduct."

Macklin is facing five total charges: "first degree rape, second degree rape, perverted practice, second degree assault and fourth degree sex offense," according to the police news release.

Ultimately, it wouldn't be fair to make any conclusions about this case until all the facts come out. That said, it's encouraging that police are investigating it so quickly after the fact. It's also a good thing that the alleged victim came forward in the first place, particularly considering her reported immigration status.

If Macklin is found guilty of this crime and/or others like it, then he should be held accountable. Fortunately, it doesn't sound like his bosses are trying to cover up the investigation, as evidenced by the promptness with which he was arrested, charged and suspended. In this case, it seems the process is working the way it should. Let's hope that continues.

NEXT: Report: California's Transportation Agency Coordinated With Gas Tax Supporters

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. Can’t rape an illegal because illegals aren’t people. They’re illegal. Charge him with bestiality. But not rape. Right Trumpsters?

    1. You are a sick puppy.

      1. I’m not the one who thinks someone isn’t a person unless they have a permission slip from the government.

        1. A trespasser is a person…a person who is legally in the wrong place.

          1. Sarcasmic is an anarchist, so he latches on to any story that gets him closer to Anarchy-Land.

            1. Then Sarcasmic goes on to blab about other non-Libertarian things like zero national sovereignty or border rights.

              1. And lc1789 shows he’s not in favor of self-ownership. Pretty soon he gets down to Trump and deal making, as if that collectivism overrides individualism.

            2. Anarchist, minarchist, individualist, it’s all the same to collectivists and statists.

              1. Neither one of your dumbass posts approaches coherence.

            3. Hey, at least sarcasmic has a moral compass. lovecollectivism1789 and tulpa have yet to demonstrate any.

              1. Poor trolls had a sad.

          2. And here I thought libertarians didn’t subscribe to collectivism. Guess that all goes out the window when it comes to immigrants trespassing on the collective’s property.

            1. And here I thought libertarians didn’t subscribe to collectivism.

              It’s not *our* fault you can’t grasp the obvious.

            2. We don’t. And nothing in his reply suggests otherwise.

              1. Of course it does. If you’re framing it as a property rights issue (trespassing), then suggesting that there’s a collective rule that applies to everybody’s property regardless of their own preference is by definition a collectivist stance.

                1. “then suggesting that there’s a collective rule”

                  So, are you going to continue talking abput things that didn’t happen?

                  You see things that aren’t there because you have raging TDS.

                  1. When you aim to apply a rule to everybody’s property without their consent, it’s a collective rule. HTH

                    Answer this question: should I have the ability to host any person (here with or without consent from the US government) on my property?

                    1. “When you aim to apply a rule to everybody’s property”

                      He didn’t do that either.

                      You see things that aren’t there because you ha e raging TDS.

                    2. You see things that aren’t there because you ha e raging TDS.

                      Huh? This story has nothing to do with Trump.

                    3. Which is why your raging TDS based replies are so stupid.

                    4. The only basis for the type of immigration policies you advocate is collective property theory. That makes your position intrinsically collectivist, and you yourself a collectivist. TDS has nothing to do with it, and your transparent use of the ad hominem fallacy merely demonstrates that you have no rebuttal.

                      It’s not our fault you’re a literal communist.

                    5. “…should I have the ability to host any person on my property?
                      Only if you live in Anarchlandia.
                      In every civilized nation, no, you can’t.

            3. You thought wrong, again.
              American libertarians subscribe to the Constitution’s republican form of government.
              If that is what you call “collectivism”, then that’s what American libertarians subscribe to.
              Without some form of government – “collectivism” – there would be anarchy, which is what we all know you want.
              Sure hope you’re the biggest, baddest boy on the block. Otherwise that ideology you subscribe to will not turn out well for you.

          3. This poor woman wasn’t a trespasser, Eddie. Did some private property owner accuse her of trespassing? I don’t think so.

            1. Hi, you clearly do not understand what you were responding to.

          4. Eddy, you got the open border Anarchists all whipped up.

        2. “I’m not the one who thinks someone isn’t a person unless they have a permission slip from the government.”

          Stop being an idiot sarc.

          1. Re: Tulpa,

            Read the rest: “Right, Trump[istas]?”

