Police spot gay marriage license thru window, notify miliary, woman discharged from army

[Liberal_in_LA]

looks like the police retaliated against the woman

------------------
The Rapid City Police Department says Newsome, an aircraft armament system craftsman who spent nine years in the Air Force, was not cooperative when they showed up at her home in November with an arrest warrant for her partner, who was wanted on theft charges in Fairbanks, Alaska.

Newsome was at work at the base at the time and refused to immediately come home and assist the officers in finding her partner, whom she married in Iowa — where gay marriage is legal — in October.

Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base, police Chief Steve Allender said in a statement sent to the AP. The license was relevant to the investigation because it showed both the relationship and residency of the two women, he said.

"It's an emotional issue and it's unfortunate that Newsome lost her job, but I disagree with the notion that our department might be expected to ignore the license, or not document the license, or withhold it from the Air Force once we did know about it," Allender said Saturday. "It was a part of the case, part of the report and the Air Force was privileged to the information."

He said his department does not seek to expose gay military personnel or investigate the sexuality of Rapid City residents.

Allender said the department was finishing its internal investigation and has determined the officers acted appropriately. They have not been placed on leave during the investigation.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/03/13/national/a105705S41.DTL#ixzz0i5txl8X3

[Bluebear]

1. 'The license was relevant to the investigation' - swine. nt

[GodlessBiker]

2. Fuck the Rapid City Police Department. What bastards.

[KamaAina]

3. Got Fourth Amendment?

:grr: :banghead: :nuke:

[Tesha]

20. Not anymore! And the Democrats just pissed on it again by renewing the USA PATRIOT Act! (NT)

[laughingliberal]

4. Since when was the policy 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell, & Make Sure No One Else Tells?'

This is nuts!

[RedCappedBandit]

5. Tax dollars funding the sexuality police. Brilliant.

[louis-t]

6. Wait, you mean cops could 'read' the names on a license

through the window and determine they were both female names? Fishy, at best. I bet they were tipped off before they "looked through the window".

[Demoiselle]

11. Do they have a photograph taken through the window to prove it?

Or did they really just walk into her house without a warrant because they knew she wasn't there and snoop until they found it?
Words fail me.

[KamaAina]

22. Even if they did, unless the Rapid City, SD PD has high-tech zoom lenses,

they would still have been on her property to take it, hence, an illegal search and seizure under the former Fourth Amendment, in effect until 2001. :eyes:

[Demoiselle]

24. That's what I thought, too.

[louis-t]

32. Says they "saw it through the window".

I ain't buying it.

[deminks]

19. Is a marriage license evidence of a crime? Is it probable cause?

How about her tax papers, did they see them on the table? Personal letters? Bills? How about her scrap books, photo albums, her laundry, her food? Address book?

[apocalypsehow]

7. Absolutely ridiculous. DADT has got to go - now. n/t.

[Initech]

8. What a piece of shit.

[d_r]

9. this is effed up

this is so unfair.

[arcadian]

10. Is it fascism yet?

Sadly, many here on DU will say "no"

[Autonomy]

12. No

If it were fascism, the police would not have to create such a contorted justification of 'seeing a marriage license through a window in the course of a legal investigation'. They would just do whatever they wanted. Thankfully, we have laws that make police create wacky justifications for their actions that make such little sense that they often get thrown out of a court of law.

[DaveinJapan]

17. Disagree. Even the Nazis had kangaroo courts.

And I've read quite a bit about the old Soviet Union and how their secret police would still "sneak around" to a point, only invading ones home when the occupant was out while gathering up their secret info to use at a later time (trumped up stuff, to be sure).

Totalitarian does not mean they don't still need a shoestring of a pretext in order to keep the public at large from completely rejecting it and rising up against it.

Like in this case.

[Autonomy]

25. It's interesting you mention the Nazis

The Nazis rounded up homosexuals, put them in concentration camps, and executed them. Where in this country are they treating homosexuals, or any minority group, like the Nazis did? Same goes for the USSR, which killed probably 500 times more of its own citizens than did the Nazis.

