I grew up in Melbourne in the 90s where the standard police joke was this:
BANG BANG
“Freeze!”
So incorporating ethics is a good thing. The next step is making sure that they actually act by them.
As a rape survivor, the detectives I dealt with were compassionate, thorough, professional and ethical. I would like to think they are not the exception to the rule.
I had a good group of people from the same department. It's all really hot n miss lot of good people trying to do the right thing and a lot of crumbs that know the best place to go unnoticed is standing right beside those sorts of good cops
There is, yes. However, there's some great academic literature that shows most 'training' modules have minimal effect on police practice, largely because they're educational models (i.e. you learn in a classroom and are then tested by questions). Police typically develop most their tactics, their preferred means of interacting with the public or resolving anti-social behaviour, etc, 'on the job'.
Because of this, they develop *awful* behaviours, such as relying on OC (capsicum) spray to diffuse minor protests or silence someone arguing with police. The VicPol manual is *very* clear about how OC spray must not be used unless there is a genuine threat of danger - it was introduced to the CIRT team first for a reason. But it's really effective at resolving any minor disputes or breaking up a peaceful protest that might be viewed as an inconvenience. And so, police learn this is a great crutch to lean on, some supervisors will tell new recruits to rely on it (something that multiple recruits I've met over the years said they were told) and with the knowledge violating internal policy has no accountability, they use it in a manner that technically constitutes misconduct.
Of course, this is about ethics. And it is difficult to train an officer for practical ethics. They are meant to learn about following the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, they are meant to be vetted and aptitude tested for these traits, etc. None of it will matter until police are consistently held accountable for their actions - externally and independently of Victoria Police. Police history shows the work attracts unethical people, violent people, abusers, etc - more than just about any other profession. Without the present threat they cannot abuse that power, it likely won't matter what else you do.
Not really. Especially in the type of misconduct you're seeing in that article.
Back when the Police Complaints Authority was first formed in 1986 (only lasted ~22 months before it was squashed by police opposition), one of the few reports they published was responding to about a decade worth of complaints of sexual impropriety - police using their powers to pursue vulnerable women for sexual favours, to start innapropriate relationships and (in rarer cases) violent sexual assault and rape.
Then in the 1990s, the Victorian Ombudsman published a report on police sexual impropriety following a decade worth of complaints that started *right after the PCA report's scope*.
Now IBAC has published two reports I believe, including one just last year, detailing sexual impropriety in Victoria Police. If there was a genuine effort to minimise this type of unethical and abusive behaviour, we shouldn't have 40+ years of a consistent stream of complaints and reports about how systemic the issue is.
Remember, we're talking about an organisation that, in the last 5 years, has been caught leaking domestic violence escape plans to cops who were abusing their partner and officers threatening DV victims to drop their complaints because their cop buddies were the abusers. VicPol is a *deeply* misogynistic place, like most police forces. Women either become honorary men to survive the 'boy's club' or they become sexualised and harrassed.
Police need to be held to a higher standard than civilians, keep in mind police have the monopoly use of force and deadly violence the badge & gun comes with serious accountability
No where in that article did that sound like a consensual sexual relationship.
That sounded like coercion. He made her feel like her case against her abuser would be tossed out if anyone found out, so maybe she only consented under duress? Which is not actually consent. Therefore it was rape.
Disgusting. Good thing he's being jailed
Unfortunately the unique powers bestowed upon Police to make it necessary to do their job effectively will attract pieces of shit. Not sure how you would make this better.
I don't think the police attract more pieces of shit than any other job, they're just human beings doing a shitty thankless job.
Fuck, I've been waiting literal years for the spotlight to be turned toward child protective services and the domestic violence services in Victoria and Tassie, some of the absolute bullshit I've seen their managers and workers get away with over the years makes me physically ill to think about.
Obviously the power dynamic makes this whole thing immoral, and there is an irony of him being a sex crimes detective but I can totally see how this could happen and I didn't read anything to suggest it wasn't consensual.
Jesus as a survivor myself, who has had the police fail me multiple times, I cant even fathom how much additional trauma this could bring to someone. It's enough to drive someone to end it.
He was convicted of misconduct in public office, not rape.
It sounds like it may have been difficult to prove the cop thought or ought to have known the victim wasn’t consenting.
I know what they mean.
It's a hard situation to consent when he's the person responsible for putting away a violent offender, position if authority through vulnerability etc. There is an implied quid pro quo, that even if addressed is still an unhealthy power dynamic.
That doesn't necessarily make it rape, it certainly flirts with it.
What the fuck does a power imbalance have to do with consensual sex?
What about hypergamous people? Is every single one of them raped if they actively pursue people in positions of power?
