MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Cops Claim Teen Consented to Sex in Their Custody, Point Prosecutors to Her 'Provocative' Selfies

Repeat after me, NYPD: Instagram is not consent.

October protest against NYPD in Coney Island@ashagony/TwitterAfter their DNA was found on 18-year-old "Anna Chambers" in September, the two Brooklyn narcotics officers who she accused of raping her admitted to sex with the young woman. But they claimed the contact—which occured after police pulled over Chambers on a traffic stop, found loose prescription pills in her bag, and took her into their custody—was consensual. Now they're trying to discredit her by pointing prosecutors to her "provocative" social-media selfies and to tweets where she lashes out at someone accusing her of lying.

The officers, Richard Hall and Eddie Martins, are currently on modified duty with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) as the investigation continues.

The teenager claims Hall and Martins took her into their van in handcuffs and told her they would let her go if she had sex with them. "There was zero consent," her lawyer, Michael David, told The New York Post. "The cops were over 6 feet tall. She's very petite, like 5-2 and maybe 100 pounds. There's nothing she could do."

A male friend in the car with Chambers when she was pulled over said the Prozac and Klonopin police found in were his, but police let him go. "They said she's not allowed to have them outside the bottle, they're a controlled substance, and she has to go to the precinct," he told the Post. "I saw them put her in cuffs." At the station a half-hour or so later, however, the friend was told Chambers had not been brought in. He found her back at the car, drove her home, and then went with her and her mother to the hospital.

Chambers alleges that one of the officers forced sexual intercourse on her and the other made her perform oral sex on him. She is suing the city for damages.

Meanwhile, Hall and Martins have been trying the oldest trick in the predators' book: claiming she was asking for it. In a letter to the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office, the men's lawyers highlighted "provocative" selfies Chambers had posted on Instagram and Twitter. They also brought up a recent Twitter argument with someone accusing her of lying, in which Chambers retorted that she hoped the doubter's "mommy gets gang raped."

The lawyers suggested that this was "unprecedented" behavior "for a depressed victim of a vicious rape."

It should go without saying, but people handle trauma in different ways and there's no "right" way to be a rape victim. It also doesn't seem to terribly bizarre or "unprecedented" that a victim might push back (even–gasp!—impolitely) at people accusing her of lying, especially when an onslaught of social-media randos are bullying them. And to suggest there's something pathological about an 18-year-old posting selfies is simply absurd. Repeat after me, NYPD: Instagram content is not consent.

​"Without commenting on this ongoing investigation, defense counsel's characterization of how a rape victim should behave is inaccurate, inappropriate and demeaning," the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office responded to the officers' letter in a statement.

The bottom line is that Chambers was picked up by on-duty police officers and, by their own admission, was detained in their custody at the time the sexual activity occurred. As such it cannot be consensual, even if no direct force was used and even if Chambers seemed to go along with it. As an armed agent of the state with the power to arrest people and ruin their lives, you don't get to claim you seduced or were seduced by someone in your custody.

People will argue that Chambers and those in similar situations could have said no but just didn't want to be arrested. But how does she know that? These are powerful men with weapons who have her alone. What if resisting only makes them angry? They might sexually assault her anyway. They might get violent. They might tell who-knows-what to colleagues back at the station.

They have the ability to abduct, cage, and steal from you, and those are just the legal options. Doing what they ask is a survival tactic, the same as it would be if any non-cop with a gun was involved. And no matter how "provocative" you are on social media before or afterward.

Photo Credit: @annaaachambers/Twitter

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.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Shreek approves.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    These cops also agreed to donate to Reason, but never did.

  • ImanAzol||

    I can't believe what sluts those cops are.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Its called sex with those in custody and like statutory rape, there are very few defenses. The person in your custody cannot consent to sex since you have control over their movements and are supposed to protect them.

    As we see from reports of violence against citizens by police, there are police who want to be police to rape and murder citizens after supposed minor infractions of the law.

