• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

This was RAPE!

What's weird to me...

I was a McDonalds manager for about a year, I worked for McDonalds during high school and took a assistant manager position part time while attending college, before I got smart enough to realize that I could make a lot more money doing pretty much *anything* else.

My point being, I could care less who the caller claimed to be, if anyone called claiming to be part of any law enforcement agency and asked me to strip search one of my employees, I would simply hang up and call the police. End of story. No need to do a bunch of silly things that are going to wind up in me looking really bad at the end of the day, just call the police. If the person calling was, in fact, a policeman -- I doubt he would be worried about me calling the police just to make sure. And I also have a hard time believing any manager of anything, anywhere, would actually be stupid enough to believe that a police officer was calling, and asking a McDonalds manager to perform a strip search. I understand the whole argument of implied authority, but to think someone would actually be that stupid makes me sad :(

I'm not trying to defend anyones actions when I bring up this next point. What about the girl? So she accepts that her McDonalds manager has the right to ask her to remove all her clothes, because someone is on the phone asking her to do it? Seems a little strange, not impossiable of course, but putting myself in her place I would have simply responded "So you want me to take my clothes off for you, becuase someone on the phone says that they are a cop? I'll be going home now, you'll hear from a herd of snarling lawyers in the morning. Thanks for paying my collage bills for the next four years, by the way" :-) Something seems strange to me that the girl believed it all, and stood there letting herself be abused like that. Pretty depressing stuff :(
 
Art Vandelay said:
I think that the police also need to take some responsibility for this. The fact is, they DO order strip searches for frivolous reasons, and they DO intimidate people into giving up their rights. The fact that the guy's story sounded plausible really says something about the police. Let me ask you something: suppose you're pulled over by a cop, and he asks for your ID. You tell him that you won't show him yours until he shows you his. Which do you think is a more likely response:

A: The cop will commend you on your prudence in ensuring that he is not impersonating a cop, and happily give you a photo ID, his badge number, precinct number, and supervisor.

B: The cop will get pissy and imply, if not outright state, that any further reluctance to comply will have serious consequences.
Click to expand...

Where I come from the would show their badge, in fact they have to by law.
 
Actually, the law of the land, per the Supreme Court, is that a citizen MUST identify themselves with a photo ID or the equivalent, when a Law officer requests it.


It was in the papers a while back....
 
gtc said:
Where I come from the would show their badge, in fact they have to by law.
Click to expand...

The same over here. In fact time and time again after some terrible incident has happened, normally involving an OAP letting someone into their home, the police come on the TV telling us that the police will always identify themselves and people should always demand ID. Some forces in the UK have even advertised telephone numbers for people to use to confirm police identity.
 
gtc said:
Where I come from the would show their badge, in fact they have to by law.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you get a bad cop. A few months ago, I was pulled over in St. Louis, Missouri, at a drunk driving checkpoint. I was sober, had not had a drink all day, and was en route to California. I had receipts all over the car for food and gas and other services in other states that were along my route, from Georgia to California. The officer in question asked me if I had been drinking, to which I responded "No." He then asked me to step out of the car, which I did. He then told me that "they" had a report of a drug dealer in the area matching my description, and asked my permission to search my car. I refused, as I am not a drug dealer and did not want my personal property searched, and asked for the officers name, badge number, and also the name and phone number of his supervisor. I also asked about the "description" they received that matched my own, and was told that it "was none of my damned business". Long story short, no badge number given, I was arrested and held without charge for over six hours before being released. My car was impounded, and of course, searched.

I'm not trying to derail the topic at hand, but my point is there are some cops out there that get pretty damned offended when you stop them and ask for their name and badge number. :(
 
I think there may be a sense of escalation here.

I doubt you could get someone to strip search and violate an employee just by asking. But I can see it would be a lot harder to resist if you start off making reasonable requests and then make each request just slightly less reasonable.

Remember, this is a young employee who probably does not know her rights very well. If I had been her, I would have wanted to co-operate. I can see how by the time it progressed, she would have been very demoralised and intimidated. I can also see how the person in charge, could find it easier to take it further than to admit they made a terrible mistake.
 
disfunkster said:
Sometimes you get a bad cop. A few months ago, I was pulled over in St. Louis, Missouri, at a drunk driving checkpoint. I was sober, had not had a drink all day, and was en route to California. I had receipts all over the car for food and gas and other services in other states that were along my route, from Georgia to California. The officer in question asked me if I had been drinking, to which I responded "No." He then asked me to step out of the car, which I did. He then told me that "they" had a report of a drug dealer in the area matching my description, and asked my permission to search my car. I refused, as I am not a drug dealer and did not want my personal property searched, and asked for the officers name, badge number, and also the name and phone number of his supervisor. I also asked about the "description" they received that matched my own, and was told that it "was none of my damned business". Long story short, no badge number given, I was arrested and held without charge for over six hours before being released. My car was impounded, and of course, searched.
Click to expand...

That's not good.

Did you take it further?

A cop could get into a lot of trouble for something like that around here (I hope).

But I think the incident might still happen in places where the cops behave more reasonably.
 
gtc - I understand what you are saying and as the article mentioned there is real research that does seem to confirm that a slow escalation is a key factor here. However in this case the article states that initial request was to "strip search" the girl so the stakes started high.

