Video: Court marshal allegedly sexually assaults woman — then has her arrested for objecting

posted at 2:01 pm on June 12, 2013 by Allahpundit

Why is a local story that’s three months old suddenly exploding online this week? I saw half a dozen people tweet this clip earlier this morning, all with the same expressions of horror and outrage, even though it was first reported in early March. I’d never seen it before myself. My half-assed theory on why it’s catching on belatedly is that someone rediscovered it last week during NSA-palooza and saw it as some kind of metaphor for the futility of protesting state abuse of the power to invade your privacy. The analogy’s not perfect — the marshal here was reportedly fired, although the fate of “multiple employees and managers” who were also under investigation remains, as far as I know, unclear — but the past two weeks have been a “libertarian moment” and this clip is very, very libertarian-friendly. Even Lindsey Graham would think twice about state power after watching it. For a moment. Reluctantly.

Exit quotation from the KLAS report that broke this story: “The I-Teams investigation shows how the internal affairs investigation is revealing much larger problems at family court. There are multiple marshals involved and allegations ranging from sexual assaults to choking a citizen in court.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Here is what they “should” have done…

Raquel Pinkbullet on June 12, 2013 at 3:01 PM

Oh, get out of here. I already said they may have had reason to search her which includes probationary search and seizure conditions.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM

I just don’t think anything else could have been done at that particular time.

JetBoy on June 12, 2013 at 3:00 PM

I think a lot could have been done, even if she didn’t have the authority to simply stop the arrest. (See my first response to you, above.)

….by Ms. Contrera’s reaction and body language—-she is more credible than the two bozos who arrested her….

Raquel Pinkbullet on June 12, 2013 at 3:01 PM

I’ve seen too many women outraged over nothing to place credibility in her reaction. And, I include women faking it, and women actually outraged by something that was nothing at all. Doesn’t make her non-credible, but it isn’t a positive in her favor, either, IMO.

GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Personally, I am more inclined to chalking this up to ignorance and bad training on part of the officer then some sort of deviancy.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM

You’re too nice.

I find your faith in Humanity somewhat refreshing.

As for me, I’ve seen too much of the rear end of Humanity and believe that most will do whatever makes them feel good, especially if they think they can get away with it. Morals are relative, bad behavior can be blamed on something or someone else, and sins can be routinely forgiven or somehow indulged through positive actions and charity.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 12, 2013 at 3:17 PM

So. What happened to the woman that was arrested, and her child?
The report is not really complete.

TerryW on June 12, 2013 at 3:18 PM

Well, it’s OK for female guards to spray, feel, etc. male prisoners, so why can’t male guards do it to female prisoners. Female reporters are allowed into men’s locker rooms whilst they shower…hey, how about a little equality here.

America needs a BIG TIME pruning!

Karmi on June 12, 2013 at 3:20 PM

the judge was distracting the girl by playing with her. but the girl did eventually realize what was going on and tried to tell the police not to take her mom away. (not that they could care less about the poor girl!!)

Sachiko on June 12, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Her mom was hysterical and crying yet the girl seemed eerily calm even when talking to the police.

jdpaz on June 12, 2013 at 3:20 PM

What if I work for myself; can I sexually harass freely without punishment?

gekkobear on June 12, 2013 at 3:05 PM

Ummmmm. If you work for yourself and sexually harass…… You are telling yourself not to touch yourself like that?

If you wonder how the GErmans could have allowed Hitler’s madness, just take a look at the judge turning away.

PattyJ on June 12, 2013 at 3:11 PM

When anyone who voted for Obama (especially twice) asks that age-old question about NAZI Germany, “How could they let that happen?” I look at them and reply, “You are they.”

GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Well, it’s OK for female guards to spray, feel, etc. male prisoners, so why can’t male guards do it to female prisoners. Female reporters are allowed into men’s locker rooms whilst they shower…hey, how about a little equality here.

America needs a BIG TIME pruning!

Karmi on June 12, 2013 at 3:20 PM

She wasn’t a prisoner. Don’t you have some pearls to clutch?