            1. Why can’t you ever not be insane?

          2. Stop being evil, Satulpatanic Satulpan! Have you been sacrificing illegal humans again?

            1. ^See even this idiot isn’t stupid enough to pretend that anyone thnks illegals aren’t people.

              You’re really going to be less sane than SQRLSY, sarc?

              1. When humans are outlawed,
                Only outlaws will be human!

                By this standard, illegal-human-haters (ones who want to outlaw humans) are no longer human. I don’t actually-really buy that… They (haters) are still human. They are just EVIL humans! And they are surely not humane!

                1. I see you’re happy being my parasite.

        3. Don’t be an idiot. Even the most rabid anti-immigrationist still believes that illegal immigrants are people. And whether or not those immigrants have certain rights in their own name has no bearing on the legal elements in the definition of the crime alleged above.

          1. Re: Rossami,

            Don’t be an idiot. Even the most rabid anti-immigrationist still believes that illegal immigrants are people.

            Uh, no, they don’t. You haven’t heard nor read what they call immigrants.

            1. Oh my god names!

              Fainting couch stat!

              By the way, I always love the handwaving references to the horrible people that live in your head, that ypu never actually name or quote.

            2. Uh, no, they don’t. You haven’t heard nor read what they call immigrants.

              Even at that it’s a tangential issue. As the decision discussed yesterday kinda highlights, you can be 100% anti-immigrant, see them wholly as chattel, and still believe it to be an abuse of power and waste of resources for police to be fucking chattel.

          2. Don’t be an idiot. Even the most rabid anti-immigrationist still believes that illegal immigrants are people. And whether or not those immigrants have certain rights in their own name has no bearing on the legal elements in the definition of the crime alleged above.

            This is a circular argument. You can’t invoke the current status of the law to criticize someone’s suggested change of the law.

            Libertarian: “Income tax is bad policy.”
            Circular reasoning non-libertarian: “No it isn’t. It’s the law.”

            1. The fact that you had to incorrectly paraphrase what he said is really all that needs to be said about your point.

              1. I dumbed it down for people who don’t know what circular reasoning is. And based on the comments in this thread invoking “rule of law” as a defense of immigration law, I’d say that’s a lot of people.

                1. “I dumbed it down”

                  Boy did you ever.

            2. You didn’t dumb it down – you completely misrepresented it.

              Illegal immigration is a status crime that depends on citizenship.

              The legal definition of rape, however, makes it a crime regardless of the citizenship of the victim. Also regardless of the citizenship of the perpetrator, for that matter.

              Let me try to put this differently for you. Once you are dead, you have no legal rights at all. Despite that, necrophilia is a crime and you can be jailed for necrophilia even though your victim is legally a non-person.

              Similarly, the crime of rape remains a crime defined solely by the actions of the perpetrator and regardless of the legal status of the victim.

              1. First of all, none of that is true. The identity of the victim dictates whether or not the act of fucking someone or something without consent is classified as rape, a violation of property rights, or nothing at all. You won’t be charged with the same crime if you “rape” a horse. Why is this relevant? Because sarcasmic “sarcasmically” posted about illegal immigrants not having the full complement of human rights (an argument that is made by restrictionists when they justify restricting freedom of movement) and extended the logical consequence of that to another act.

                In other words, you and tulpa completely misunderstood the point of his original post, which is why you’re now assuming I’m misrepresenting something.

                1. Still digging, huh? No, sarcasmic did not make a statement about human rights. Nor do even the most rabid anti-immigrationists. They argue (correctly or not) that illegal aliens have restricted legal rights. From the perspective of the law (and that’s what this whole argument is about), that’s a very different thing.

                  And again, the legal rights (or lack thereof) of the victim are utterly irrelevant to the elements of the legal definition of rape. Assuming the allegations above are true, Macklin would still be guilty of rape even if the victim had no legal rights whatsoever.

                  1. They argue (correctly or not) that illegal aliens have restricted legal rights. From the perspective of the law (and that’s what this whole argument is about), that’s a very different thing.

                    Some would argue (and from reading sarcasmic’s posts for a while, so would he) that there should be no distinction. There should be no legal restrictions on a human right.

                    Macklin would still be guilty of rape even if the victim had no legal rights whatsoever.

                    I already pointed out why this is not true.

                    1. You think you’ve pointed it out but as a legal matter, you are wrong.

        4. if you mean Trunp’s (and mine, too) position that those individuals without the government permission slip cannot slip across the border and live here, you need to take some courses in logic.

