NYPD orders cops to run criminal checks on domestic violence victims

[ProfessionalLeftist]

What the actual fuck? The NY Post reports:

Women who report domestic violence are exposing themselves to arrest under a new NYPD directive that orders cops to run criminal checks on the accused and the accuser, The Post has learned.

The memo by Chief of Detectives Phil Pulaski requires detectives to look at open warrants, complaint histories and even the driving records of both parties.

“You have no choice but to lock them up” if the victims turn out to have warrants, including for minor offenses like unpaid tickets, a police source said.

“This is going to deter victims of domestic violence . . . They’re going to be scared to come forward.”

This has gotta be, like, domestic violence policy 101, right? Anyone with any common sense can predict that this policy is likely to have a huge chilling effect. “The majority of domestic-violence cases go unreported,” explained defense attorney Joseph Tacopina. “This is just going to increase this percentage.”

MORE...

http://feministing.com/2013/03/18/nypd-orders-cops-to-run-criminal-checks-on-domestic-violence-victims/

[tblue37]

1. I bet the "huge chilling effect" on reporting

domestic violence is not a bug but a feature.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

6. That's my guess.

I'm also guessing Phil Pulaski likes to abuse women himself.

[awoke_in_2003]

2. What the fuck?...

K&R so more people see this insanity.

[Marrah_G]

3. Very very bad policy

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. This is common practice in many areas.

Not that it's okay, but NY is not the only place this happens.

[SoCalDem]

20. Yep.. In a "she said-he said" world , cops will check all involved

because they are covering all bases to prove that they were being thorough.

Computers make it super-easy for law enforcement, and if there are children involved, the cops can probably justify it.

Familial violence often extends to the kids too

[sheshe2]

5. Doesn't anyone give a

F**K anymore about keeping, women and children safe! We just got VAWA passed and now here goes the NYPD, making it harder for a victim to seek help. Way to go NYPD, lets just keep on victimizing them!

This is obscene and I am furious!

And before any one jumps down my throat, I know men can be victims too.

[Helen Reddy]

7. k&r n/t

[badtoworse]

8. I'm having trouble being sympathetic to someone with an outstanding arrest warrant.

Breaking the law does have its downsides.

[Flatulo]

9. Yes, but you can have a warrant against you for a small debt or a parking ticket. nt

[BlancheSplanchnik]

11. oh. So being on the wrong side of the law disqualifies you for protection against being abused?

Is that what you're saying?

I don't care if you're a prostitute or a druggie or a jaywalker, women still deserve protection against violent partners.

[Historic NY]

18. The problem is knowing it then, rather then at trial...

blows the case out the window. It would be the first question a defendants attorney would ask. I think the order is a more CYA manuver that they can deal with in advance.

[badtoworse]

21. Absolutely - they deserve protection, but not a pass on outstanding warrants

[backscatter712]

15. What you just said is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

You think that women should fear trying to get protection from violent psycho husbands/boyfriends/ex's?

Really?

[badtoworse]

22. I think if you have an outstanding warrant, you should deal with that.

Even if such a policy had not been announced, do you actually believe that the outstanding warrant would not be discovered at some point in the process? I would expect that the cops check that anytime they are called or have cause to stop you. When that happens, do you think it's reasonable to expect that the cops will just let you go? I don't and I strongly doubt anyone in a domestic violence situation would either.

Not dealing with an outstanding warrant is a choice you can make, but it's a very bad one.

[Ash_F]

19. 28 hundred posts

DU 2013.

[Cha]

10. It seems like too many women of domestic violence

don't report it anyway. We need to be encourged not deterrents.

thanks PL

[lonestarnot]

12. Sounds like some old white wrinkled up child abuser decided this crap. Coward. Afraid of the

most dangerous cop work.

[loudsue]

13. Pulaski is an idiot. Someone needs to picket Bloomberg's office and make him fire the asshole.

What a mess.

[tblue]

14. Booooooo!!!!!

[backscatter712]

16. I think it's time to start implementing this rule in police departments:

If you're an officer, and you witness misconduct from a fellow officer, if you fail to report it, you get punished equally to the officer that committed the misconduct. If you're a supervisor that hears a report from one of your officers, and you fail to act on that report, you get busted even worse.

Maybe that would break through the blue wall of silence...

[bluedigger]

17. I guess they needed more time for stop and frisking.

[Glassunion]

23. This is the outcome of what happens when people expect the police to reduce crime.

Take an under-reported crime, make it harder for the victim to report it, reports of the crime go down, stats get published making look like crime has dropped. The police take the credit and everyone is happy... right?