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM

You don’t have to be a “highly trained professional authority” to know that her stuff and her person being searched while appearing in court is not normal procedure. She wasn’t even defending herself against any kind of complaint, not so much as a parking ticket!

You can be sure officer Frisky Hands has done this many times before and gotten away with it.

The judge should be recalled, the bailiff should be fired, and this “officer” should be in jail for misusing his authority. Another thing to ask is what, if any, articulable cause did he have for searching her or her belongings in the first place? She could probably sue for a violation of her Fourth Amendment rights alone.

However, this does show the upside of video surveillance in public places. If not for this video, probably nothing would have been done whatsoever.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 12, 2013 at 2:35 PM

There’s an awful lot we don’t know about this incident, but one thing we can be sure of: this isn’t the first time Officer Handsy has taken advantage of his position. Which clearly means he expected to get away with it.

I don’t know if the court marshall (weird title) corrupted the hearing master, or vice versa, but the hearing master was obviously trying to distract the child so there wouldn’t be a scene.

I wonder how long the woman was under arrest? If the child had to be in state custody even overnight, then the court system should pay through their nose.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM

I’ve seen too many women outraged over nothing to place credibility in her reaction. And, I include women faking it, and women actually outraged by something that was nothing at all. Doesn’t make her non-credible, but it isn’t a positive in her favor, either, IMO.

GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM

that doesn’t matter. i can make the same statement about guys- there have been a lot of incidents where guys sexually harass or assault women and then they pretend they are innocent. so the perv in this case had no credibility either.

Oh, get out of here. I already said they may have had reason to search her which includes probationary search and seizure conditions.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM

no, there was no reason. the drug search was just an excuse for the perv to touch her.

Sachiko on June 12, 2013 at 3:25 PM

That poor little girl will probably suffer from PTSD the rest of her life after that slimy court official pulls her away from her mother.

I would not trust my 2 year old with him. *shivers*

HellCat on June 12, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Personally, I am more inclined to chalking this up to ignorance and bad training on part of the officer then some sort of deviancy.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM

WHAT!?

Ok, you (male) feel the need to search a Female…there is no emergency, no ticking bomb…do you:
1) Call a female bailiff for the search; or
2) Go to a private area and do it yourself?-bearing in mind, that by doing so you open yourself up to just such charges of sexual misconduct.

Officer “Friendly” chose 2)…really Blake do you think Officer Friendly was that foolish…Occam’s Razor says, as other posit, that this was not the first time Officer Friendly had decided to cop a feel and get a look at those really cute T!ts….under the guise of his authority.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:28 PM

Bureaucrats on a power trip. The judge should have been canned too.

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 2:17 PM

..with all due respect to you and the others, the woman in the robes is ONLY a master and has less significance that a judge would. That woman — the master — should have been disciplined and fired ON THE SPOT.

Those [deluded souls] here asserting that the woman should have been searched may be correct BUT she should have been searched by a marshal-ette or at least have had a woman witness present instead of being alone in the room with the sleazy, drooling, limp-tooled horndog with the beer belly.

Additionally, he should not only have been fired, he should have been publicly neutered with an old, rusty Gillette Blue Blade and had his organs presented to him in Hellman’s mayonnaise jar.

The War Planner on June 12, 2013 at 3:28 PM

I think the judge is really a court Master. Not a judge. Could be why she took no action to override the marshals. Still, this is very upsetting.

jake49 on June 12, 2013 at 3:29 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:28 PM

A refreshing attitude, I must say.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM

This is metaphorically every single one of us. Since when does a policeman’s word mean more than a citizens? I wonder how many times a perp is right when he says, “that cop is lying!” I bet it’s a lot higher than never as the court would have us believe. Guilty until proven innocent. If the cop doesn’t have any proof that her allegations never happened, he should have (listened to the woman and) had a witness before he touched her.

RedManBlueState on June 12, 2013 at 3:31 PM

The older I get, the less respectful I become of those that are supposed to be on our side. I no longer give the benefit of the doubt to judges, prosecutors, or cops.

Mark1971 on June 12, 2013 at 2:35 PM

True story. I used to give them the benefit of the doubt as well. But now, I regard them all with suspicion. They have to earn my trust, they no longer get de facto trust or respect based solely upon the office they occupy or the badge they wear.

dczombie on June 12, 2013 at 3:32 PM

The marshals’ need more training and guidance as to when they can/cannot search people and the extent of the search.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Sorry, but that’s an easy way out for too many agencies – even the IRS is pleading that they need to rewrite the policies regarding conferences and scrutinizing of selective groups. The “we didn’t know” or “it wasn’t clear” excuse is unacceptable.

This guy is a Marshal, assigned to the court. As such it’s incumbent upon him to know his job – what he can and can’t do. To suggest that his training would be so deficient as to leave him this clueless is beyond the pale. No, I think the Marshal fully knew what he was doing – and he got caught.

Hill60 on June 12, 2013 at 3:32 PM

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM

I think he was being sarcastic. But I’m not certain.

GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:34 PM

To: Blake on June 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM & GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM and all the other jerks.

It is a VIDEO. Watch it. It is clear that something terribly wrong is taking place. The young mother WON her case.

All she and other women want is a court appointed FEMALE to do the searches.

HellCat on June 12, 2013 at 3:36 PM

Why did the lady have to make a scene? Just take the pat down and chalk it up to life. The officer needed a distraction as the court gig is not as desirable as cracking heads in a dark alley.

arnold ziffel on June 12, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Not only one but two cops here were deficient, and I’m thinking the blimpie older one has been around long enough to know better, or should know better by now.

Sure this is “only” illegal harassment of a female citizen, but what if he had beaten the woman unconscious, would it still be a simple training issue? These people have power over others, they should know the rules intimately.

Bishop on June 12, 2013 at 3:38 PM

I’m shocked that a male officer would be allowed to search a female. That judge was a piece of work.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 3:38 PM

The marshal, who was fired months later (and of course is appealing his termination), claimed he searched her because she acted as if she was on drugs. Yet she passed all field sobriety tests and drug tests after she was arrested.

mbs on June 12, 2013 at 3:39 PM

The marshals’ need more training and guidance as to when they can/cannot search people and the extent of the search.

Blake on June 12, 2013 at 2:53 PM

Puh-leeeeeze, can you think of ANY organization that doesn’t have training on “Sexual Harassment?” Stop covering for this guy. My priest has rules, no one is EVER in a closed room with a child, UNLESS there are two people present….”Reconciliation” with children occurs in an open room…Priests or adults are NEVER alone with children, now…

But, the Bailiffs/Marshall’s they just “forgot” that searching women brings with it the risk of being accused of “groping/sexual misconduct” or they never got the training…

Puh-leeze, Officer “Show Me Your T!TS” knew what he was doing and just didn’t expect to get any push-back.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:39 PM

arnold ziffel on June 12, 2013 at 3:37 PM

That was SO wrong, but still wicked funny….

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:41 PM

I bet the TSA would like this deal.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:39 PM

Well said. This crap with LEOs has gotten worse, not better, and none of the feel-good human resources milquetoast solutions are fixing the attitudes of these departments.

Wonder what would happen if we got rid of the police unions?

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 3:43 PM

Wonder what would happen if we got rid of the police unions?

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 3:43 PM

Future retirement obligations would be much less….

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:45 PM

To: Blake on June 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM & GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:15 PM and all the other jerks.

HellCat on June 12, 2013 at 3:36 PM

You need to bone up on your reading comprehension, hun. You obviously don’t have a clue what I’m talking about.

GWB on June 12, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Future retirement obligations would be much less….

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:45 PM

I wonder if that uncertainty might make them think twice about their conduct.

Though, personally, I think fear of vigilantism might be even more effective.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 3:46 PM

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Nor or the players in a men’s locker rooms…

(BTW, quit flirting with me, I’m not gay.)