          They are, and will always remain, PERSONS, and as such, have certain rights simply by their being alive. Being raped violates some of those rights. And this dirty copper knows it. Perhaps this copper took advantage of her thinking if he violated her she would not report it because of her lack of legal status. If so, he has since learned he is mistaken on that count. This sort of thing tends to happen when one is run by that little head down between his legs, as this pervert apparently is. How many OTHER women, legally here or not, has he also violated? Perhaps now the dam has broken other of his victims may well come forward.

          SO glad the city have taken immediate and decisive action. THAT right there will gain them tremendous respect in the community.

    2. That parody’s a little bit off. More like “WAR ON COPS!! Why do you hate the people that enforce the laws!!” is the more likely spin.

      1. I dunno. We’ve got people here who tingle with glee when illegals have their children taken away from them. Why wouldn’t they cheer when illegals are raped?

          1. Satulpatanic Satulpan comes to mind!

            1. Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

              1. I can’t find jack diddly squat that you say besides name-calling, at about the 99.9% level. So, no surprise, I cannot find examples of Satulpatanic Satulpan saying “I hate illegal humans”.

                I do find an unmistakable pattern of you attacking the defenders of illegal humans, far more so than you attacking the haters of illegal humans.

                Since you do just about zero actual justifying of your thoughts, as opposed to grade-school-style name-calling…

                Case closed!

                1. “I can’t find jack diddly squat”

                  So you were lying like I said , and have admitted it.

                  1. Should we really be surprised to find nothing of real substance or value when digging through tons of nonsense?

                    “I do find an unmistakable pattern of you attacking the defenders of illegal humans, far more so than you attacking the haters of illegal humans.” Rebut that!

                    You really cannot see your writhing masses of hateful thoughts in your own mind? That is one of the hallmarks of evil people… Every murderous asshole of a dictator who has ever lived, has convinced himself of His Own Holy / Sacred Righteousness!

                    1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                      Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                      reply to this report spam
                      SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                      I can’t find jack diddly squat

                    2. The essence of your entire personality is a giant lie. There is actually hope for people like you, but it has to start with you seeing yourself honestly, before the healing can even begin.

                      I would benevolently recommend that you start here…

                      “People of the Lie: The Hope for Healing Human Evil” by M. Scott Peck (Author)

                      http://www.amazon.com/People-L…..0684848597

                    3. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                      Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                      reply to this report spam
                      SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                      I can’t find jack diddly squat

        1. NEWS FLASH dummie!!! Recent numbers quoted: of the 12,000 children in custody who were detained for illegal border crossing, 10,000 of them were NOT accompanied by either parent, but instead were accompanied by non-relatives. That means, they WERE indeed separated from their parents, but that happened deep in Mexico or Honduras or whereever they were when the kid started his journey north weeks before capture. The other two thousand are separated from their parents because their parents have been arrested for some criminal activity, and to put the children in the adult JAIL facility awaiting legal adjudication of their crime would be far worse than being in the facility now holding those children.

          Your tearjerking false meme fails. It ain’t happni’n like you say.

      2. See, Sarcasmic equates kicking illegals out of the USA to rape.

        He is so close to Anarchy-Land.

        1. Collectivists unite! You have nothing to lose but your self-ownership and self-respect!

          1. I doubt protectionist xenophobes have much self-respect to lose.

            1. At least they don’t gin up bullshit comparisons and cling to them no matter how stupid they look.

              1. While some just vomit and fume no matter what. They’d be better off renting themselves out as perpetual motion machines.

                1. Why are you talking about sarc like that?

            2. Some butthurt anarchists and trolls.

    3. I’d go with that … except for the bestiality charge.

      If she hadn’t broken the law, she wouldn’t have been there.

      More to the point – if our military had defended our borders and shot her the instant she crossed… AS THEY SHOULD…

  2. I’m surprised she came forward given her status. He probably is too.

    1. He was counting on her NOT coming forward. But I say “good for her”. Bust the scumbag.

  3. This is disgusting.

    1. Yeah. Why charge a cop with rape of someone who wasn’t even supposed to be in the Country? If she hadn’t invaded America, she wouldn’t have been in that kind of danger!

  4. Back to the open border narrative.

    A few cops violating the law means that we should get rid of the Rule of Law.