Indeed something doesn't seem quite right in how the narrative is presented, why would the manager want to do a strip search in the first place? Why wouldn't she have gone for the option of letting the police take over? I suspect that the caller sold her on the idea at the beginning and I wouldn't mind betting that she went the strip search route after being told how good it would look with her bosses that she sorted this whole situation out, that her bosses would appreciate an employee that sorted out her own problems and so on. BUT all of that should have set alarm bells running for anyone who can think for themselves.

The more I think about this the person with the most responsibility is Summers, even the guy making the phone call doesn't have as much responsibility as the people carrying out the actions. At no time did he even have the means to force Summers et all to comply.
 
I think we are overlooking the obvious here.

A young female employee is forced to strip by orders from someone not there. What does he gain? Does he gain anything?

The security camera catches it all.

(....waiting for the other shoe to drop....)
 
I wonder why the article sees fit to name the poor girl? In the UK, we have laws preventing the media identifying the victims of sex crimes. Perhaps it's time the US did the same...
 
Ian Osborne said:
I wonder why the article sees fit to name the poor girl? In the UK, we have laws preventing the media identifying the victims of sex crimes. Perhaps it's time the US did the same...
Click to expand...

I believe because it's already gone to trial, et al and she gave permission.
 
Kiless said:
I believe because it's already gone to trial, et al and she gave permission.
Click to expand...

Fair enough if she gave permission, but why would anonymity be lifted after the trial? Over here, you can only name victims of an alleged sex crime if the victim has given permission, or is being charged with perjury or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice with regards to the original allegations (in other words, if s/he is charged with lying about it). Makes sense to me...
 
gtc said:
I think there may be a sense of escalation here.

I doubt you could get someone to strip search and violate an employee just by asking. But I can see it would be a lot harder to resist if you start off making reasonable requests and then make each request just slightly less reasonable.

Remember, this is a young employee who probably does not know her rights very well. If I had been her, I would have wanted to co-operate. I can see how by the time it progressed, she would have been very demoralised and intimidated. I can also see how the person in charge, could find it easier to take it further than to admit they made a terrible mistake.
Click to expand...

I don't know if the young excause holds up here. The girl was 18 years old, and believed that a police officer would order a McDonalds manager to strip search a employee? Assuming the article is factual and we're not missing part of the story here, we have both a *very* stupid manager and a *very* stupid 18 year old girl. I'm not saying this is not horridly wrong and bad that this poor girl got degraded, just saying both her and the manager have a bad case of the stupids. :-)
 
gtc said:
That's not good.

Did you take it further?

A cop could get into a lot of trouble for something like that around here (I hope).

But I think the incident might still happen in places where the cops behave more reasonably.
Click to expand...


Considering I was just passing through, and was rather happy just to be out of there and on the road again, I decided just to drive on and not worry about it, i'm just laid back like that :p It was just kinda weird and depressing that it actually happened, becuase I really was doing nothing wrong and had nothing illegial on me or about me in any way. I've met quite a lot of really cool cops and only a couple real jerks, but those real jerks really stand out :)
 
Darat said:
The same over here. In fact time and time again after some terrible incident has happened, normally involving an OAP letting someone into their home, the police come on the TV telling us that the police will always identify themselves and people should always demand ID. Some forces in the UK have even advertised telephone numbers for people to use to confirm police identity.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, there are many accounts of police at, say, football matches where they might expect trouble, or riot police, who cover their numbers up.

Re: the OP. Anyone else suspicious of Nix? Unbelieveable.
 
Hell, yes, I'm suspicious of Nix. Something about that particular part of the tale just leaves me wondering "WTF?"

As to the girl, remember: She's 18. A coworker of mine once said it best: "Dumb kid is redundant."
 
disfunkster said:
Sometimes you get a bad cop. A few months ago, I was pulled over in St. Louis, Missouri, at a drunk driving checkpoint. I was sober, had not had a drink all day, and was en route to California. I had receipts all over the car for food and gas and other services in other states that were along my route, from Georgia to California. The officer in question asked me if I had been drinking, to which I responded "No." He then asked me to step out of the car, which I did. He then told me that "they" had a report of a drug dealer in the area matching my description, and asked my permission to search my car. I refused, as I am not a drug dealer and did not want my personal property searched, and asked for the officers name, badge number, and also the name and phone number of his supervisor. I also asked about the "description" they received that matched my own, and was told that it "was none of my damned business". Long story short, no badge number given, I was arrested and held without charge for over six hours before being released. My car was impounded, and of course, searched.

I'm not trying to derail the topic at hand, but my point is there are some cops out there that get pretty damned offended when you stop them and ask for their name and badge number. :(
Click to expand...

Are your cops policemen or a ****ing occupying army?
 
Is this really so far off from what we now do w/o complaint at airports? Take off your shoes, get pat down (groped?) in intimate places by this complete stranger over here. In front of everybody. Now they are coming out w/ scanners that leave little or nothing to the imagination.

Oh, and we don't think twice about giving a urine sample to play high school sports, or get (or keep) a job.

We're slowly becoming conditioned to accept this, this case really doesn't surprise me that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom