Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

CHP Officers Steal, Forward Nude Pictures From Arrestee Smartphones

Posted by Soulskill on from the your-tax-dollars-at-work dept.

sabri writes: Following the initial suspension of a California Highway Patrol officer earlier this week, news has come out that the CHP has an entire ring of officers who steal and subsequently share nude pictures. The nudes are stolen from women who are arrested or stopped. Officer Sean Harrington of Martinez reportedly confessed to stealing explicit photos from the suspect's phone, and said he forwarded those images to at least two other CHP officers. Where is the ACLU when you need them the most?

35 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Prison time by weilawei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now. No other options. This shit has gotta stop.

    1. Re:Prison time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Copyright infrigment, they know how to deal with that.

    2. Re:Prison time by flyneye · · Score: 4, Insightful

      LOL, here in this small industrial city, our "incarceration officers" have, over the last 2 years been cited three times for male rape and yesterday they caught one stealing $200 from another officers purse. I have personally caught patrolmen smoking pot, getting fellatio while driving and stealing personal items from car wrecks.
      A friend was raped one night, returning from the lake by an officer who pulled her over and similar stories I have heard for the last 20 years.
      My best advise for dealing with cops is; buy a throwaway gun and hope you never have to use it on a more and more typical, rogue cop. If you do; empty the chamber into their head and run like hell.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    3. Re:Prison time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I believe the same thing as with what the people who stole those celebrity pictures. I believe that would be unauthorized use of a computer as defined by the computer fraud and abuse act. That's a federal level felony you know.

    4. Re:Prison time by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is precedent. It has now been established in law that a cop can mow down a pedestrian while texting and not be charged for it (CA), and toss a hand grenade into a baby's crib during a wrong-address raid and not be charged for it (GA) . Small wonder that the right now hates cops just as much as the left ever did.

    5. Re:Prison time by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Funny

      after all, they wouldn't steal a car.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    6. Re:Prison time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      http://www.oklahomalegalgroup.com/news/ohp-trooper-formally-charged-in-rape-case

      Eric Roberts, a 16-year veteran of the OHP, resigned in September after he was arrested following an investigation into a claim that he raped a woman on a July 22 traffic stop. ...
      Roberts has now been charged with 14 criminal counts in the three cases. Ten of those counts are felonies. Charges against the former trooper include second degree rape, rape by instrumentation, forcible sodomy, sexual battery, embezzlement, and bribery.

      Members of three separate law enforcement agencies in Oklahoma have been criminally charged with on-duty sex crimes. In addition to the former Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper charged with rape, and Oklahoma City Police officer and a Tulsa County Sheriff's deputy have also been charged with sex offenses.

      This is just one state and with women who were brave enough to come forward and risk retaliation from the accused's fellow officers. Just think of how many women were too intimidated to press charges. Cops all over the country are able to steal, frame innocent people, assault, rape, and kill with damn near impunity. I'm no SJW, but if you think this shit isn't becoming more prevalent, the you're a fucking idiot.

      captcha hint: harlots Really, Slashdot? jeezus.

    7. Re:Prison time by koan · · Score: 4, Informative

      And look what happened to them...

      Federal Bureau of Investigation Director J. Edgar Hoover called the party "the greatest threat to the internal security of the country",[7] and he supervised an extensive program (COINTELPRO) of surveillance, infiltration, perjury, police harassment, assassination, and many other tactics designed to undermine Panther leadership, incriminate party members, discredit and criminalize the Party, and drain the organization of resources and manpower.[8][9][10][11]

      Founded 1966
      Dissolved 1982
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...

      Newton's last words, as he stood facing his killer, were, "You can kill my body, and you can take my life but you can never kill my soul. My soul will live forever!" He was then shot twice in the face by Robinson.[33]

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    8. Re:Prison time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm a woman. A real woman. I was born with my vagina, uterus and ovaries. I'm not one of those social justice freaks who was born with a penis, scrotum and testes but is somehow considered a "woman".

      Bullshit, you're a dude.

      Let's cut the crap, son.

      The only time the term "son" is used is when referring to someone's male offspring, which you were not. The other instance is when one male is attempting to assert dominance over another male, by referring to the other as "son". I have never, EVER heard a female use this term in the second fashion described. It just isn't done. Son.