    This is what stupid anarchists actually want.

    1. The stupid person is the one who concludes that opposition to some laws equals opposition to all laws.

      1. Yeah, you are pretty dumb.

        Glad you finally admit it.

        1. You need to lay off the stupid pills, man. You’re gonna choke.

          1. Go have a drink and settle down sarc you’re making a fool of yourself.

            1. In days of old,
              When knights were bold,
              And toilets weren’t invented,
              We stopped by the road,
              And dropped our load,
              And walked away contented!

              The days of old are over now… We have toilets now. Please be considerate of others, and drop your loads there, instead of a nice, clean, rational web site like Reason.com!

              1. Shouldn’t you be looking for quotes so you don’t have to add proven liar to your other titles?

          2. Sarcasmic has been on and off the wagon, so his comments dont normally have any substance.

            Its a daily ritual to follow me around reason and troll or beg me to come and discuss some issue.

            Reason staff are really desperate for web traffic.

    2. When an “illegal” alien comes and commits a crime against a citizen, your side calls for banning all immigration. It’s essentially what happened with that recent Iowa murder case.

      So… shouldn’t we call for banning all cops in this case because of one bad individual?

      1. Some of us are already pushing for tightening immigration with or without a crime taking place.

        The crimes by illegals just make it hit home since that crime literally would not have happened had that person not gotten into the USA illegally.

        I love winning so much. Border security!

        1. MAGA!

      2. “your side”

        Is this the anti-collectivist rehtoric sarc says gets respect?

        1. I thought it was the anti-immigration side that respected collective property rights? I’d be perfectly fine letting illegal humans onto my portion of our property.

          1. You didn’t answer my question.

            1. As if you have no history of totally avoiding questions!

              Pot calls kettle black!

              Get thee behind us, Satulpatanic Satulpan!

              1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                reply to this report spam
                SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                I can’t find jack diddly squat

            2. I haven’t been reading the back and forth between you and Sarc. So I don’t know how to answer your question.

              You didn’t answer my question. Do you believe in “collective” property rights? It takes a village you know…

              1. It takes a village to contain the village idiot, and that idiot is Satulpatanic Satulpan.

                He’s done the same thing to me; totally and completely refused to answer simple questions… Such as his “fix” to protect humans from evil humans; HOW he will raise the funds to perform this function, if “taxation is theft”. Tulpa magic or genetically engineering away human evil? He never did answer the question. All he does is call people names, truth be told.

                1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                  Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                  reply to this report spam
                  SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                  I can’t find jack diddly squat

              2. You still didn’t answer my question, because you know the answer will make you look stupid.

                I didn’t answer your question because it was and continues to be a lame attempt to dodge.

                1. I see above that you are answering neither my question nor Leo’s. “Lame attempt to dodge”, so look in the mirror.

                  I can’t find your literal written lies because you do nothing other than name-calling.

                  “I do find an unmistakable pattern of you attacking the defenders of illegal humans, far more so than you attacking the haters of illegal humans.” Rebut that!

                  And you haven’t rebutted, because you cannot do so honestly. You tell so many lies, your lie-generator batteries are running dry.

                  1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                    Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                    reply to this report spam
                    SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                    I can’t find jack diddly squat

                    1. Under the collectivism that you so much admire, if hating illegal humans was a crime, your written history…

                      “I do find an unmistakable pattern of you attacking the defenders of illegal humans, far more so than you attacking the haters of illegal humans.”

                      … would be enough to hang you high! North Korea would welcome you to their collective! Check it out and see if you like it, please!

                    2. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                      Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                      reply to this report spam
                      SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                      I can’t find jack diddly squat

      3. None are calling for an end to immigration because of the illegals. We DO call for an end to ILLEGAL INVASION by those not properly vetted and admitted.

        Horse of a different colour……..
        same with cirty coppers. Clean up the dirty ones, or get them out of being coppers. Crimes like this need to be dealt with as if any of the rest of us had done the deed. NO immunity for this barstid.

        1. Actually, I would favor a temporary end to ALL immigration until the 20 million criminal aliens already here are imprison, deported or killed.

          After that, we can talk about restarting LEGAL immigration – including a substantial reduction over the current rates.