Power imbalances muddy the waters around consent, due to the simple refusal of consent being not so simple. Maybe there's fear, maybe there's unspoken force such as a subtle threat that implies your violent ex would be released if you say no and the detective let slip they were involved. All sorts of things could be happening here. It's not against code for no reason.
Consent isn't a given in the absence of a clear "no". Pretty much no one is just up for it at any given time.
Pursuing rich and powerful men for marriage and children? Seems like a plan. If you're both happy and respectful of each other.
Of all the things cops do, a questionably consensual relationship is what gets one jailed ? There’s go to be more to this story than being reported.
You’ve got cops killing Alzheimer’s grandmas getting slapped on the wrist. I get the ethics component for what he’s being charged for but I’m frankly surprised that this would be it. You’ve got rapists literally getting away with worse.
It's a complete breach of ethics and disrespecting the foundation of police interacting with the public community in a respectful manner. If this dude wants to have a consensual relationship with someone, then go and fuck your wife bruh but he became perversely obsessed with this woman and entered into a sexual relationship with. That's disrespecting the code of law. Regardless of whether he's a police officer, do the right thing and give that victim time to heal and move on in a healthy environment. What he did could potentially retraumatise this domestic violence victim regardless of whether it was consensual or not.
Consensual? Did you read the article? There is a reason why in certain jobs or professional relationships its inappropriate to pursue intimate relationships. He took advantage a vulnerable VICTIM OF CRIME. Disgusting. This isn’t the hill to die on
I’m not dieing on it at all, and yes I did read the article - did you? It seems pretty clear there was a long running relationship that they both kept hidden, hence why it isn’t a rape case.
Just because she’s a victim of crime doesn’t strictly mean she’s removed of all agency. Unless she reported him herself and testified against him, none of which was in the article - hence why I said ‘what is missing’, then it seems consensual to me.
Generally I'd agree if the relationship was more organic but after reading the article, it sounds like the detective was kinda a dick. Married with kids, seemed pretty forceful with a dv victim, knew what he was doing was unethical and asked her to hide it and she did end up disclosing it a while later.
It can take years before you can start to see past the trauma of physical abuse and she could have still been thinking that sex with the detective is the only way to protect herself. Hence why those laws exist.
I don’t disagree, despite the down votes, I actually think it’s likely a worse situation than is reported, I just can’t believe that they’d gaol a cop for this despite everything else police get away, it just doesn’t make sense to me. Police breach ethics all the time and you never hear of gaol time.
>I actually think it’s likely a worse situation than is reported
Most definitely. I do agree that jail time was surprising though but I guess with all the other shit they get away with. It has skewed our expectations of the punishment someone in a position of power should receive. Just shows that our justice system is munted.
What are you talking about? These things happens in the movies all the time.
Detective fallen for the pussy of a beautiful female Femme Fatal? Classic Hollywood story line.
On an entirely unrelated note please have a look at this 2016 story about a robbery being successfully solved: https://www.mpnews.com.au/2016/04/06/security-tightened-after-robbery-spree/
Edit: I thought people might be a bit smarter in understanding what I was doing. A photo of the cop is in the article.
If no one understood then it isn’t a people problem, it’s a you problem. Also it’s still hardly relevant. It’s the same guy but he didn’t fuck anyone in that story
Cya shit head
Feel sorry for his families and the DV victim. Just because he couldn't keep it in his pants. Disgusting POS.
Good
Genuine question: Is there an ethics component to their training?
I’d be concerned if this required ethics training instead of being self evident.
I grew up in Melbourne in the 90s where the standard police joke was this: BANG BANG “Freeze!” So incorporating ethics is a good thing. The next step is making sure that they actually act by them. As a rape survivor, the detectives I dealt with were compassionate, thorough, professional and ethical. I would like to think they are not the exception to the rule.
I had a good group of people from the same department. It's all really hot n miss lot of good people trying to do the right thing and a lot of crumbs that know the best place to go unnoticed is standing right beside those sorts of good cops
There is, yes. However, there's some great academic literature that shows most 'training' modules have minimal effect on police practice, largely because they're educational models (i.e. you learn in a classroom and are then tested by questions). Police typically develop most their tactics, their preferred means of interacting with the public or resolving anti-social behaviour, etc, 'on the job'. Because of this, they develop *awful* behaviours, such as relying on OC (capsicum) spray to diffuse minor protests or silence someone arguing with police. The VicPol manual is *very* clear about how OC spray must not be used unless there is a genuine threat of danger - it was introduced to the CIRT team first for a reason. But it's really effective at resolving any minor disputes or breaking up a peaceful protest that might be viewed as an inconvenience. And so, police learn this is a great crutch to lean on, some supervisors will tell new recruits to rely on it (something that multiple recruits I've met over the years said they were told) and with the knowledge violating internal policy has no accountability, they use it in a manner that technically constitutes misconduct. Of course, this is about ethics. And it is difficult to train an officer for practical ethics. They are meant to learn about following the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, they are meant to be vetted and aptitude tested for these traits, etc. None of it will matter until police are consistently held accountable for their actions - externally and independently of Victoria Police. Police history shows the work attracts unethical people, violent people, abusers, etc - more than just about any other profession. Without the present threat they cannot abuse that power, it likely won't matter what else you do.