    9. Re:Prison time by tinkerghost · · Score: 4, Informative

      Formally, a flash bang is a "stun grenade" and falls in the "less than lethal" category of offensive weapons.
      Note it is not harmless, most people report significant temporary (1 year or less not 5-10 minutes ) or permanent hearing loss. If close to the detonation point, 2nd & 3rd degree burns are common. Vision problems (retinal damage, corneal burns, etc) are another frequent side effect.
      These weapons are designed for high risk breaches, not raiding a house in the middle of the night to serve a search warrant after you've already arrested the suspect.

    10. Re:Prison time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hand grenade? I can't take you seriously if you're going to spin the story like that.

      "ATLANTA - A family says a SWAT team raided their home in the middle of the night and seriously injured a 19-month-old boy with a stun grenade. Alecia Phonesavanh told Channel 2's Ryan Young her child is at the Grady Memorial Hospital burn unit, and is in a medically induced coma..."

      Sources: (left-leaning) and (right-leaning).

      Fuck the police.

    11. Re:Prison time by pjbgravely · · Score: 4, Funny

      You wouldn’t shoot a policeman.

      --
      Star Trek, there maybe hope.
    12. Re:Prison time by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All of that is irrelevant.
      The police should not be allowed to use any weapons the general public doesn't have. Period.
      Grenades, flash or otherwise, are complete overkill.

      What would have happened had they not been able to enter that building?

      There seems to be this idea that the police, in search of a conviction, can put everyone withing a quarter mile radius into mortal danger. That's flat out stupid. Surround the house, get on the bullhorn "Come out with your hands up!" and wait. Worst case, they flush the drugs. But that was the goal right? Get rid of the drugs? Fact of the matter is, pull the toilet and there's plenty stuck in the trap for the conviction anyway.

      There is absolutely no excuse for the police to act as violently as they do.

    13. Re:Prison time by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Now unless that article is a total white-wash, it sounds like a tragic mistake. Like insurgents who hide their weapons behind children hoping to vilify their attackers, it seems quite strange someone would place a baby's crib blocking their own front door.

      Now ask why they're breaching in the midnight to 4 am time period, why they're breaching at all when there's no evidence that somebody's life is in immediate danger, etc... Heck, I was just reading about where they decided to raid both sides of a duplex and did the full 'bang&bash' before shooting a seven year old in the head. Disregarding signs of a child being in the house like toys scattered around the lawn... The seven year old didn't even live in the side where the suspect lived, there were no interior connections, etc... I don't even blame the officer who shot her all that much - his actions were the tip of an iceberg that involved the whole department. The chief's decision to have a SWAT team. The leader who decided to use them in such raids. The site lead/investigator who called them in for this case, and to have them raid BOTH sides at the same time, when reports are that he didn't have a warrant for her side at the time(got it retroactively, which is bullshit if true). The training he received, etc... Negligent? Sure. Manslaughter? I'd actually save that for the guy that ordered both apartments raided and higher.

      These raids take place presumably when the drug dealers inside are at their lowest. Well, everybody is typically at their lowest during this period, so it takes them longer to identify police, and reflex actions are reflex actions.

      They're not even really safer for the officers than walking up to the door and publicly presenting the warrant because death tolls DURING SWAT raids from people who manage to get a lucky shot off and worse, friendly fire from other SWAT agents is similar to officers lost handing them out the old fashioned way. If necessary, SHOW THE BLOODY SWAT VAN. At that point they know they can go quietly and painlessly or SWAT can put them down the hard & painful way. Yes, I've seen a couple incidents where they raid a house, find nothing, but in the progress of the raid one SWAT officer shoots another SWAT officer and they try to charge the occupants with assault/murder. Hell, I don't think it's justified to push an officer's death at the hands of another officer during a raid deliberately conducted when you're at your lowest ability level even if drugs are found.

      Save lives - both officer and not. End the war on drugs.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    14. Re:Prison time by El+Puerco+Loco · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ever hear of Civil Forfeiture? They steal cars all the time. And cash. And houses.