          1. +1

      4. Nice try. So you have a cop who broke the law (allegedly). And every single criminal alien in America who has broken the law and is a criminal. The cop is an exception (sort of) but the criminal alien is the iron-clad rule.

    3. Rule of Law? Where? Trump makes your laws, or at least the ones you think count.

      1. Trump has actually been getting rid of ‘laws.’ More so than any of the other viable potential candidates would’ve ever dreamed.

        1. Good thing you placed “laws” in quotes, because it’s utter nonsense. The clearest illustrations of the collectivist (Klanish) orientation of Trump and his mob are that he is proud to be an immigration dictator and a trade dictator, and his mob approves.

    4. A few cops violating the law means that we should get rid of the Rule of Law. This is what stupid anarchists actually want.

      When the law is that people are caged for ingesting substances that aren’t approved by the government, you agree we should get rid of it. When the law is that people’s earnings are stolen by the government in the form of income taxation, you agree we should get rid of it. But when it’s about immigration, you get on your “If you disagree with the law then you oppose the rule of law, you filthy anarchist!” soapbox.

      1. Except this story isn’t about immigration it’s about rape, so wtf guy.

        1. The comment I replied to was about immigration. Follow along.

          1. “A few cops violating the law means that we should get rid of the Rule of Law. This is what stupid anarchists actually want”

            THAT is what you quoted, and it’s abput rape not immigration.

            Try to stop making a fool of yourself.

            1. Get thee behind us, Satulpatanic Satulpan!

              1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                reply to this report spam
                SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                I can’t find jack diddly squat

            2. Please provide the full quote before calling me a fool. The first line that immediately preceded the one you provided was:

              “Back to the open border narrative.”

              Stop being so intellectually dishonest. As I said, this subthread is about immigration.

              1. “Please provide the full quote before calling me a fool”

                I did you fucking idiot fool.

                JunkScienceIsJunk|10.16.18 @ 12:21PM|#

                A few cops violating the law means that we should get rid of the Rule of Law. This is what stupid anarchists actually want.

                When the law is that people are caged for ingesting substances that aren’t approved by the government, you agree we should get rid of it. When the law is that people’s earnings are stolen by the government in the form of income taxation, you agree we should get rid of it. But when it’s about immigration, you get on your “If you disagree with the law then you oppose the rule of law, you filthy anarchist!” soapbox.

                Your post is right there you moron.

                Stop being so intellectually dishonest.

                like how you’re suddenly acting like you qyoted things you didn’t actually quote because I pointed out that you were wrong?

                As I said, this subthread is about

                And as I PROVED you were wrong about what you said.

                And the fact that YOU don’t even know what YOU QUOTED IN YOUR POST makes you look even more stupid, desperate, and wrong.

                Seriously what kind of fucking moron are you?

                1. Shorter junkforbrains “POST THE FULL QUOTE!!!”

                  ME – “I did”

                  Shorter junkforbrains “WELL THAT ISNT THE FULL QUOTE!!!”

                  ME – ” It’s what you quoted”

                  Shorter junkforbrains “REEEEEEEEEEE YOU SHOULD HAVE POSTED THINGS I DIDN’T QUOTE!!!! SO I DON’T LOOK TOTALLY STUPID!!!”

                  Lol

                  1. Shorter Satulpatanic Satulpan:

                    “I am the smartest mo-fo on the block, and everyone else is a moron who wears stinky pants, in My Sight, and I need not provide an explanation of why they are stinky-pants”.

                    1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                      Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                      reply to this report spam
                      SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                      I can’t find jack diddly squat

                2. Wow, you’re still lying. Here is the post I replied to. That link will take you directly to it. If you don’t want to click it, then read below:

                  loveconstitution1789|10.16.18 @ 10:55AM|
                  Back to the open border narrative.

                  A few cops violating the law means that we should get rid of the Rule of Law.

                  This is what stupid anarchists actually want.

                  Now, unless you are trying to make the case that “open border” now refers to rape, then I assume you’ll concede that this part of the conversation was about immigration.

                  1. “Wow, you’re still lying. ”

                    Ha! I’m fucking quoting you!!! It’s YOUR EXACT POST!!!

                    OMG you’re literally insane!!!

                    Shorter junkforbrains – “stop using my words to prove what I said!!! I have to call you a liar because I have no other retort!!!”