That’s good feedback. Have the police shown any evidence that they’re likely to act on that?
Not really. Especially in the type of misconduct you're seeing in that article. Back when the Police Complaints Authority was first formed in 1986 (only lasted ~22 months before it was squashed by police opposition), one of the few reports they published was responding to about a decade worth of complaints of sexual impropriety - police using their powers to pursue vulnerable women for sexual favours, to start innapropriate relationships and (in rarer cases) violent sexual assault and rape. Then in the 1990s, the Victorian Ombudsman published a report on police sexual impropriety following a decade worth of complaints that started *right after the PCA report's scope*. Now IBAC has published two reports I believe, including one just last year, detailing sexual impropriety in Victoria Police. If there was a genuine effort to minimise this type of unethical and abusive behaviour, we shouldn't have 40+ years of a consistent stream of complaints and reports about how systemic the issue is. Remember, we're talking about an organisation that, in the last 5 years, has been caught leaking domestic violence escape plans to cops who were abusing their partner and officers threatening DV victims to drop their complaints because their cop buddies were the abusers. VicPol is a *deeply* misogynistic place, like most police forces. Women either become honorary men to survive the 'boy's club' or they become sexualised and harrassed.
Geez. That’s flat out horrible.
They also dont seem to be trained in grappling which is why they quickly resort to striking the head, neck chokes, and mace
Yeah, it’s a conflict of interest. You can’t get involved with someone you’re trying to protect, professionally speaking.
Police need to be held to a higher standard than civilians, keep in mind police have the monopoly use of force and deadly violence the badge & gun comes with serious accountability
Ffs
No where in that article did that sound like a consensual sexual relationship. That sounded like coercion. He made her feel like her case against her abuser would be tossed out if anyone found out, so maybe she only consented under duress? Which is not actually consent. Therefore it was rape. Disgusting. Good thing he's being jailed
No way! Vicpol are the epitome of a moral and trustworthy police force.
What are you smoking?
Woosh
i mean, Ice Cube years ago said 'Fuck the police', but i dont think he meant it this way
Then spent many a season playing a police officer in SVU 🤷🏼♂️
That's ice-T not ice cube. Although they go pretty well together on a hot day.
And Ice-T wrote & sung [Cop Killer](https://youtu.be/LH8gUhDd6WE?si=gcBCJq9OVD2pWXKr) in his thrash/metal band Body Count. So, close enough?
Oh man I totally forgot about this song, thanks for reminding me.. I guess? Lol
They are talking about nwa
That was Ice muthafuckin T, bitch
Ice T is the actor in SVU lol, not Ice Cube
lol good point
Unfortunately the unique powers bestowed upon Police to make it necessary to do their job effectively will attract pieces of shit. Not sure how you would make this better.
I don't think the police attract more pieces of shit than any other job, they're just human beings doing a shitty thankless job. Fuck, I've been waiting literal years for the spotlight to be turned toward child protective services and the domestic violence services in Victoria and Tassie, some of the absolute bullshit I've seen their managers and workers get away with over the years makes me physically ill to think about.
Obviously the power dynamic makes this whole thing immoral, and there is an irony of him being a sex crimes detective but I can totally see how this could happen and I didn't read anything to suggest it wasn't consensual.
What in the fk…
Fkn gross pos
5 months in prison for this? What a bloody joke
Jesus as a survivor myself, who has had the police fail me multiple times, I cant even fathom how much additional trauma this could bring to someone. It's enough to drive someone to end it.
💀
i am too dumb to understand.. Wasnt this consensual? Why is it a punishable offence?
It's like if a Doctor has relations with a patient. It also can stuff up criminal investigations even if it was consensual.
It wasn't consensual he was in a position of power. This is rape
He was convicted of misconduct in public office, not rape. It sounds like it may have been difficult to prove the cop thought or ought to have known the victim wasn’t consenting.
Doesn't matter, had sex
"Intercourse"? Isn't it better classified as "rape"?
I don't think rape was being alleged.
I know what they mean. It's a hard situation to consent when he's the person responsible for putting away a violent offender, position if authority through vulnerability etc. There is an implied quid pro quo, that even if addressed is still an unhealthy power dynamic. That doesn't necessarily make it rape, it certainly flirts with it.
Seems it was consensual from the woman unless im misunderstanding the article. He's being charged for misconduct not rape
No, that's not the story here.
"Ethically or morally ambiguous? Ehh, lets go for RAPE"
should be due to power imbalance but they don't beleive in that i guess
What the fuck does a power imbalance have to do with consensual sex? What about hypergamous people? Is every single one of them raped if they actively pursue people in positions of power?
The woman was in a vulnerable position and and the cop took advantage. Shouldn’t be that difficult to understand ….
Power imbalances muddy the waters around consent, due to the simple refusal of consent being not so simple. Maybe there's fear, maybe there's unspoken force such as a subtle threat that implies your violent ex would be released if you say no and the detective let slip they were involved. All sorts of things could be happening here. It's not against code for no reason. Consent isn't a given in the absence of a clear "no". Pretty much no one is just up for it at any given time. Pursuing rich and powerful men for marriage and children? Seems like a plan. If you're both happy and respectful of each other.
At first I was wondering how everyone here is literally insane but then I seen this was the melbourne sub lol literally the woke scourge of australia.
Of all the things cops do, a questionably consensual relationship is what gets one jailed ? There’s go to be more to this story than being reported. You’ve got cops killing Alzheimer’s grandmas getting slapped on the wrist. I get the ethics component for what he’s being charged for but I’m frankly surprised that this would be it. You’ve got rapists literally getting away with worse.
It's a complete breach of ethics and disrespecting the foundation of police interacting with the public community in a respectful manner. If this dude wants to have a consensual relationship with someone, then go and fuck your wife bruh but he became perversely obsessed with this woman and entered into a sexual relationship with. That's disrespecting the code of law. Regardless of whether he's a police officer, do the right thing and give that victim time to heal and move on in a healthy environment. What he did could potentially retraumatise this domestic violence victim regardless of whether it was consensual or not.
Consensual? Did you read the article? There is a reason why in certain jobs or professional relationships its inappropriate to pursue intimate relationships. He took advantage a vulnerable VICTIM OF CRIME. Disgusting. This isn’t the hill to die on
I’m not dieing on it at all, and yes I did read the article - did you? It seems pretty clear there was a long running relationship that they both kept hidden, hence why it isn’t a rape case. Just because she’s a victim of crime doesn’t strictly mean she’s removed of all agency. Unless she reported him herself and testified against him, none of which was in the article - hence why I said ‘what is missing’, then it seems consensual to me.
The article says she did report him herself
Generally I'd agree if the relationship was more organic but after reading the article, it sounds like the detective was kinda a dick. Married with kids, seemed pretty forceful with a dv victim, knew what he was doing was unethical and asked her to hide it and she did end up disclosing it a while later. It can take years before you can start to see past the trauma of physical abuse and she could have still been thinking that sex with the detective is the only way to protect herself. Hence why those laws exist.
I don’t disagree, despite the down votes, I actually think it’s likely a worse situation than is reported, I just can’t believe that they’d gaol a cop for this despite everything else police get away, it just doesn’t make sense to me. Police breach ethics all the time and you never hear of gaol time.
>I actually think it’s likely a worse situation than is reported Most definitely. I do agree that jail time was surprising though but I guess with all the other shit they get away with. It has skewed our expectations of the punishment someone in a position of power should receive. Just shows that our justice system is munted.
What are you talking about? These things happens in the movies all the time. Detective fallen for the pussy of a beautiful female Femme Fatal? Classic Hollywood story line.
Name one
On an entirely unrelated note please have a look at this 2016 story about a robbery being successfully solved: https://www.mpnews.com.au/2016/04/06/security-tightened-after-robbery-spree/ Edit: I thought people might be a bit smarter in understanding what I was doing. A photo of the cop is in the article.
You’re right. Entirely unrelated
its kinda related, same detective in both links.
But did he also fuck the robber and/or the robbery victims?
I would like to think he did have intercourse with the robber
And the insurer, and the tradie that fixed the place up, and the dogs that barked.
anything is possible
Some context would’ve been good then rather than just saying it’s unrelated. I’m not opening an unidentified link with a comment like that
I thought people might be a bit smarter in understanding what I was doing. A photo of the cop is in the article.
If no one understood then it isn’t a people problem, it’s a you problem. Also it’s still hardly relevant. It’s the same guy but he didn’t fuck anyone in that story
Indeed it is the same guy, with a picture.
It's a complete topic change.
Yeah VIP residents with $$$ get extra police care