Karmi on June 12, 2013 at 3:50 PM

If Bill Clinton doesn’t get the marshall job, A Weiner says, he is throwing his name in the hat…Menendez says he has seniority though

LaRepublican on June 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Menendez says he has seniority though

LaRepublican on June 12, 2013 at 3:52 PM

I don’t think so; the victim is way above the age of consent…Menendez doesn’t like them that old.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:54 PM

Guys, I believe Blake works extensively with law enforcement and his experiences are mostly positive.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Rape culture rears its ugly head again and again.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

his experiences are mostly positive.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Mine have been nothing but POSITIVE as well…BUT, that doesn’t mean I can’t call it like I see it.

Every Peace officer I’ve dealt with has been courteous and professional, but that doesn’t mean I can just over-look or make excuses for bad behavior.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Wonder if the right will start to think more about quietly supporting Stop n Frisk. The rise of libertarianism is kind of exciting!

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:01 PM

Rape culture rears its ugly head again and again.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

In a very DEMOCRATIC area…of course, really all she had to do was poop, pee or vomit and this could have all been so quickly sorted out.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:02 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Well, he did say they needed more training. I may not always agree with him but I would want Blake on my side in a fight.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:03 PM

HellCat on June 12, 2013 at 3:36 PM

I wanted to slap the stupid off that woman in the black robes.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:06 PM

America…how far you have fallen from grace…

PatriotRider on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

In a very DEMOCRATIC area…of course, really all she had to do was poop, pee or vomit and this could have all been so quickly sorted out.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:02 PM

Oh rape is partisan and limited to Democrats? Like….why? What does that kind of partisanship get you?

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Well, he did say they needed more training. I may not always agree with him but I would want Blake on my side in a fight.

OK, and I’m just telling you…if the bailiff’s haven’t been taught by now OR FIGURED OUT ON THEIR OWN, that searchng woman needs to be done by females, UNLESS there is an emergency, then there’s not much we can do for this organization.

Do you have to inform your Significant Other, that having sex with person’s other than you is kind of frowned upon? If it happens, can your SO say, “Oh I never received that training.” Will that excuse fly with you?

Blake can be as nice a person as s/he can be, but in this case s/he is dreadfully blind…and it’s not attack on “Blake.”

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Oh rape is partisan and limited to Democrats? Like….why? What does that kind of partisanship get you?

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Because, as far as I can tell, The “Rape Culture” is a partisan, Progressive term…usually reserved for those to the Right of Attila the Hun. I’m just pre-empting your next move to bash the “usual suspects.”

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Does a judge have the authority to tell the court officer not to cuff this woman? Serious question…I mean, I don’t know. The alleged sexual assault took place in another room.

JetBoy on June 12, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Absolutely. The judge has complete control of the courtroom and everyone in it. Period.

This woman is a commissioner, appointed by the court to hear minor matters.

There are about 50 elected judges in that district. No doubt the court marshal jobs and the court commissioner jobs are political plums. In this case, the marshal may have had more political clout than the commissioner. That might explain her reluctance to intervene, although it certainly doesn’t justify it.

As far as I can tell, the woman is still on the bench and hearing cases. I say as far as I can tell because NO ONE who works at the courts that I called (4 different places) admitted knowing anything about this case or this commissioner. (The administrator for the chief judge is supposedly looking into it ans will get back to me!!) But I was able to find a current listing for her office by prodding an otherwise completely unhelpful person to just check her county office phone list.

I have never seen anything like this video in my life. Just sickening. If this woman is still on the bench, there are political reasons, and that court system has some very serious problems.

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 4:10 PM

This Hearing Master specializes in domestic violence cases:
Patricia Doninger

itsacookbook on June 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Wonder if the right will start to think more about quietly supporting Stop n Frisk. The rise of libertarianism is kind of exciting!

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:01 PM

A lot of us on the right have been making noise about this with regards to lawfully openly carrying firearms. All your people wouldn’t even pay attention because, according to them, gun rights aren’t as important as other ones. Your people better get that misconception cleared up soon, if you value any liberty whatsoever.

I don’t care who you like to sleep with, what color your skin is, or what your stupid ideas on economics are. Get ready to put that stupid crap aside and worry about having the right to air those opinions without being punished for them. We were right. Tyranny is around the corner. Time to stop snickering and start thinking, because the inside of your head is the only private place left.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Anyone else hear those squealing noises?