    15. Re:Prison time by TheP4st · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unfortunately I have, and each time I get reminded of this appalling practice I take a deep breath of relief in the knowledge that I am not a US resident.

      --
      "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
    16. Re:Prison time by Idarubicin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How the fuck is this modded insightful? Even at 0? This is the type of shit that gives SJW ammunition in claiming that IT culture is hostile to women. I like to believe the words that come out of my mouth when I argue that point.

      You know, I just put together now that "SJW" is intended to be an acronym for "Social Justice Warrior" (which is in turn intended to be a derogatory phrase meaning, as far as I can tell, "uppity feminist"). For some weeks now, I have been pondering what the internet has against straight (or single) Jewish women. Now it makes a lot more sense.

      That the "reasonable" faction of the male IT world - that the parent poster would like to think he represents - seems to believe that the SJW caricature represents a non-trivial force that is conspiring against him is troubling. That the acronym SJW exists and is presumably widely understood in his circles is rather more revealing about (his part of) "IT culture" than he probably thinks.

      Don't get me wrong, the parent poster is better than the grandparent asshole who believes all rapes are imaginary--but just being better than the anonymous trolling asshole isn't setting a high bar.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    17. Re:Prison time by Shoten · · Score: 4, Informative

      Formally, a flash bang is a "stun grenade" and falls in the "less than lethal" category of offensive weapons.

      Note it is not harmless, most people report significant temporary (1 year or less not 5-10 minutes ) or permanent hearing loss. If close to the detonation point, 2nd & 3rd degree burns are common. Vision problems (retinal damage, corneal burns, etc) are another frequent side effect.

        These weapons are designed for high risk breaches, not raiding a house in the middle of the night to serve a search warrant after you've already arrested the suspect.

      One more thing: flash-bang devices often ignite fabrics and papers, if they happen to land on them. The amount of heat they put out is quite intense, if brief, and the reason why tactical teams frequently wear either natural (cotton) or ablative (nomex) fibers on the outside. Imagine if a raid starts with the blankets of a crib catching fire while the baby's inside, and the parents can't do a thing about it because they've been put face-down on the floor, hands zip-tied behind them, hysterical while they have a cop kneeling on the middle of their back.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    18. Re:Prison time by binarylarry · · Score: 3, Funny

      Damn, looking at your post history... did some american steal your girlfriend or something?

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    19. Re:Prison time by DrJimbo · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, it's called "asset forfeiture" and it does happen far too often. Hell, happening once is far too often.

      In the US there are two kinds of asset forfeiture, criminal and civil:

      There are two types of forfeiture cases, criminal and civil. Approximately half of all forfeiture cases practiced today are civil, although many of those are filed in parallel to a related criminal case. In civil forfeiture cases, the US Government sues the item of property, not the person; the owner is effectively a third-party claimant. [...]

      In civil cases, the owner need not be judged guilty of any crime; [...] In contrast, criminal forfeiture is usually carried out in a sentence following a conviction and is a punitive act against the offender.

      I don't want to put words in your mouth but I think the type of forfeiture you so strenuously (and correctly) object to is called civil asset forfeiture or civil forfeiture for short.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
    20. Re:Prison time by jythie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Heh. It would be amusing to see if a judge was willing to award damages on the same scale they did for the record industry. I could see someone who is bored and has too much money taking on such a case just for the book writing value.

    21. Re:Prison time by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, paramilitary groups getting police to back down only works if you involve rich white ranchers.

    22. Re:Prison time by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Funny

      Probably was a case of civil forfeiture while vacationing.

    23. Re:Prison time by sjames · · Score: 4, Informative

      I live near where the incident happened and that article is a total white wash.

      1) the cops were raiding a regular old residential home where no drugs had ever been made or sold. The child belonged to another couple staying there after their house burned down. The person they were supposedly after was the son of the owners. He did not live there.

      2) The door wasn't barricaded at all. If they had trouble entering it's because they need more time in the gym.

      3) They moved a variety of toys that were in the yard aside before the entry was attempted. They KNEW (or at least any adult of normal intelligence would know) there were probably young children in the house.

      As for the character of the department, they haven't made a public apology and claim it is illegal for them to pay any of the child's million dollar medical bill.

