NY “Rape Cops” Case: Another “Casey Anthony” jury? Why did Cops go back 4 times to Victims apartment?Posted: August 9, 2011
Is there something in the jurors water or are jurors lately just giving defendants the benefit of “a” doubt?
Maybe you missed it, but, we may have another “Casey Anthony” jury. This time, it was the stunning acquittal of two New York cops in May 2011 of raping a 27-year-old woman while convicting them of several counts of “official misconduct”, misdemeanors . What’s stunning is the evidence against the cops in the “Rape Cops” case. Unlike the Casey Anthony case, we do have video surveillance of the cops returning 4 times to the victims apartment that evening using the victims house key, and a 911 call from the officers posing as Canadian tourist “John Edward” (original, right? ) lying about a drunken guy being in her hallway so they could return to her apartment. And, even more compelling, we have one cop on tape admitting to the victim that he used a condom and he was the only one, not his partner. Not enough, apparently, for this jury.
Yet, we shake our heads and ask similar questions of this jury’s acquittal verdict. Instead of WHY didn’t Casey report Caylee missing, we now ask this jury, “Why did the Officers return to the victim’s apartment 4 times that night? Casey offered “grief”, I guess, as her excuse. One cop offered he returned to help the victim “beat” alcohol, a counseling session from a recovering alcoholic, if you will. Since when does a “counseling session” for alcoholism include sex? She got “counseled” alright. Really, is that even remotely believable? Since a drunk person can’t consent to sex, isn’t that rape? Was this really a “he said, she said” case? Incidentally, why does “he said, she said” only seem to come up in rape cases? What happened to the jury’s common sense? Did they dislike the victim? Did they feel for the cops? Please don’t tell me that there are still jurors who blame the victim, blame her for drinking too much that night.
Does it matter that these defendants were cops? Does it matter that they were on duty at the time? What happened to the duty to protect? If the cop had a “welfare” concern for the victim, call a real counselor or her friend or family to attend to her. Don’t we hold cops to a higher standard? Wasn’t this an abuse of their power? I wonder have they done this before. It just seems so thought out with the phony 911 call, and the boldness to return to the victims apartment not once but 4 times. Well, maybe we’ll find out in the upcoming civil case against the cops.
Well, just like Judge Perry in the Casey Anthony trial, we have a judge who stepped in yesterday and sentenced one of the cop defendants to the maximum sentence, a whole year in jail, on the 4 counts of “official misconduct”, a misdemeanor. The other cop to be sentenced shortly, likely to the same. Lucky cop, the judge could have run the sentences consecutively (4 years) or maybe, have kept the cop on a leash by staying probation on some of the counts to ensure good behavior. Can you believe the probation department recommended probation?
Like Casey Anthony’s case, convicting her and these cops on misdemeanors just don’t seem to fit the conduct or the evidence. And, why is it that “official misconduct” convictions are only misdemeanors? Shouldn’t it be a felony? Shouldn’t we hold police officers to a higher standard given their position in society? And, shouldn’t the penalty be greater given their position?
Simply my opinion, What Say You?