Texas State Troopers and illegal cavity searches

More fun from the great state of Texas.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...

The first video was graphic enough. Two women, as shown in a Texas state trooper’s dash cam recording, are probed in their vaginas and rectums by a glove-wearing female officer after a routine traffic stop near Dallas.

A few days later, a second video surfaced. It was an eerily similar scenario, but this time the traffic stop was just outside Houston, and with different troopers. Two women, pulled over for allegedly speeding, are subjected to body cavity searches by a female officer summoned to the scene by a male trooper.

Unlike the earlier tape, this one had clear audio. Yells can be heard as the female trooper shoves her gloved finger inside one woman.

In both invasive incidents, the female troopers don't change gloves between probes, according to the horrified victims.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...

It's a little sad that my thought on this is, "Oh, well it looks like no official in Texas is trying to defend the practice or even hedge as to why it might be a good thing! That's good news, right?"

I'm awaiting the "privacy is for those with something to hide" types.

"Body cavities are for those with something to hide."

In both invasive incidents, the female troopers don't change gloves between probes, according to the horrified victims.

What...just...WHAT?!
I am never, ever, ever going to Texas.

Edit:I don't care how incredibly unlikely it could happen to me, by the way. That's not what I mean. I'm just kind of horrified by the place as a whole and mean this in a more "on principle" kind of way.

Would you get arrested if you told an officer you were "full of sh*t"?

I seem to recall reading a while ago that Texas gun laws made a point of including that resistance to unlawful police action was protected by state gun law. I may be recalling incorrectly but if not I wonder what the case would look like had a passenger in the car attempted to protect the victim's rights with the aid of a firearm.

I'm not getting the point of random roadside rape by patrol officers. What's going on here?

I don't get how the women agreed to this. If a cop asked to do a body cavity search on me, I'd refuse. If they insisted, I'd be dialing 911 asking for another cop and trying to call a lawyer.

Nevin73 wrote:

I don't get how the women agreed to this. If a cop asked to do a body cavity search on me, I'd refuse. If they insisted, I'd be dialing 911 asking for another cop and trying to call a lawyer.

You may (or may not!) be surprised how scared people get when they are told, "I am a cop, do what I say!" For some, the idea they can say 'no' and not get immediately hauled off to jail or something seems like an impossibility.

Bloo Driver wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:

I don't get how the women agreed to this. If a cop asked to do a body cavity search on me, I'd refuse. If they insisted, I'd be dialing 911 asking for another cop and trying to call a lawyer.

You may (or may not!) be surprised how scared people get when they are told, "I am a cop, do what I say!" For some, the idea they can say 'no' and not get immediately hauled off to jail or something seems like an impossibility.

Isn't it? Surely they'll be arrested for resisting the police and/or tasered... It's not as if the police force hasn't been widely known to overreact.

:l

Bloo Driver wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:

I don't get how the women agreed to this. If a cop asked to do a body cavity search on me, I'd refuse. If they insisted, I'd be dialing 911 asking for another cop and trying to call a lawyer.

You may (or may not!) be surprised how scared people get when they are told, "I am a cop, do what I say!" For some, the idea they can say 'no' and not get immediately hauled off to jail or something seems like an impossibility.

Given the purposeful vagary around what constitutes a lawful order and how much you are required to do on a cop's say-so, and the general over-eagerness to pull out the tasers and pepper spray, the concept of saying 'no' doesn't actually exist in a lot of cases. If the decision has already been made to do something like this, it is hard to imagine that the cop is going to sit idly and let someone start talking on their cell phone while refusing to cooperate.

I was under the impression that none of the women really had a choice in the matter. Especially in the second case where she's handcuffed and bent over the patrol as she pleads.

Resisting would've been an automatic trip to jail. The options were: A) don't resist and B) resist and go to jail where the same thing will happen with some "disobeying orders" nonsense tacked on. It's a no win situation.

I really have no words.

I definitely think the Texas patrol has earned the nickname of "pigs".

This is profoundly shocking and makes me physically sick to my stomach.
Unfortunately, Mystic Violet has the right of it. You either submit or resist and get charge for contempt.

Thank god those news agencies saw fit to post videos of the victims' humiliating violation for everyone to watch.

The first thing I thought of were the Texas lawmakers who basically ran re-election on criminalizing TSA pat downs and X-ray searches because they were too invasive.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/11...

Another part of me wonders if the vaginal searches are actually part of the state's new abortion law.

KingGorilla:

Seriously speaking, what differentiates a "vaginal search" from just out and out sexual assault? I'm seeing here elements of coercion, threats of force, and invasion of private parts. Is it not sex assault because it is being conducted by officers of the law?

It certainly is. But Texas also has pretty Draconian practices when it comes to traffic stops. In the Police State Thread, we have discussed DWM(Driving While Mexican), Texas' policy on seizing cash monies and how impossible it can be to have it returned. A lot of Texas Law enforcement still operates like it did in the latter 1800's.

That is not to mention their horrendous track record with women's issues.

Folks who think it is better overseas haven't ever tried videotaping the Swedish police.

For some reason, this reminds me of something that happened to my friend's father when I was growing up. He was riding his bike through the park and a police car raced by and hit him. He wrecked, bike totaled, and flipped off the police car as it sped away. Then the police car stopped, came back, and the policeman arrested him for obstruction of justice. The judge eventually threw out the case, but even so. Wrecked bike, medical bills, and jailed simply for riding in the park when a policeman wanted to take a shortcut.

But at least it's not a police state.

Fortunately I already dislike Texas and never had any intent of living there.

Or driving through, I hope.

"Smelling marijuana" seems to be the go-to excuse for doing whatever the f*ck cops want. They can invent it completely and it's literally impossible to disprove. But Nuean, asset forfeiture is used everywhere, not just Texas, even though it's a direct violation against the fourth amendment protection from unreasonable seizure.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

"Smelling marijuana" seems to be the go-to excuse for doing whatever the f*ck cops want. They can invent it completely and it's literally impossible to disprove. But Nuean, asset forfeiture is used everywhere, not just Texas, even though it's a direct violation against the fourth amendment protection from unreasonable seizure.

It is, but the case above is a pretty egregious case of it.

Yeah this was a straight up organized crime ring with a badge. Way different.

So what recourse do people have when they are faced with blatant violations of their rights? Smile and take it? Threaten the cops with legal action? Take cell phone video?