                    Ahahahh

                    He ACTUALLY SAID SAID I WAS LYING BY DIRECTLY QUOTING HIM!!!

                    Ahhaahhahahaahahahahahahah

                    What kind of mental defect muat he have to even try that!!!

                    AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHA

                    1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 4:23PM|
                      OMG you’re literally insane!!!

                      Ahahahh

                      Ahhaahhahahaahahahahahahah

                      AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHHAHA

  5. This is horrible but what does the fact that the woman was an illegal have to do with it? Would it had been better if he had raped a citizen?

    1. Because illegals risk deportation when reporting crimes committed against them, it stands to reason that this probably happens a lot. “Suck my dick you illegal bitch. If you complain we’ll take your children and send you back home.”

      1. Because illegals risk deportation when reporting crimes committed against them, it stands to reason that this probably happens a lot. “Suck my dick you illegal bitch. If you complain we’ll take your children and send you back home.”

        Weird set of preternatural powers that allow officers to determine whether the driver of a vehicle is an illegal immigrant but not whether she’ll turn them in for rape.

        1. If they don’t have documentation, well then they’re probably undocumented. Durrrrrrrrr. And like I said, illegals risk arrest for making complaints, by virtue of the fact that they don’t have permission slips.

          1. You still didn’t explain how he knew she was illegal when he was pulling the vehicle over. Sounds like he intended to rape someone at some point. Whom and when were dictated more by opportunity.

            Given the facts, it’s entirely possible she’s a latino citizen and the department is withholding her ID because the only documented proof of her identity is whatever her rapist wrote down.

            You really want to bend this to fit your narrative don’t you?

            1. You’re saying he knew she was illegal before he pulled her over. He’s saying he pulled over lots of people and found out she was illegal when he asked for ID and registration.

              Difficulty: thinking.

              1. Difficulty: thinking.

                It’s clear from what you wrote down that you’re having trouble thinking about it, so let me help you: you do realize you’re arguing in favor a hate crime, right? That the crime was somehow worse or different because she was undocumented?

                Would you feel better if, rather than being undocumented, she was just driving without a license?

                1. No, it’s clear you go out of your way to misunderstand everything.

                  1. No, it’s clear you go out of your way to misunderstand everything.

                    Fuck outcomes! What’s really important is that people understand your hot take.

        2. Sort of like how car thieves have a weird set of preternatural powers to know which cars are unlocked and have the keys in the ignition? Or do you think maybe they just keep looking and looking and looking until they find one? My guess is that over the next week or so you’re going to have multiple complainants coming forward – this likely isn’t the first time Officer Friendly has put the squeeze on women desperate to avoid coming to the attention of the law.

          1. Or do you think maybe they just keep looking and looking and looking until they find one? My guess is that over the next week or so you’re going to have multiple complainants coming forward – this likely isn’t the first time Officer Friendly has put the squeeze on women desperate to avoid coming to the attention of the law.

            You mean like he might be a more general sexual deviant and the fact that she’s undocumented or latino might just be coincidental?

            1. No coincidence. He wouldn’t have pulled out his dick for someone who could protest without fear of deportation.

              Difficulty: thinking.

            2. These don’t need to be competing narratives. You can want border enforcement and also recognize that those who could be legitimately arrested on the spot like illegal aliens are vulnerable to predatory law enforcement agents and agencies. We’ve seen evidence of police stealing their property and here sexual assault.

              1. We’ve seen evidence of police stealing their property and here sexual assault.

                Plenty of evidence that they do it to natives as well.

                The only reason it would make a difference if she was undocumented vs. documented is if you wanted to make up a hate crime where it was worse to rape an undocumented immigrant.

                Otherwise, rape is rape.

                1. Well, don’t forget, there is another kind: rape-rape.

                2. …if you wanted to make up a hate crime where it was worse to rape an undocumented immigrant.

                  I think here the assumption (correct, in my opinion) is that corrupt law enforcement like many exploitative actors would target those less likely to report the crime. Citizens maybe found with illicit drugs or caught drunk driving would be one type of easy mark, as would someone poor who couldn’t risk jail for fear of losing a job or custody of a child, or an illegal alien.

          2. I don’t see how it is any harder to molest a citizen. He is still a cop. He still can cause their lives all kinds of problems to deter them from saying anything.