  • the other Jim||

    And shoot dogs. Seems like a lot of cops love to shoot dogs that pose no danger to anyone. Because they are sick fucks, apparently.

  • ||

    And shoot other people's dogs. Seems like a lot of cops love to shoot other people's dogs that pose no danger to anyone. Because they are sick fucks, apparently.

    FTFY

  • Hugh Akston||

    Can't consent in handcuffs

    There's really not much more to say.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Hugh doesn't believe in safe words.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Chipper's safe word is "Eyjafjallajökull," and he hopes to one day be able to use it.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    I hope to be able to use it ironically some day.

  • Joe Blowski||

    strangely today i saw a person wearing a shirt that read 'Eyjafjallajökull.'

  • EscherEnigma||

    If there's reasonable fear of force following the use of a "safe word", then it's not really a "safe word", is it?

  • Insert clever name||

    Exactly. It's consent first, then handcuffs.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    It's totally legit as long as the cops didn't know that they didn't have consent.

  • Rhywun||

    They just need to pinky-swear that they'll never do it again before their next promotion.

  • sarcasmic||

    What if resisting only makes them angry? They might sexually assault her anyway. They might get violent.

    They're cops. Not getting violent when you fail to obey is one of the few things that can actually get them fired.

    Doing what they ask is a survival tactic, the same as it would be if any non-cop with a gun was involved.

    Major difference: the non-cop might be bluffing.

  • Cy||

    So... What's it going to take for everyone to stop supporting the 'thin blue line?' How blatant does their disregard for everyone's rights have to be?

    Non-elected, Judge backed, politician backed, militarized, unionized thugs with unlimited power are the problem. Not society. Not 100 lbs girls. Not (insert race). Not drugs.

  • sarcasmic||

    She deserved it. They cops said so.

  • Mitsima||

    "... Judge backed, politician backed ... unionized ..."

    And there is your answer. Bad cops would be so much easier to deal with without all the unaccountable top cover. When corrupt judges & prosecutors start going to jail then po-po will get all Sheriff Andy again.

  • MJBinAL||

    I HAVE known some good cops. Unfortunately, none of them are still cops. They left "law enforcement" and got regular jobs, for a variety of reasons.

  • Mitsima||

    Ditto. As a matter of fact, an old girlfriend of mine was a cop who became a special needs teacher. Apparently, criminals and police chiefs are too difficult to deal with.

  • Dizzle||

    While i get the outrage and think it's highly deserved in this case, let's not pretend all cops are some boogeyman. I've lived in shitty neighborhoods and the cops are the last thing you worry about. Drugs and the violence associated are much greater day to day concern. My business wasn't put on lock down 3 times in 2 years because it was cops shooting down the street.

  • L.G. Balzac||

    I am pretty sure that was 3 points before the goal posts moved

  • ImanAzol||

    There's good cops. Like those good members of the Mob who just keep the books and don't personally break legs.

  • juris imprudent||

    Way to go NYPD In convincing the public of your integrity when it comes to handling sexual assault cases!

  • Hugh Akston||

    It's a continuing mystery as to why rape activists want sexual assault cases to be adjudicated by campus star chambers instead of cops and courts.

  • EscherEnigma||

    This.

    As shitty as campuses are at dealing with this shit, the reason folks ask them to is because the courts are often worse. Creates a perverse incentive to seek justice elsewhere.

  • <Unpastable>||

    WTF? This isn't remotely comparable to campus rape stuff.

    If a college student accused a city cop of rape, the university wouldn't have any ability to impose punishment.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    But I have it on good authority that "In New York City, sexually based offenses are considered especially heinous..."

  • Insert clever name||

    You mean like when someone plays too many scratchy lotteries?

  • ||

    Agreed. Making this a PR thing is not acceptable.

  • Aloysious||

    The officers, Richard Hall and Eddie Martins, are currently on modified duty with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) as the investigation continues.

    I can't help but notice the difference in treatment between female teachers accused of engaging in sexual behavior with students, and police officers accused of straight out rape.

  • sarcasmic||

    Better unions.

  • Cy||

    Because society will immediately fall into absolute chaos without the po-po! It'll be like the purge! Right?!?! RIGHT!!!!??? We NEED THEM! They don't need us!

    Did I do that right?

  • KDN||

    In NYC? There is no difference. Teachers get rubber rooms, police get desk duty. Both continue to go to the office and get paid, but neither is interacting with the public.

    The teachers that get fired after being caught are from the suburbs or flyover states.

  • Dadlobby||

    It's wrong any way you look at it, unless the sexes were reversed, then it would be abuse excuse "he wanted it". It's not hard to imagine if it was female cops and a male arrestee that we would hear the "lucky stud" remarks. It's also not hard to imagine the cops were being propositioned with an exchange of sex for release (Even a fat old, now retired, cop like me used to get those) but what amazes me is that they were so gullible to think it would work out OK. One would think men would be smart enough to recognize a woman offering a BJ for favors just might look to her financial future by singing like a canary, portraying them as big bad wolves and her the innocent victim. I'm sure it will be a 7 figure settlement, something a male victim would never get.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    How did they think they would get away with this Devil's Threeway unscathed? If they had simply beaten or shot her, maybe.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    "How did they think they would get away with this Devil's Threeway unscathed?"

    In a word:history.

  • Texasmotiv||

    Heroes.


    It says they have had their gun and badge stripped and placed on 'modified duty'. Is there any reason you wouldn't just be outright fired for having even consensual sex with a person you had arrested?

  • sarcasmic||

    Is there a policy that specifically says they may not rape handcuffed women in their custody? Huh? Is there?

  • Rhywun||

    "Was that wrong?"

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    If raping you in the back of a police car is wrong, I don't wanna be right!

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Is there any reason you wouldn't just be outright fired for having even consensual sex with a person you had arrested?

    Yes, and it's called a "collective bargaining agreement."

  • croaker||

    The solution for police unions is RICO.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Broadly speaking, the ideal is "innocent until proven guilty"; it's bad form to fire someone because they've been charged with a crime.

    That said, the specific reasons is, as Crust said, the union.

  • Zeb||

    They admitted to sex with her while she was in custody, no? That right there should be good for a firing.

  • Wizard4169||

    Like the article said, the very idea of consent was ludicrous under the circumstances. No different than having sex with someone you know to be underage or intoxicated. I agree, they should be unemployed already.

  • GamerFromJump||

    That right there should be good for a firing.

    Out of a railgun. Into the moon.

  • Bubba Jones||

    They had sex with her and then didn't jail her.

    At the very least they accepted a bribe.

  • <Unpastable>||

    Or even consensual sex while you were supposed to be working?

  • Crusty Juggler||

    which occured after police pulled over Chambers on a traffic stop, found loose prescription pills in her bag,

    Narcs are conducting traffic stops?

  • Rhywun||

    I would think that all cops are narcs.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I read "narcotics officers" I think plainclothes, and I have a problem with an unmarked car and plainclothes officers conducting traffic stops. Is radioing for a patrol car too much to ask?

  • Rhywun||

    Yeah, I didn't see that they were in fact narcs. I just thought they were regular cops who "spotted something". The post wasn't clear on how it exactly went down.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    The NYPD has hundreds of these narcotics or anti-crime plainclothes officers running around doing whatever it is they want to do, but one thing they should not do is conduct traffic stops, or at least traffic stops without calling for a marked car as backup as soon as possible.

  • KDN||

    I have a problem with an unmarked car and plainclothes officers conducting traffic stops

    Stay away from New Jersey. Pretty much SOP for local cops here.

  • Libertymike||

    Getting tough on crime means holding cops and other public sector heroes accountable to a higher standard.

    Applied here, it means making assault, battery, sexual assault, and / rape a capital crime for any public sector actor with arrest powers convicted of the same.

    Result. A much freer and safer society.

  • sarcasmic||

    I'd settle for cops being held to any standard.

  • MJBinAL||

    I'd settle for the ones like this getting wacked in their sleep.

  • tbc||

    They are held to standards. The 'conduct an internal investigation, paid leave, back at work' standard.

  • Finrod||

    I've advocated for a long time now that any crime committed by a judge, attorney, police officer, or any other officer of the court should automatically have all penalties in every situation doubled.

  • ||

    Clearly this woman is an agent of the war on cops. They were set up. Was she black? She's probably a hooker who was hired by BLM operatives to impugn the reputation of these fine upstanding police officers.

    /alt-right

  • Cy||

    How in the hell did you manage to drag Alt-right into this? You really are insane. Also, she's white and I think a natural blonde.

  • ||

    I'm just predicting what the average alt-right person would say, if she was black.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Fun! Now do what the average Saudi imam would say, if she was a transgendered paraplegic.

  • Rhywun||

    A psychotic break is an ugly thing to witness.

  • ||

    Leave the alt-right alone!!! They're people!

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Hazel, in your defense you were batshit crazy far before the alt right existed.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    So hot.

  • sarcasmic||

    "Muhammad is the servant of God and Zirs messenger".

  • ImanAzol||

    You obviously are on the far side of the Sar Chasm.

  • TW||

    The bottom line is that Chambers was picked up by on-duty police officers and, by their own admission, was detained in their custody at the time the sexual activity occurred. As such it cannot be consensual, even if no direct force was used and even if Chambers seemed to go along with it. As an armed agent of the state with the power to arrest people and ruin their lives, you don't get to claim you seduced or were seduced by someone in your custody.

    After reading through the statute, from what's been described she probably would need to prove that she was forced or threatened with force since apparently being under arrest by itself is not proof of lack of consent.

    http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/pe.....30-05.html

  • sarcasmic||

    Um... Isn't arrest an act of force?

  • perlchpr||

    I was going to go with "Being arrested makes you physically helpless".

  • GamerFromJump||

    When to physically resist is death, yeah.

  • Tony||

    What am I missing? So it's OK for cops to get their fuck on while on duty--with a perp--as long as she somehow consents (which is impossible)?

  • KDN||

    Fortunately her captors are Police, and with their intense training they can glean consent from any furtive movements and react accordingly.

  • Tony||

    Maybe if they intensely trained a bit less on donut munching their wives would want to fuck them.

  • Bubba Jones||

    They will convict her of bribing an officer.

  • MJBinAL||

    Tony,

    Mark this down as a watershed moment. You are absolutely right here.

  • Finrod||

    Time to buy a lottery ticket.

  • LarryWilson||

    You need to be donkey punched while a toilet plunger is rammed up your ass for that dumbfuck comment.

    Because the fact that your mouth is gagged and your neck is shackled to the basement floor is not really proof of lack of consent.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    That escalated quickly.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Give him a break, laws are extra scary to the illiterate.

  • <Unpastable>||

    Handcuffing is force, and the statute also says that consent is lacking when someone is physically helpless.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    "3. A person is deemed incapable of consent when he or she is:
    (a) less than seventeen years old;  or
    (b) mentally disabled;  or
    (c) mentally incapacitated;  or
    (d) physically helpless

    Police handcuff you for the sole purpose of making you "physically helpless."

  • damikesc||

    Once they hire a ventriloquist cop, all bets are off.

  • the other Jim||

    This story is yet another piece of evidence that police departments really do use IQ tests to weed out the smart applicants. Setting aside the ethics of the situation, which are horrendous...How the hell did these two idiots think they could get away with this?

    "Hey, let's gang-bang this hottie we just arrested and then let her go. If she says anything, we'll just call her in an Instagram slut."

    "Brilliant!"

  • Crusty Juggler||

    How the hell did these two idiots think they could get away with this?

    They are above the law.

  • Rhywun||

    Until I hear they're doing hard time, I will assume that they will get away it.

  • sarcasmic||

    How the hell did these two idiots think they could get away with this?

    Well, so far they have.

  • sarcasmic||

    Sadly, I bet this wasn't the first time. Nor the last.

  • the other Jim||

    Good points. I am not cynical enough.

  • Tony||

    Not only do they screen for morons, they screen for psychopaths in their psych evals. There are institutional reasons why cops are the way they are.

  • Cy||

    And if for some reason you're a sane and normal person, you'll quit within the first few years. You'll quit because of the other cops. Not because of the job.

  • sarcasmic||

    I knew two somewhat sane and normal people who quit being cops. They quit not because of the other cops, but because they didn't enjoy spreading pain and misery. But they didn't mind the company of people who do.

  • Cy||

    4 of my co-workers all quit being police officers, because of other police officers. It's easy from the outside to demand cops turn in bad cops, but it's a lot harder when you've seen the consequences of doing so first hand.

  • sarcasmic||

    That just tells me that the vast majority of cops are evil. Because if the majority of cops were good people, they wouldn't tolerate bad cops.

    The two people I knew, one was a town cop and the other a sheriff. The town cop got tired of handing out tickets to people who couldn't afford them, and the sheriff got tired of being the constant bearer of bad news in the form of subpoenas and other court documents. But both of them continued to hang out with their ex coworkers. At least that's what they told me.

  • KDN||

    It's got a pretty sweet retirement package. The normals join when they're young, do just enough not to get fired for 20 years, and retire to PA, NC, or TX on the NYC taxpayers' dime.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Can't speak to PA or NC, but you don't retire to TX. You want to retire somewhere that's more generous with Medicare.

  • MJBinAL||

    Not everywhere. Dallas did such a poor job of screening candidates they had convicted felons on the force.

  • EscherEnigma||

    How the hell did these two idiots think they could get away with this?


    "What's she going to do, call the cops?"

    Given (A) how rapes are underreported to start with, and (B) that cops are rarely prosecuted for the wrongs they do? I wouldn't be surprised if (C) they're normally right, and her making a stink about this is the exception to the rule.

    I mean, this could be their first time raping someone in their custody. Everyone has to start somewhere I suppose.

  • LarryWilson||

    Because they have no doubt time and time again.

    Just like Daniel Holtzclaw...sexually assaulted at least a dozen women before he was even investigated. It's because very often their victims think no one gives a shit about them.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    .How the hell did these two idiots think they could get away with this?

    Their union is better than yours, that's how they thought-- and will get away with this.

  • Finrod||

    Considering how many times 'because fuck you, that's why' has worked for them...

  • Tony||

    Fearing for my life, the penis was discharged.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    We already knew this about you, Tony.

  • MJBinAL||

    Hmmm, was it impounded? Sold at Sheriff's auction?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Let's say it was consensual. Are cops allowed to engage in sexual activity with the people they arrest?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Only if they are deep undercover, working a prostitution sting, or really, really want to.

  • Chipper Morning Truthjammer||

    Of course not. If therapists are not allowed to fuck their patients, even 10 years later, how do you think the power differential applies to cops and arrestees.

  • sarcasmic||

    Can you put your finger on the specific policy that says they can't?

    Because that's all that matters. The law does not apply to them. Only department policy. If they didn't violate policy, then they did nothing wrong. And that is what they truly believe.

  • Qsl||

    It also has broader ramifications, from instructors having sex with students, the whole Hollywood revelations, to even prostitution if you want to stretch enough. If it is a question of power dynamics, then no one wealthy can get involved with someone poorer, high IQ people have to use MENSA as a dating club... there are numerous ways power can be manifested.

    Bubba Jones made the point that regardless, this still counts as bribery, and that should at least stick, but the implicit categorization that station equals coercion leaves me uneasy. If they had also busted her for prostitution for offering sex, would people be praising (or at least ignoring) the cops or would it still be seen as overreach?

  • LarryWilson||

    Or as one of my cop-sucking former friends told me, when a cop tells you to do something, just do as you are told.

    But hey, if you are going to remove civil asset theft, cathartic beating of suspects, routine dog execution, and fucking teenaged girls from the list of allowable perks, then why would anyone want to become a unionized gov't employee anymore?

  • Tony||

    I don't think they do that sort of stuff over at the DMV, and teachers who do it get shitcanned. Perhaps unionization isn't the primary culprit.

  • Rhywun||

    teachers who do it get shitcanned

    No they don't, they get paid to sit around and do nothing. And unionization is the reason why.

  • sarcasmic||

    Every week there is a new story in the Daily Fail about some female teacher getting their mugshot taken for banging students.

  • Rhywun||

    Then their union isn't doing its job.

  • Tony||

    Teaching, world's easiest job. They even get summers off! $20,000 is too much of a salary, if anything.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Good teachers at private schools make far more money than that.

    ...because they are good teachers.

  • Tony||

    So the people who can't afford private school presumably need good teachers all the more. How do you propose to deal with that? Don't say vouchers, because that's socialism by another name.

  • notJoe||

    * Charter schools

    * Change the tax code to make homeschooling an option (right now your benevolent government's tax policy all but forces both parents to work)

    * Eliminate public unions -- make it possible to fire bad teachers

    * Vouchers. Socialism, smocialism, if you're going to take 40% of my earnings I'll take every opportunity I can get of controlling how that money gets spent

  • Tony||

    How is handing it over to a shady-ass long-discredit private industry having more control?

  • MJBinAL||

    Now now now Tony, no one is talking about your ass here.

  • MJBinAL||

    Tony, did you know, that if you don't like a private business, you don't HAVE to give them your business? You can give your business to someone else!

    Imagine that, crappy schools (public, private, both) that went out of business because no one would send kids there because they had other choices. My goodness, it might be not only possible, but necessary, to get rid of bad teachers ... to use teaching techniques that actually work instead of the current standardized, pretty much works for no one, techniques.

    Imagine, schools that did not focus on football stadiums, but actually taught math and science!

    The mind just boggles doesn't it?

  • EscherEnigma||

    Change the tax code to make homeschooling an option (right now your benevolent government's tax policy all but forces both parents to work)


    That's not the "tax code", that's women's liberation.

    It's simple supply and demand. Add in more workers to the labor pool, the worth of that labor goes down. Worth of labor goes down, more households that previously got by with one income now need two incomes.

    That said, the tax code actually favors single-earner households and includes many other incentives to marry and only have one spouse work. They aren't big enough incentives to counter-balance the market forces at work, but the social policy of the US, as demonstrated through it's tax code, favors single-earner married households.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    Studies show that the bottom 10% of teachers keep a student back about one half of a school year and that just getting rid of the bottom 10% would improve overall [public school] class performance by enough to move it almost 3/4 of the way to the performance of private schools.

  • MJBinAL||

    Kindly find an example of this in a major city Tony. I for one, would be eager to see it other than when a teacher manages to get on the local news.

    I agree, it COULD be done, but it has been widely documented that in most major cities, the cost of getting rid of a teacher is so high and takes so long, it is easier and cheaper to pay them to sit in the teacher's lounge and chill full time.

    Unless of course the teacher manages to get convicted of a crime and goes to jail, then of course he/she goes on paid leave! (j/k)

  • Dead inside||

    Once again the taxpayers will be on the hook for a huge and justified settlement which I hope includes therapy for the victim and her family. The cops will go on mostly unscathed and the city, the precinct and the union will downplay the incident while protecting those f'ed up cops.
    You'd think by now the powers that be would realize that it's far better to make an example of these pieces of dried human vomit to improve their image,keep the masses from rioting AND...AND...it's the RIGHT THING TO DO!!!!!!!!!!