[DaveinJapan]

26. You really want to compare mistreatment of minority groups?

How would you characterize American treatment of African-Americans throughout our history?

Gays didn't have it any better through most of those periods, either (except that they could hide much more effectively).

Sure, it's all a part of a larger spectrum, America certainly isn't the worst but nor is it close to being the best in these matters.

[Autonomy]

30. I didn't intend on comparing, but let's do it

Summation: The original statement was: "Is it fascism yet?" To which I said 'no' because we have laws restricting the actions of law enforcement. To which you said 'Even the Nazis sometimes kept the appearance of law for its law enforcement'. At this point I could have gone in two directions. First, I could have pointed out the difference between keeping the appearance in a rigged system that has neither check nor balance (fascism), and our system, which has both. But given that you cited the Nazis in particular, and given that it's well-known that the Nazis executed gays, I felt that was the stronger point. It may have been slightly outside the original topic of 'search and seizure' but I thought it juxtaposed a fascist system with our own succinctly.

Yes, many cruel and inhuman policies have been committed by American governments, but given that the original statement is in re: 'trending toward fascism', and your supporting point is in re: a 'trend AWAY from fascism', I think you've lost sight of the topic.

So, "Is it fascism yet?"

NO.

[LiberalFighter]

13. Should get names of Rapid City PD officers and create marriage licenses for them.

Making sure that somewhere on the document it says it is not a legal document.

[anonymous171]

14. How is this legal? Doesn't that count as "telling"?

[Thothmes]

28. No. DADT applies to the individual that is involved

if they do not reveal their orientation, the Service will not ask them about it. However, if a third party outs an individual or the Service finds out about a persons orientation in a manner other than direct interogation, the Servics will start action to discharge the person under existing laws. In this case, the PD outed her to the command.

[LiberalFighter]

15. Allender is a scumbag that needs to be horse whipped.

Since they were legally married there was no justification for them to report anything to the military.

The military is also out of bounds in my opinion. Newsome did not tell anyone she was married and it was none of their business considering they weren't paying for her partner's insurance or anything else.

[Bill McBlueState]

16. Well, here's one reason why it would have been a good idea to end DADT in 2009.

It would have been great if, in the 2008 elections, Americans had overwhelmingly supported candidates from a party that made gay rights a priority.

I *thought* that had happened...

[deminks]

18. I wonder, if this were a hetero situation,

would the spouse be expected to come home and help the police locate their wife, husband, significant other? This smells to me like "vindictiveness of a third party outing" that the article suggests the Pentagon is telling military officials to consider in their DADT policies until the whole rule is removed. I think the military and the police are both at fault here.

[marmar]

21. Unreal.....The RABID City PD.

Sick mofos.

[Last_Stand]

23. Pig bigots...

More of the country's finest.

[GodlessBiker]

29. +1

[nashville_brook]

35. pigots.

[Divine Discontent]

27. they will be judged by the creator for doing that to this couple. their love is no less holy than

any of the marriages of convenience that the closeted right wing swine marry into to protect themselves from other right wingers judging them, and self hatred.

God bless that couple - like they needed this on top of their other problems. Those cops are not worth the value of their badges for scrap metal.... fascist bastards.

[Odin2005]

31. Assholes!

:grr:

[JoeyTrib]

33. I don't believe they saw it from the outside.

Which means, they broke in.

[nashville_brook]

36. ding ding ding...we have a winnahr!

[JoeyTrib]

37. What do I win?

:scared:

[Liberal_in_LA]

39. a visit from your local authorities

[tomm2thumbs]

34. I know I can always spot the little signatures on those documents from 10 yards

It's a learned skill - because you always hear about this in court cases, where someone calls out under oath that they saw someone's 1/2" handwritten name on a wall certificate from outside a window at 10 yards, through glass reflection and at an angle in the midst of a heated altercation.

It's quite a Penn & Teller feat, and it is part of early training for all police officers. Didn'ja hear??

[Iggo]

38. Yay, cops!

They're the best!