        3. Who says he stopped her for being illegal? You never been stopped by a cop? They ask for ID and registration. Durhp.

          1. Who says he stopped her for being illegal? You never been stopped by a cop? They ask for ID and registration. Durhp.

            So, what you’re saying is, he might have pulled over anyone and raped them?

            1. Anyone who couldn’t protest without fear of deportation.

              Difficulty: comprehension.

              1. Difficulty: comprehension.

                I agree. You’re having significant trouble conceptualizing this crime in any other context besides your narrative.

                Start an #immigrantlivesmatter campaign and become as successful as the BLM campaign hasn’t been at spotlighting and diminishing police violence.

    2. This is horrible but what does the fact that the woman was an illegal have to do with it? Would it had been better if he had raped a citizen?

      Alleged illegal alien. The only evidence that she’s illegal is because, presumably, she’s a part of the Latino community. Which is totally not racist.

      Reason Magazine – Free Narratives and Facts Free

      1. Work on your reading skills. Reason quotes WRC-TV regarding her possible status. The reporter then quotes the police chief regarding ethnicity.

        1. Did you read the part where they said “it wouldn’t be fair to make any conclusions about this case until all the facts come out”? Because an anonymous tipster to the local news affiliate does not a fact make.

          1. It doesn’t look like he did read that.

            Maybe he should work on his reading skills.

            1. Get thee behind us, Satulpatanic Satulpan!

              1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

                Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

                reply to this report spam
                SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

                I can’t find jack diddly squat

    3. Its all about the narrative John.

      It excuses the violations of law by a corrupt cop, so open border people can get their illegal in to vote.

    4. What if he had raped Mike Tyson? Or Thomas Edison’s corpse? Or a prickly pear cactus? See, the thing is, he wouldn’t have raped her if he didn’t have some way of coercing her, something he could threaten her with – like threatening to arrest her for being an illegal alien if she didn’t go along quietly.

      1. See, the thing is, he wouldn’t have raped her if he didn’t have some way of coercing her, something he could threaten her with – like threatening to arrest her for being an illegal alien if she didn’t go along quietly.

        Because cops are known to never take people into custody to sexually abuse or rape them?

        1. What some other cops have done has little bearing on this cop and what he did.

          Difficulty: changing the subject.

          1. What some other cops have done has little bearing on this cop and what he did.

            I’m not arguing against or in favor of what this cop did. I’m arguing against the narrative that’s been fabricated for political ends.

            Either the victim was raped and you close the book or the victim was an illegal immigrant and that’s somehow different and needs more pages written about it.

  6. Ultimately, it wouldn’t be fair to make any conclusions about this case until all the facts come out.

    *Choking gasp* *Hack* *Cough* *Cough* *Cough* *Deep breath* Excuse me?

  7. Hmmm, and wasn’t Prince George’s County just in the news here for having a cop shot during a no-knock wrong-address raid – and the cops not only didn’t shoot the homeowner but apologized for the incident and halted the no-knock raid shit until they could review their procedures? What the hell’s going on over there in PGC?

    1. That’s pretty impressive.

    2. Why is it so hard to check an address? Their kill boners take all the blood from the brain?

      1. Not to slap the PGCPD on the back too hard but, last I heard, a couple cops took a couple bullets and they hadn’t charged the homeowner with anything. And, while it’s not clear that the officer above isn’t on some sort of paid leave it seems superficially, that he’s out of a job well before any conviction.

        I admit the bar was pretty low, but this is at least a bit more towards parity than our usual “King’s Men – FYTW” story.

    3. What’s going on is that a few years ago, the PGC SWAT team made the mistake of conducting a botched raid on the Mayor’s house.

      Apparently, killing the Mayor’s two dogs is what it takes to get politicians to pay attention.

  8. Somebody’s supplied the wrong link, I think. YouTube’s of a furniture store. A cop car does pass by outside.

    1. Fuck off Hihn.

      1. Get thee behind us, Satulpatanic Satulpan!

        1. TuIpa|10.16.18 @ 12:13PM|#

          Quotes should be easy to find then if you’re not lying.

          reply to this report spam
          SQRLSY One|10.16.18 @ 12:25PM|#

          I can’t find jack diddly squat

  9. Ultimately, it wouldn’t be fair to make any conclusions about this case until all the facts come out.

    I don’t need any more facts. I have all the evidence I need. That chief needs to be fired for using that “totality of the circumstances” bullshit phrase.