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Rape culture rears its ugly head again and again.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

Just what the heck does that even mean?

The “Marshal” needs more than just being fired from his job, and that “Master” needs never to sit behind a bench ever again. I hope the victim Ms. Contrera sues the living daylights out of that court.

Disgusting Vermin is too nice of a description for them but I like posting here so I’ll leave it as that.

D-fusit on June 12, 2013 at 4:15 PM

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Well said.

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Conclusion after reading this thread:

Blake is trash or just has his head in the sand.

fossten on June 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I know, I’m not sticking up for the officers, there is no way they thought this was okay. What I find really remarkable is how the other policeman and the “master” just sat there. They had to know that arresting her was b.s. and still one of them blindly did his bidding and the other willfully ignored what was going on it what I assume she considers her courtroom. How does this creep get to make all the calls?

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:22 PM

fossten on June 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM

He’s not trash but when it comes to law enforcement workers your second choice is probably correct.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM

fossten on June 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM

He’s always given the benefit of the doubt to law enforcement over citizens.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Hope that judge got removed too, disgusting people.

clearbluesky on June 12, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Wonder if the right will…
The rise of libertarianism is kind of exciting!
 
libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:01 PM

 
Posted by the guy who recently voted and willingly supported both the administration’s exponential increases in domestic spying:
 
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/05/report-nsa-collecting-daily-phone-logs-of-millions-of-american-verizon-customers/comment-page-3/#comment-7062201
 
and supports the same administration’s direct attack on black wealth/financial well-being (more bizarre considering the source, btw):
 
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/11/last-best-chance-to-stop-the-gang-of-eight-bill-obamas-starting-to-get-involved-in-immigration-reform-again/comment-page-4/#comment-7079252
 

Wonder if the right will…

 
Nicely done, professor.
 
(Glad to see you’re okay, btw. We worry each time you flee the difficult threads.)

rogerb on June 12, 2013 at 4:27 PM

That’s just it…what the judge witnessed in the courtroom was this woman claiming alleged sexual assault…that happened away from the judge and the courtroom. I’m not sure she could have done anything to keep the officer from cuffing and arresting her.

JetBoy on June 12, 2013 at 2:37 PM

She, the Hearing Master, could have told everybody to step-back and sit-down and wait until some external police officers could be brought-in to take statements from the accuser and the accused. Getting a third-party to interview those involved is pretty basic stuff.

Allowing the accused to bully and arrest the accuser in a situation which is not dangerous to life and in which there are other options, is an elementary travesty of justice. A judge, of all people, ought to recognise injustice when they see it.

Even if she didn’t have the power to stop the arrest she could have contacted a more senior police officer to express her disquiet about the circumstances of the arrest. She could also have filed an internal report to note that having a man search a woman in a private room was bound to lead to trouble of some sort. This is the sort of elementary legal, moral and practical sense one would expect every judge to have.

YiZhangZhe on June 12, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:22 PM

As I said above, both the commissioner and the court marshal probably hold their jobs through political connections. Those are political plum positions that are appointed by the court (presumably the prerogative of the chief judge). One conceivable explanation is that the accused officer actually had better political connections than the commissioner, and she had no intention of crossing him.

But she is either totally unfit to sit on the bench, or she is corrupt and totally unfit. I’m going with #2 as the least hypothesis until I see more evidence.

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:22 PM

And so, Blake is blind, because the answer is CLEAR, but s/he doesn’t want to grasp it….it wasn’t LACK OF TRAINING.

It was ABUSE OF AUTHORITY, and the “everyone else” like Milgram’s 37 or the people in Stalin’s Russia or Hitler’s Germany decided it was easier to do nothing than get involved with “Authority.”

Why in deed did the officers and “judge” act as they did? Well Occam’s Razor keeps saying, “Because that’s just how we ‘roll’ in this court.”

Now, Blake can have as good a relationship with LE as s/he wants, but that doesn’t me, you, I or Blake ought to be blind to the very obvious injustice here, and to understand that it wasn’t poor training, not 25 years AFTER Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas…and 25 years of “Workplace Harassment” law suits and training, 25 yeras of corporate “Zero Tolerance” Standards for workplace harassment.

It wasn’t IGNORACE, it was a CHOICE…

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Well, it’s OK for female guards to spray, feel, etc. male prisoners, so why can’t male guards do it to female prisoners. Female reporters are allowed into men’s locker rooms whilst they shower…hey, how about a little equality here.

America needs a BIG TIME pruning!

Karmi on June 12, 2013 at 3:20 PM

I would think that the term ‘misogynist’ applies to people like you…

zoyclem on June 12, 2013 at 4:31 PM

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Corrupt, stupid or related to someone, I hope that the video will be too much for any of them to withstand. One of the newsfolks said that the master/judge is under investigation.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:39 PM

The marshal was fired? Are you kidding? The judge should be fired for ignoring the lady, and the marshal should be arrested if the internal investigation showed that he was guilty of what he was being accused of.

Stoic Patriot on June 12, 2013 at 4:41 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 4:29 PM

The fact that he isn’t still arguing says more than you know. I know he’s wrong about this, I just hate to see him labeled as a misogynist jerk.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 4:44 PM

rape culture=democrats.

done and done.

tom daschle concerned on June 12, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Maybe the cop and judge could get jobs with the IRS.

JellyToast on June 12, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Rape culture rears its ugly head again and again.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM

This isn’t an issue of rape culture. This is an issue of government employees abusing their power. There’s been a lot of that going around lately.

blink on June 12, 2013 at 4:35 PM

The troll should put some ice on that.

CurtZHP on June 12, 2013 at 4:55 PM

This was so incredibly hard to watch. I never ever could have envisioned something like that happening in America.

That poor woman! And with her child right there in front of her! In a court no less.. with the judge just sitting there with her back turned…. basically held hostage and threatened by the very people who are suppose to uphold the law.

It boggles the mind. If they hadn’t been stopped now.. in a couple years they would be raping women right in the court room!

JellyToast on June 12, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Does a judge have the authority to tell the court officer not to cuff this woman?

The judge could have ordered the marshal to O.R. her.

myiq2xu on June 12, 2013 at 5:10 PM

The judge could have ordered the marshal to O.R. her.

myiq2xu on June 12, 2013 at 5:10 PM

For the benefit of ignoramuses such as myself, please explain your acronyms. What does O.R. signify in this situation/context?

YiZhangZhe on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

My question is: Why aren’t enough liberal politicians objecting to stop and frisk?

When have liberals ever opposed state violence against people of color. Liberals are marginally good at opposing the violence of private citizens or mobs, but when it comes to the violence of the state they tend to be quite adept at using it against people of color. This is what “hate crime” law does. It pathologizes violence, locates its source as exclusively within the body of a “sick” individual, instead of recognizing it as an endemic part of state formation.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

Liberals are marginally good at opposing the violence of private citizens or mobs, but when it comes to the violence of the state they tend to be quite adept at using it against people of color.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

If you’re unable to admit that the state doesn’t just persecute people with your level of melanin, then you’re helping to distract from the threat we all face.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 5:20 PM

YiZhangZhe on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

OR = Own Recognizance, i.e. released without posting a surety or bond.

But the judge controls the courtroom completely. Any competent judge would know that there is no crime of making false allegations against an officer. She witnessed in real time the intimidation and false arrest of a citizen and she did nothing. She ignored the very serous allegations of multiple felonies committed by the officer whom she then permitted to commit further felonies in her courtroom and in her presence.

I don’t have the words to express my disgust and my contempt. Just sickening.

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 5:25 PM

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

And by the way, who the f**k came up with “people of color”? Exactly how many people do you know whose skin has no color? Are there clear people walking around that I don’t notice because I can see through them?

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 5:28 PM

Liberals are marginally good at opposing the violence of private citizens or mobs, but when it comes to the violence of the state they tend to be quite adept at using it against people of color.

The problem I have with that is ‘color’, because it isn’t about ‘color’ but, rather, about ‘tribe’ or difference. Perhaps often ‘us and them’ do happen to have different pigmentations, but so long as ‘us and them’ can be distinguished skin color difference is unimportant and merely coincidental.