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: Cops Claim Teen Consented to Sex in Their Custody, Point Prosecutors to Her 'Provocative' Selfies
    Repeat after me, NYPD: Instagram is not consent.

    Which is worse?
    LAPD or NYPD?
    Winner of this question gets to be beaten by the cops of their choice and raped in the county jail of their preference.

  • ImanAzol||

    Well, at least we get a choice, right?

  • MJBinAL||

    How about we shoot them all, and sort it out later?

  • ||

    Hopefully nuns can still introduce evidence that they are nuns, when litigating sex offenses. "There are no perfect victims, but there are perfect accusers. I fine to show that one wasn't asking, wrong to be shown that one was asking." - This is a general point regarding the asymmetry of believing, shielding, and manipulation.

  • Duke of url||

    A couple years ago, in Anderson Ca, ofc. Bryon Benson, a member of the multi agency DUI task force known as "Avoid the six", raped a suspect en route to jail.
    Since the elite hero raped her in a parking lot, instead of at the jail, his union lawyer argued that they could claim it was consensual.
    Even though she was under arrest and in his custody.
    The other officers that he bragged about it to, failed to report it.
    He was eventually allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and not even have to register as a sex offender.
    The task force has been known ever since as "Avoid the sex".

  • Duke of url||

    * following local outrage, he eventually caught a 'depravation of rights under color of authority', and got five years in the federal pen

  • Tyler R||

    These guys are as despicable as it gets, and I hope they get life sentences. But I caution people against thinking these two individuals represent all cops. If you already have a preconceived notion that all cops are bad, it's way too easy to hear a story like this and think it confirms that your preexisting beliefs. The truth is there are tens of thousands of officers in NYC alone, most are good. In every profession about 1 or 2 percent of people are awful. Granted, evil officers can do a lot more damage than an evil accountant, but you can find evil in every profession.

  • Duke of url||

    I agree, not all police are bad.
    It's just that those 99% make the other 1% look bad.
    And that 1%, covers for the 99%.

  • Tyler R||

    I know you are half joking. But seriously, where does your perception of what percentage of cops are bad come from? YouTube videos? The news?

    It's just like everything else... if you're looking for bad cops, you'll see them everywhere online. But if you're actually looking at data, you'll see it's actually pretty impressive how rarely they use deadly force, considering the number of officers dealing with mentally deranged and/or violent people, every day. I've changed my opinion on this topic a lot over the past few years.

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    Actually a study conducted by a national sheriff's group found half of cops witnessed misconduct from other officers and said nothing,
    When half of the cops do nothing when the other half do something wrong, 100% of police have failed us.

  • dexter||

    Lol, that kind of event is unbelievable anywhere else in the world, if this kind of shits happend once in France, there would be no cops left after.

  • MikeP2||

    "if this kind of shits happend once in France, there would be no cops left after."

    That is laughable on its face. This kind of stuff, and worse, happens all the time in France and the rest of Europe.

  • dexter||

    LOOOOL, i'm french dude, i believe i know my country and Europe better than you do.
    Maybe you want to compare statistics about unarmed civilians shotted by police in France ?
    Or maybe remember you the riots that happend in 2005 was not even because some cops kill anyone but because they chase 2 kids that try to hide themself in an electric transformer and died.

    And to finish with you (if you know how to use google trad) :
    "L'affaire Malik Oussekine est une affaire de violence policière française ayant entraîné la mort de Malik Oussekine, le 6 décembre 1986 à Paris, après une manifestation étudiante contre le projet de réforme universitaire Devaquet. À la suite de cet événement, très médiatisé, le projet de loi a été retiré et son auteur, le ministre délégué Alain Devaquet, a démissionné."
    1 death by the hand of the police => the law and the minister is removed. And that happend in 1986.
    You can't even fire cops that shot kids...

