Detective Lt. Todd Sparks identified the woman as Abimbola Lipford-Sims.
“She’s being booked into our facility,” Sparks said during a press conference in front of the County Jail.
La Vergne Police initially arrested her Wednesday on theft and violation of probation charges.
“During the booking process, special circumstances required the arrestee to change from her street clothes into different apparel,” states a news release from Major Preble A. Acton.
She was released Thursday and told a companion that she’d been raped by two officers while in her cell, Sparks said. The companion later came back to report what Lipford-Sims had said.
“We have to examine every single complaint that comes in,” Sparks said.
Detective Lisa Svitak interviewed Lipford-Sims and officers. Svitak also reviewed several hours of the jail system’s 24-hour video surveillance that records anything that happens, said Sparks, adding that Lipford-Sims was offered the chance to seek a medical examination to determine if she had been raped but declined.
Svitak also examined all booking records in determining that the officers acted in a professional manner and were falsely accused.
“They were actually very compassionate,” said Sparks, noting that Lipford-Sims could face up to a two-year sentence if convicted of a class E felony.
“After reviewing extensive video footage, gathering statements and interviewing all parties involved, Detective Svitak can find no evidence of any criminal act or misconduct by any member of the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office,” Acton said in news release. “Taped footage clearly contradicts Lipford-Sims’ statement and reflects only compassionate and appropriate care by both female officers.”
The sheriff’s office obtained a warrant charging Lipford-Sims with filing a false report. Sparks, Svitak and newly appointed Detective Chuck Thomas of the U.S. Marshal’s District Fugitive Task Force and task force officers took her into custody before 5 p.m.
“Complaints of officer misconduct are serious matters and a means for citizens to aid law enforcement administration about employees’ conduct outside of direct supervision,” the news release states. “When used appropriately, the complaint process benefits both citizens and the Sheriff’s Office. However, blatant misuse is evident in this situation leading to officers being accused of a criminal act, which did not occur; therefore, the Sheriff’s Office will not release the two female officers’ names.”
Link:
Posts
25 comments:
slightly OT but an important read about how the media is complicit in FRA's
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/10/police-drage-password-sex
What in the constitution grants more protection from false rape accusations to police officers than the average citizen gets???
How come no where in this report does it state " law enforcement take all rape accusations seriously, and we don't want this false report to in any way have a "chilling effect" on women coming forward"??
American law enforcement, just like the American mortgage de-regulators, know that American males are broken and alienated from each other, which leaves the door open for them to be abused.
Off-topic:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-chilling-realisation-of-how-close-i-might-have-come-to-rape-20101012-16hxg.html?comments=210#comments
The article above is not as interesting as the comments on it. Maybe those in Oz are getting sick of feminism?
Off-topic:
http://www.roydenhollander.com/
Whata guy! :)
Rape hysteria, and domestic violence hysteria are the main tools for "Breaking the American patriarchy".
If there were any remnants of American patriarchy left, they would be demanding the names and numbers of the deviants that de-regulated the mortgage business, and caused hundreds of thousands of families to lose their homes, and many fathers to commit suicide because they lost their families after they lost their homes.
But since the Gender / Raunch community have "Broken the patriarchy"...now perverts can rape America and take their time doing it cause who's gonna stop them???? The Gender / Raunch community aint gonna do it.
Anon 12:22,
That is an interesting piece. And it's garbage. If he had slept with that woman, it would not even have been close to rape. She was a willing participant and they BOTH were drunk. She was just as much an instigator as he was. That would be drunken sex, NOT rape.
There are several comments there that are ridiculous but this one really caught my eye:
Also, being drunk is no excuse for breaking the law, it isn't with drunk driving - and the difference between men and women in this situation is that it is the man who is breaking the law (by having sex with a woman who is unable to give consent.
The problem with that, is that if both are dunk, he is breaking the law because she can't give consent, but that doesn't work the other way. Isn't she just a guilty of the same thing? And that is the problem with these laws. It treats women as individuals with no agency.