This is what “hate crime” law does. It pathologizes violence, locates its source as exclusively within the body of a “sick” individual, instead of recognizing it as an endemic part of state formation.

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 5:16 PM

Hate crime law is wrong for several reasons. However I think the problem is not the state, as such, but that any institution can become another ‘us’ against the ‘them’ of everybody else. I’ve seen it in businesses (the ‘us’ of employees against the ‘them’ of owners), in hospitals (‘us’ medical staff and ‘them’ patients), and with police officers.

This is again why I object to you singling-out ‘color’, because the violence with in respect of ‘color’ is a merely one form of expression of the problem of cliques or co-worker-tribes; it also leads to laws like hate laws that are unjust and that miss the point.

To me the behaviour of the court workers seemed very much those of an ‘us’ closing ranks against ‘them’ (or her, in this instance).

YiZhangZhe on June 12, 2013 at 5:39 PM

But the judge controls the courtroom completely. Any competent judge would know that there is no crime of making false allegations against an officer. She witnessed in real time the intimidation and false arrest of a citizen and she did nothing. She ignored the very serous allegations of multiple felonies committed by the officer whom she then permitted to commit further felonies in her courtroom and in her presence.
I don’t have the words to express my disgust and my contempt. Just sickening.
novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 5:25 PM

Absolutely. I hope the court-cop thug and the Im-just-a-bystander-judge are run through the wringer for this. Shameful.

whatcat on June 12, 2013 at 5:41 PM

OR = Own Recognizance, i.e. released without posting a surety or bond.

Thank you.

I don’t have the words to express my disgust and my contempt. Just sickening.

novaculus on June 12, 2013 at 5:25 PM

That video was pretty hard to watch. However I’m fascinated to discover that watching a person with some authority and power (the court Hearing Master) ignore the obvious distress of someone who is obviously being bullied, affects me more strongly than do videos showing violent misdeeds or catastrophes.

YiZhangZhe on June 12, 2013 at 5:49 PM

Luckily I’m NOT labeling “Blake” a “Misogynist jerk” merely blind to the reality of this tape and the incident.

As I posted, if, after 25 years, the bailiffs “need training” in the dangers of searching women in private without a female or another officer present, well I doubt they CAN be trained……

It’s just easier to say, it wasn’t lack of training, it was lack of RESTRAINT….

Had it been an issue of a package on the front seat of the car, versus a package in the trunk of the car…THEN it’s a matter of training, because the law or the court’s interpretation of the law change thru time….

But, I don’t think you need a whole lot of training to know that frisking a woman, by yourself, in a closed room, AS A MAN, is fraught with peril and the fact that this bailiff/marshal CHOSE to do so and then proceeded to arrest the person when they complained pretty much says, HE MADE A BAD CHOICE, not that he was ill-trained.

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 6:00 PM

Every judge or magistrate has control over his or her courtroom. Period. They are like kings or queens. I used to work in a little court, and believe me I never saw a judge turn away from an abuse of power like that. Never even saw anyone try it! So she has been intimidated or loosey goosey for a while.

PattyJ on June 12, 2013 at 6:18 PM

zoyclem on June 12, 2013 at 4:31 PM

And misandrist to people like you…

Karmi on June 12, 2013 at 6:18 PM

Those 3 people in authority in that room need tar, feathers, and an armed escort out of town. This is police brutality, corruption and tyranny. This kind of abuse clearly destroys the authority of this court to act in an official capacity.

And these people want our guns? How about bayonet end first?

And FU NSA.

Spartacus on June 12, 2013 at 6:27 PM

ROFL!!! This guy was beggin’ to get canned!! And what the HELL was the PC for the search again? Dope? That’s convenient…wonder where that came from? What a tool.

And if that ‘Hearing Master’ or whatever the hell title that Fake Judge uses, had an ounce of self respect or human decency, She’d step down from that big ass chair and never assume any responsible role of any kind again. She is clearly incapable of handling it.