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    Sorry but if every other NYPD officer took a stand against this type of behavior then these two wouldn't still have a job.
    The problem is that the police endorse a union that negotiates contracts where two cops can admit to having sex with a custodial suspect without being fired on the spot. Why would they do this. The only reason is that, deep down, they know they just might find themselves in the same situation and wouldn't want to lose their jobs so they push for these types of protections,
    When police officers are telling us, through these contract demands, the vile behavior the know they are capable of, then we should believe them rather than pretend the are mostly decent people,

  • MikeP2||

    Entirely possible that it was consensual and that she used sex to get out of the arrest. But, that should be irrelevant. The cops had complete authority, under threat of force. Even if she was begging, there is no way legal consent can be given...it is tainted regardless. Responsible authority figures should know when to keep it in the pants. If they cant, they should have no authority, and ideally, removed from society completely.

  • Vladilyich||

    I see both of them making sergeant before this is over. This is the NYPD, after all!

  • MJBinAL||

    ^THIS^

  • Traik||

    I can very easily see how she may have been the one to suggest it and try and use her sexuality as a bribe get released... But, those cops are complete idiots no matter how it went down. As many have already said, you can't consent in handcuffs.

  • Cyto||

    People will argue that Chambers and those in similar situations could have said no but just didn't want to be arrested.

    Uh... wouldn't that be pretty much a textbook definition of rape? Extorting sexual favors is straight-up rape, isn't it?

  • MJBinAL||

    After they get through with the kabuki theater where they pretend to investigate and then hope it goes away. I sincerely hope someone adds an additional hole the these disgusting pieces of shit right in the middle of the forehead. Maybe even a couple extra holes, 9mm holes would be great.

    You would think, that cities and police forces would figure out that this crap is what is ruining them. Why is the BLM nonsense so easy for folks to believe? Because we all know that the bad cops run wild and are protected rather than thrown under the bus and run over twice as they should be. The police have no credibility, even when they are not guilty.

  • dexter||

    Where is your american dad willing to exterminate all pedophiles and pervert lurking at his daugther? Seem's he shit his pant when the rapist is a cop.

  • MikeP2||

    Most likely the cops selected their conquest based on her connections and support structure, or lack-there-of.

    It's often that we see the worst abuse directed at people who do not have the means to retaliate. Predators always know who to target, particularly when a wealth of information is available to them as LEOs.

  • Some Engineer||

    Same reason the lions target the infirm and weak in the herd.

  • Quintus Cicero||

    One of the first things I learned, when I was in law enforcement was that I was never to have any contact with anyone I had a professional interaction with while on patrol. It was considered unprofessional, and could lead to all sorts of problems in doing the job correctly. It was , also, a major conflict of interest. Those two NYC officers made numerous bad mistakes in this arrest.

  • Curt2004||

    "Those two NYC officers made numerous bad mistakes in this arrest."

    What arrest? She was never brought in. Abduction and rape were the words you're looking for.

  • Heraclitus||

    If they admitted to having sex shouldn't they be fired outright? Why the modified duties? This is as unprofessional as you can get. Even if she was begging for it and giving outright consent (which is preposterous), as professionals, they should have kept their pants on. It's really that simple. They should be fired immediately. If they can get out of rape charges that will be sad, but for f&%cks sake, they should not be getting a paycheck.

  • josh||

    Where are these cops wives and girlfriends? They should know better than to send their man to work all rapey. The solution begins in the home!

  • clarkcountycriminalcops||

    Whenever a non-compliant suspect is killed by police we invariably hear how the victim should have just done what he/she were told and they would still be alive. These comments never acknowledge that far too often this is what the cops are telling women to do.
    When every law enforcement spokesperson on every television news show tells you that the way to survive an encounter with police is to comply, comply comply how can they expect incidents like this not to happen.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online