Police Officer Stops for Sex, Not Coffee, With Female Arrestee
Posted in General on January 12, 2015
In Albuquerque, it is alleged that a state police officer arrested a woman for outstanding warrants, and, on the way to the prison, he pulled over to have consensual sex with the woman. It is unknown whether the woman hoped thatsex would result in a “get out of jail free” card, but, if that was her plan, it didn’t work as she was transported to the jail after the sexual trist. According to the online report, no charges are being filed against the officer because the “victim” has refused to cooperate with the police and testify against the officer. Without her testimony, there simply is insufficient evidence to show that the sex occurred, so there is not enough evidence to pursue a prosecution of the sexual assault or rape charges.
Consensual Sex Can Constitute Rape
Many states have sexual assault or rape laws that prohibit a person in some position of power from having consensual sex with people subject to such authority. For example, in Pennsylvania, a prison guard is not permitted to have sex with an inmate out of a fear that the guard could abuse the power and basically force or coerce the inmate into having sex in exchange for freedoms within the prison.
In a similar line of thinking, lawyers in Pennsylvania are ethically prohibited from having sex with a client. Lawyers often deal with clients when the clients are weak and vulnerable, so there is a fear that the attorney could take advantage of situation. The clear intent behind such laws and ethical rules is to prevent people in power from coercing “consensual sex” from people in a weaker position.
State College Rape Case – Sex Between Inmate and Female Counselor
A few years ago, a Penn State alumnus was employed as a counselor at the state prison at Rockview and had a consensual, sexual relationship during counseling sessions with a male inmate. The woman became pregnant, and testing later proved that the inmate was the father. Centre County criminal charges of Institutional Sexual Assault, which prohibited an employee or agent of a prison from having sex with an inmate, were filed against the woman.
The woman’s State College criminal defense attorney sought a dismissal of the charges, arguing that the law was intended to prohibit male guards from having sex with female inmates. The Centre County judge rejected the argument and noted that the law was gender neutral and prohibited all sexual contact between inmates and employees of the prison, irrespective of whether the employees were male or female.
Similar to the situation discussed above, the inmate refused to cooperate with the Centre County District Attorney’s prosecution of the charges. Unlike the officer in the Albuquerque situation, here the fact that a baby was born clearly showed that sex had occurred, so there was evidence of the sexual activity aside from mere testimony. Ultimately, a Centre County jury found the State College counselor guilty of Institutional Sexual Assault. The prosecuting attorney was requesting that the woman receive a probationary sentence and thereby avoid incarceration, primarily because he didn’t want the baby to have no parent outside of prison as the father was serving a life sentence. I just wonder if the sentencing recommendation would have been the same if the employee had been a male and the “victim” had been a female inmate.