Take heed libfree…these are the people you will be pleading to one day, right before they put you on the boxcar for The Camps…”But, I’m one of You! You can’t do this!”

don’t believe me, though …just keep pretending it could never happen here. like someone banning guns…or soda pop…or salt..or..say…collecting and reviewing your text messages…

a5minmajor on June 12, 2013 at 6:56 PM

JFKY on June 12, 2013 at 6:00 PM

Seems like it has all the makings of a successful lawsuit.

Cindy Munford on June 12, 2013 at 7:03 PM

That judge should be fired for ALLOWING the male to search the female in that manor.

TX-96 on June 12, 2013 at 7:08 PM

Oh rape is partisan and limited to Democrats? Like….why?

libfreeordie on June 12, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Well, if you actually have to go there, rape is about power. Abusing and exerting one’s will over another. There’s your connection.

(yes, this is a little silly over-conflating on both our parts)

anuts on June 12, 2013 at 7:12 PM

He’s got all the qualifications to be an IRS agent…

locomotivebreath1901 on June 12, 2013 at 7:13 PM

What a horrible judge to have allowed this behavior – she needs to go. This not Nazi Germany.

Chessplayer on June 12, 2013 at 7:16 PM

Seems that these days, everyone abuses what little power they have in the government system. The trillions of wasted dollars that our government hands out to other countries, yet we cannot hire people to stop welfare fraud, disability, fraud, and total corruption and abuse of power by even people like this POS Marshal. A good beginning would be to constantly harass your Congressmen/women daily. Bombard them with calls, faxes, and emails letting them know that their conduct will no longer be tolerated. They will do what WE tell them to do, as WE are their bosses.

F_This on June 12, 2013 at 7:22 PM

These scumbags should be dragged out into the street and shot.

P.S. NSA Snoopies, you know who I am. Go f*ck yourselves.

glockomatic on June 12, 2013 at 7:29 PM

Disgusting. I’ve said this before: conservatives need to rethink their often blanket endorsement of the police. Most are good guys, but there is a whole lot of abuse of power going on.

paul1149 on June 12, 2013 at 7:45 PM

glockomatic on June 12, 2013 at 7:29 PM

Doubleplusgood!

claudius on June 12, 2013 at 7:56 PM

What kind of “courtroom” was this? The Marshall is wearing Bermuda Shorts, the “Judge” is disturbingly indifferent to the complaint of Ms. Contreras, and the Pillsbury Doughboy can’t seem to wait to cuff the hottie.

This does not appear to be a rare event in that “Courtroom.”

BigAlSouth on June 12, 2013 at 8:01 PM

It would appear that the “court officer” thought she would be a juicy piece of meat to search without cause or warrant. Then, when she not only didn’t flee, putting as much distance between herself and the sticky fingers of the law as possible, but actually went back into the courtroom to complain, he was taken aback. The erstwhile “officer of the court” then proceeded to attempt to arrest her on a bogus charge and to search her bag (again?) right there, while the judge pretended not to see what was going on.

I’m with glockomatic on this one, but a rope is more traditional. We are coming to down to a reckoning in this country. No justice, no peace!

claudius on June 12, 2013 at 8:09 PM

Corruption is ramped in our government – law is breaking down.

Citizen’s right’s are on the verge of being totally lost. And this example is being set by the flagrant and too numerous to count violations of law that the Obama administration has been allowed.

Is there anything the Obama administration can’t get away with?

Axion on June 12, 2013 at 8:10 PM

I literally screamed at the computer screen when I watched this. Nothing I have seen online in a very long time has made me this angry. I don’t like whining about cops and I respect judges and I am SO tired of frivolous lawsuits…but I hope this poor woman has a line of lawyers at her front door that stretches around the block, and I hope she ends up with the private parts of these three “public servants” in a jar on her living room mantel. Absolutely outrageous, and especially the judge. She should never work in law ever again.

JamesA on June 12, 2013 at 8:33 PM

That’s the IRS and Lois Lerner right there.

MTF on June 12, 2013 at 8:47 PM

the marshal here was reportedly fired,

Well there is why it lost its legs the first go around.

He didn’t get away with it.

I think the reason for revival is valid in the article as well.

jaydee_007 on June 12, 2013 at 9:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3