At some point, a man who was involved in a drunken hookup, who is charged with rape, will have to file rape charges against the woman, as he was too drunk to give consent. If more falsely accused men would do this, when alcohol was involved, and there was consensual sex, it would be interesting to see what would happen.
"At some point, a man who was involved in a drunken hookup, who is charged with rape, will have to file rape charges against the woman, as he was too drunk to give consent. If more falsely accused men would do this, when alcohol was involved, and there was consensual sex, it would be interesting to see what would happen."
The problem with that is most of these "cases" are not handled by the courts, but by university kangaroo star chambers run by moonbat feminists. If a male student claimed he was too drunk to consent to sex, it would be ignored because it does not fit their ideology.
If anyone wants to get really pissed off, take a look at this info-turd from RAINN (the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network), which purports that (based on a number of deeply flawed assumptions) that 15 out of 16 "rapists" walks free.
At least they acknowledge that men are also victimized, although, the reported numbers based on studies of prison rape would seem to suggest that the true percentage of male victims is likely closer to 50% rather than 10% (they most likely did not even consider prison rapes).
The problem with that is most of these "cases" are not handled by the courts, but by university kangaroo star chambers run by moonbat feminists. If a male student claimed he was too drunk to consent to sex, it would be ignored because it does not fit their ideology.
Then take it directly to the cops. Ignore the damn school. The school can't force you to NOT go to the police. Then, if the cops ignore it, it becomes a civil action, and you still get your day in court.
E. Steven Berkimer - "Then take it directly to the cops. Ignore the damn school."
I think that what the poster was getting at was, under college "Codes Of Conduct", allegations can be brought before such "kangaroo courts" which simply "rubber stamp" a guilty as charged on any and all allegations of sexual impropriety made by female students against male students.
In such cases, there will likely be NO investigation, and NO chance to offer a defense, before the male student will be summarily expelled from the school.
It's not a matter of the accused male being able to demand a formal police investigation, since, even if one was done that concluded that there was no evidence of any sexual assault, the word of the female student would still hold sway in the colleges kangaroo court. Evidence of male innocence would be, essentially, "inadmissible".
Werner,
I was talking about a man, who had a drunken sexual hookup, with a drunk woman, counterfiling a rape charge. Not the woman filing against the man. I think there need to be a few instances of this happening.
If he is drunk, then by definition of the law, he is legally unable to consent to the act, and can have her charged with rape. Yes, I realize the ridicule he would face by doing so, but bypass the school administration, and go straight to the police and file those charges.
I agree with what you are saying, I was just looking at it from the male perspective of a way to bypass the "regret is rape" charge that a woman may file the next day.
And just to make it fun, I just got this from the criminal statutes for Illinois:
Criminal sexual abuse also can be sexual conduct other than sexual penetration in which force is used or the victim was unable to consent.
Seems that is rather gender neutral, and a man could reasonably expect, based on the 14th amendment, have a civil rights case if the police weren't willing to press charges against a woman he had sex with when he was drunk, as well as her. If she turns around and files a report, he should do the same.
"I do think that sexual abuse is a horrendous thing that should result in the castration of any male who commits it" - Marie
That's a little tease to inspire readers here to also check out Chuck Ross's take on the RAINN item I linked above. That comment was just one of many from this ill-informed Marie character.
Oops! forgot to ask, what was the name of that 19-year old who was convicted of rape for not pulling out fast enough? I thought it was Mahmoud Boy, but that seems to be wrong.
Oct 14, 2010 3:47:00 PM
Exactly.
"The school can't force you to NOT go to the police."
True.
"Then, if the cops ignore it,"
Which they will...
"it becomes a civil action, and you still get your day in court."
Which still wouldn't go anywhere.
"If he is drunk, then by definition of the law, he is legally unable to consent to the act, and can have her charged with rape."
Maybe that is true in Illinois, but it isn't true everywhere.
If only police and prosecutors acted this way towards all false accusers.
Instead they use the good old boys system.
I tell it like it is Slwerner.
@Arod99k, what are you talking about?
The "good old boys system" was a system that protected the good old boys.
Anon 3:47
Are you sure of that? Have you looked up the statutes in your state (assuming you are in the states)? I would bet, that the vast majority, if not all, in today's P.C. climate, that the laws have been worded to be gender neutral. That can be used to an individual's advantage.
And let's not just look at the state level. Federal as well:
U.S.C. TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 109A - SEXUAL ABUSE
Section 2242. Sexual abuse (1/5/99)
Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal
prison, knowingly -
(1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person
in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be
subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping); or
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is -
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to
engage in, that sexual act; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not
more than 20 years, or both.
Which means, you can get the feds involved. As I stated, I'm sure it would be an uphill fight, and at first, they would be laughed at. But would any federal prosecutor want to have it aired that he ignored a victim of sexual assault/battery, regardless of the gender? That is a career ending decision.
Werner,
Marie certainly has the feminist position down pat. And nice work on the link trackback. Beautifully done.
E. Steven Berkimer - "And nice work on the link trackback"
I've seen any number of such links to items which claim that some study or other found such low rates, only to try to follow the links back, usually through several iterations of links to yet another supposed "source", only to find that they are ultimately circular references to each others unsubstantiated claims.
At least, after resolving her initial "dead" link, I did find the PDF (for prosecutors) which noted several small-scale studies which claimed to have found 10% or less rates. Of course, even the brief synopsis provided indicate a very high standard for declaring a claim "false" (they seem to come up with rather large "pools" of the "unknown" category instead.
And, instead of giving any details of the studies they list, they simply included the one link to where more info could be obtained - so very surprising that it was to the End Violence Against Women International website, and their Making a Difference (MAD) Project "study" (from which the quote I posted came). Seems it wasn’t really so much a study as it was “guidance” as to how to more selectively categorize claims. Suprise, surprise!
I can’t say much about the other “studies” listed, because, not surprisingly, those aren’t linked. [You’d think that if those studies so unequivocally “proved” a low rate, some effort would have been made to make the whole study widely available. Not doing so, and effectively “hiding” them would seem to suggest that they don’t want people actually reading them, and trying to verify the claims made about the conclusions of those studies.]
@Arod99k, what are you talking about?
Had this been you or me, we would be in jail right now facing False Rape charges.
Since these are officers being falsely accused, they are going to throw the book at this 51 50.
This is called the good old boys system, cops looking out for cops. Prosecutors dismiss or reduce charges for friends, just ask Slwerner.
Oct 14, 2010 10:14:00 PM
I agree.
While it has nothing to do with the misuse of justice statistics, I also like this piece:
http://glpiggy.wordpress.com/2009/07/27/the-chick-who-cried-rape/
Arod99k - "Prosecutors dismiss or reduce charges for friends, just ask Slwerner."
WEAK!
And, not only weak, but just wrong! And, so very easy to disprove.
Here's a recent one from my state Detective In Masters Case Charged With Perjury.
In case you are unable to understand what this is about, a local DA is seeking to send a police detective who lied in order to get an innocent man convicted of perjury, and wishes to send that detective to PRISON.
Sure, there might be some desire to protect fellow members of LE, and some efforts made to do so. But, it's really not much different than what average citizens will do for their friends and family members who been caught-up in wrong-doing. But, in the end, those offenses are not just swept under the rug as your narrow mind wishes to believe.
Lot's of cops get charged, and many lose their job, their pensions, and any hope of ever working in LE again.
Here's a link to a site that should be right-up your LE-hating alley: Bad Cop News. I found it while searching for this story about a prosecution of some other local cops which my wife helped to prosecute for their misconduct
While the site should provide you a wealth of grist for your hate-mill, it also shows just how mistaken you are about LE not prosecuting their fellow members. It shows that it happens with significant frequency.
Anyway, if you have any more weak little jabs to throw my way, I welcome it, as always.
Sorry to harp on this, but if you haven't already seen this, I highly recommend it:
Caveat-amator
Post a Comment