  10. What ? ,all cops are heroes ! Rapist,lying pieces of garbage , but heroes !

  11. identity markers shouldn’t matter. rape occurred in the name of the state.

    1. Exactly!
      All these idiots are swinging for the fences with their identity politics, or trying to blame all police for this one guy’s actions. It’s the same arguments racists make when generalizing an entire race.

  12. When the state cracks down on illegal immigration, then those without documents will hide in the shadows. They will be prey for predators like this rapey cop, who know that the victims likely won’t report the crimes against them, for fear of being punished for their own illegal behavior.

    It is the *exact same phenomenon* that takes place with the War on Drugs, such as with crimes against the small-time drug dealers. The guy selling bags of weed isn’t going to go to the cops if he is robbed, and so the thief gets away with the crime.

    Yet one more parallel between Drug Prohibition and Labor Prohibition.

    1. When the state cracks down on illegal immigration, then those without documents will hide in the shadows.

      This was a police officer, not an ICE agent. Anybody guilty of driving without a license and insurance constitutes being ‘undocumented’ in this context.

      Weird how your narrative jumps to labor prohibition and drug prohibition while the same set of laws and predatory enforcement would/could/does cause a native mother to be separated from her child and taken to jail.

      It’s almost like you don’t really oppose the laws as much as favor some of the people they get applied to.

      1. This was a police officer, not an ICE agent.

        A vital distinction so far unnoticed by everyone else! Thank God Almighty we have someone alert here!

        1. “A vital distinction”

          It isn’t? They have significantly different missions, responsibilities, and powers.

          1. But, the similarities are more important:

            They are both PIGS.

            They both feed at the public trough.

            Neither makes or produces anything upon a voluntary, consensual basis.

            They are red, through and through.

            1. “But, the similarities are more important:”

              In this context regarding this case?

              I disagree with that.

              The rest is completely accurate.

              1. Yep, good point Tulpa.

        2. A vital distinction so far unnoticed by everyone else!

          I didn’t really think the distinction was that vital or unnoticed.

          I just assumed everyone would be opposed to actual rape-rape whether the perpetrator was an ICE agent, a police officer, or just a human and whether the victim was a citizen, documented immigrant, or none of the above.

          Apparently, I was wrong.

  13. Another spirited meeting of Libertarians For Cruel, Bigoted, Authoritarian Immigration Practices and Policies.

    Carry on, faux libertarian clingers . . .

    1. I think the thing I like most about this/these sorts of threads is that it rather vividly highlights who’s opposed to police vs. policing vs. abuse of power specifically, who’s selectively in favor of hate crime laws, and who among us include the likes of Rev. Kirkland and chemjeff in like-minded company.

      1. Do you oppose authoritarian, cruel, bigoted immigration policies and practices?

        1. I oppose forcible rape without regard to immigration policy.

  14. The alleged victim is allegedly,/b> an undocumented immigrant.

    Don’t fight it, just let this happen.

  15. Prince George’s County

    1. Fucking squirrels.

      Anyway – are those guys the epicenter for the police misconduct in this country or are they just spectacularly bad at keeping it out of the news?

  16. Fortunately, it doesn’t sound like his bosses are trying to cover up the investigation, as evidenced by the promptness with which he was arrested, charged and suspended.

    Which probably means they have some really damning evidence. So much so that they can’t ignore it or try to sweep it under the rug.

  17. I have no doubt that this cop will have no problem finding a job with the NYPD

  18. “Undocumented Immigrant” is the New Reason Stylesheet, eh?

    How wonderfully newspeak of y’all.

    Will it be “Aspiring Citizen” next, maybe?

    (Ref above, the cop in question should be independently investigated, and if guilty sent to prison for maximum sentence for the crime, because the authority and power of the job call for harsh punishment when abused.

    And if the department is covering for him, people should lose careers and possibly see Federal legal intervention.

    Lady doesn’t deserve anything like that sort of behavior for being here “undocumentedly”, no.

    But equally, she should get deported.

    Then let back in with a green card, per my border security plan: Secure the border and give out lots and lots of green cards to the same people who’re sneaking in now, minus the actual felon deportation types.)

  19. Sounds like Maklin might want to contact Daniel Holtzclaw, who has some experience in these matters. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Holtzclaw)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.