      TL;DR version, the department is packed full of exactly the sort of human refuse they claim to be fighting against.

  2. Misbehaving by amightywind · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ill tell you, the Pigs have been misbehaving in this country for some time. After 9/11 they all decided to be Navy Seals. Armed with high power weapons, body armor, assault vehicles, all without the stringent selection process. I imagine the pervert in Cali was suspended with pay.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  3. Really? by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is so twisted. It bothers me greatly that they could be so despicable and twisted. What the hell is wrong with these cops? Pervs in uniform and I wonder if they'll still be out there on duty next year? I hate the thought these sickos will still be pulling women over after they get a slap on the wrist for this. Fire them.

    1. Re:Really? by Bob_Who · · Score: 4, Funny

      Alternative would be gay or female cops (which would steal photos of nude men). Totally asexual cops will be hard to find, unless they are hiring children as cops.

      ...Or how about ROBOCOPS ?

      Then we could bust them for ogling pictures of electric can openers and for "vibrating while on duty."

    2. Re:Really? by ATMAvatar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What the hell is wrong with these cops?

      Some people become cops because of the power trip it gives. This is perfectly in-line with that personality type. The real tragedy is that it's likely very little (if anything) will be done to the officers perpetrating the acts, which will only feed into the power trip.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    3. Re:Really? by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fuck that. This is beyond libido. I like women fine and like to see attractive ones but leering at nude photos stolen from their phone is not normal behavior. To imply that it is makes this perversion seem mainstream. It's just short of sexual assault. Would you steal someone's nude photos? Would you even go into their phone to look at their photos? If so you're not the kind of person I'd ever want to know. The reason this sickness is so prevalent in society is that we tolerate it and fail to condemn it strongly enough. It's sick and they should be fired.

  4. Child porn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I understand it correctly you might get a drivers license (with limitations) as young as 15 ½, I imagine young drivers are more often stopped than others, did the stolen pictures include depictions of anyone as young?

  5. Re:Suspended? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Corrupted cops: So what if we stole some nude pictures...
    ACLU: You'll be fired...
    Corrupted cops: Fine.
    ACLU: ...out of a cannon, into the sun.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  6. Re:No need for ACLU by TheP4st · · Score: 3, Insightful

    these cops need to be taken to Guantanamo and treated as the terrorists that they are

    For fucks sake, how hard is it to use the word terrorist for the individuals committing actual acts of terror rather than diluting it?

    --
    "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
  7. Not "stealing" it was a "Civil Forfeiture" by walterbyrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    John Oliver explains in this video that hilarious and informative:

    Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Civil Forfeiture (HBO)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEpZWGgJks

  8. Completely irrational by s.petry · · Score: 3

    The question in the case of the baby + crib incident, numerous police officers shooting unarmed suspects, police shooting pet dogs, etc.. is whether or not the force used was required. This question used to be asked all the time, but today gets completely ignored..

    Not that long ago if a house seemed risky for officers or the public they did not dress up like Navy Seals and Rambo up the house. They waited outside, used surveillance, and caught criminals when it was the most opportunistic and safest for EVERYONE! Today, the only people who has their safety discussed is that of the Law enforcement agents. Which is completely contrary to what a Law enforcement officer's job is supposed to be, which is "Protect and Server the Public".

    Yeah, the cop _probably_ didn't intend to harm an infant but you don't know that for sure. At the same time, the officers had no requirement to bust into the house in the first place. Nobody was in eminent danger if the police department did not bust down the door.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  9. Officer Rape by Etherwalk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://www.oklahomalegalgroup.com/news/ohp-trooper-formally-charged-in-rape-case ...

    Rape and other crimes by police officers are quite common--which is not to say that most police officers engage in them. But in a large city, there tend to be at least a few cops who are committing major crimes on a regular basis, especially against marginalized populations who they know can't effectively do anything about it.

    I am aware of someone reporting such crimes in Oakland, for example, and getting threatened by law enforcement for reporting it.

    Relatedly, the NY Times did a report a few years back on making complaints to local police department. The vast majority of the departments tried not to give a complaint form and to have the person talk to them instead; in at least one case the cops went through their "Do you have psychological problems?" script and placed their hands on their guns.