Not a law, but the rule because of incidents just like this.
I'll stick with TSA standards which forbid open palming a breast...because of incidents like this.

Can they legally ignore these 'rules'? Sure, but it leaves them wide open for a lawsuit, and public opinion is not on the officer's side anymore. Will he go down for molestation, probably not. Will she win her lawsuit, probably.

WTF?!? They still do field sobriety tests without a breathalyzer to back them up? That's moronic. They could supply the entire force with two breathalyzers each for what this one bad arrest is going to cost us.
....and WTF 2.0....
Aren't they supposed to have female officers search women. That was not a normal search either, you don't open palm the breast and rotate, that's copping a feel, not searching. Proper search method is to use the back of the hand across the under side of the breast, and maybe a pat to the middle/top if it's possible there's something hidden, not a grab and rotate.

She's going to get paid, no matter what the cops say. All her attorney has to do is ask the jury 'what if that was your wife, mother, daughter being molested over someone else's mistake?' They won't have to leave the court room to deliberate. Sadly, the cops don't seem like they'll learn a thing.

Government sponsored molestation..

But hey is for the good of ALL.

damn this country sucks some times; same fear based crap that got the new molester in chief electoraled

I still don't get how people have been duped into thinking he's not an insider. He had both Clintons at his wedding, and dozens of congressmen on his payroll, and has been pretty clear that he buys politicians often. That makes him the quintessential insider and the cause of corruption in our government.
It's like they're hiring a serial child molester as a daycare operator with the theory that he knows all about molesting children, so he's the best person to spot and stop it'. What!?!

I disagree. Police are not supposed to be our masters, we are not supposed to bow and scrape before them in the hopes we don't get sent to the stocks (or worse). Police are simply supposed to enforce the laws that we, as a society, have decided that we all should follow.

The problem is, we have allowed the police to become more than that through our own lack of care and mismanagement. A policeman should have to undergo more rigorous training and background checks, mental and physical, than any other service we provide to ourselves. Instead we pay them about the same as teachers and we let bullies into the system. We also allow people with significant evidence that they should never have positions of authority due to mental issues to become police. We do not rigorously punish the bad cops, nor prevent them from seeking work elsewhere, leading to the same type of thing that led to catholic molesters being shuffled about to molest again.

As far as police fearing others, can we finally say that the number of police fatalities are far less than the the ones inflicted by police? Yes, we have many guns in the USA, but the few times I recall of a police person being killed by one seem to revolve around them experiencing a retaliation style attack when you would least expect it (and not on a call), or when they are alone and on a remote call location. Yet most of these controversial police shootings of suspects seem to happen when they are in a group of officers with weapons drawn, which I would consider far less of a jumpy situation than being alone on a highway. If I am an officer, with multiple other officers nearby, I have weapons on the suspect (taser or otherwise), why am I more worried than if I am alone with a suspect? It simply doesn't make sense.

Finally, referring back to your resisting comment, have we not seen lately that you can still be shot while doing absolutely no resisting? One man was laying on the ground, hands in the air, while telling a mentally ill patient of his not to do anything that would get him shot, and the man on the ground got shot. Here in Austin we had a mentally ill man running naked in the street and he was shot and killed versus being tasered or taken down. The use of force, and the extremity of it, have not been shown to be merited. So if you can be shot and killed for not resisting, or simply not understanding the commands in the short time you are given to do so, what can we do? Should we carry a pair of handcuffs and a taser so we can pre-apply these items and give the cops less to fear?

Trump stands for better woman's rights that Clinton, who defends her husbands raping / molesting women.

Have to down vote on general principle.

The the vegan ideology is: to not exploit any animals unnecessarily.

It doesn't matter if someone or something is not aware that it's being exploited, it still is wrong. If I steal money from you, and you never find out, does that make it OK? If you tranquilize a person and molest them so that they'll never know, does that make it OK? Of course not.

Also you can't really exploit plants, since most of them have evolved to be eaten as part of their reproductive cycle.

You are right though, there are definitely some blurred lines in some areas.

Very, very interesting -- thanks for the sift!

I'd love to see more, specifically about the US / Cuba talks and the Pope's involvement. As an atheist, I tend to think of Catholicism / the Pope / organized religion in general as generally having a primarily negative influence on world affairs (Crusades, Inquisition, birth control, anti-condoms, molestation, homophobia, etc.), but negotiating peace and better relations between the US and Cuba is a pretty undeniably positive thing.

I knew Latin American countries were highly Catholic, but I kinda figured that some of the USSR anti-religious stance would have rubbed off on Cuba. I guess maybe it did, but the missile crisis and fall of the Berlin wall / end of the cold war was long enough ago that Cuba has greater freedom to make up their own minds on this sort of thing.

Enough so that perhaps the Pope's involvement was necessary, or at least very helpful, to act as a mediator between the two sides. Props where props are due.

Anyway, all quite interesting.

Exactly.
Jobs that pay minimum wage are (at least according to most who oppose higher minimum wages) supposed to be for the brain dead, lazy, and/or 'the shunned' (like child molesters that can't get any other kind of job, no matter what their skill set).
Jobs that require more than average intelligence should absolutely pay better than minimum wage. Intelligence is a valuable (and rare) commodity.

As I said to @newtboy sometime ago in a similar(ish) conversation, I appreciate your responses. It's nice to talk to someone not just spitting bile (which you'd do less if you ate a plant-based whole food diet ).

Those 'multiple phases of science' saying some food was good or bad at various times of your life is mostly the lobbyists and corporations making smoke screens. It's been known for decades that a plant-based whole food diet is protective against the #1 killer in the Western world. Again, it's the same as the tobacco companies. When the science disagrees with you, you cause a confusion smokescreen so people say exactly what you just said. And evidently it worked -- until the last few years when the internet and a handful of movies and books have started making it very clear what's going on. If you have a short attention span, I suggest you watch just a few 5-min videos on NutritionFacts. The guy is funny and has videos about just about everything in nutrition. And he takes everything from the newest studies. He also has a great book that came out recently, How Not to Die which is a fun read considering it's a diet science book.

Re: personal choice -- I understand you annoyance at being belittled by vegetarians/vegans, but you have to understand that we don't see it as a "personal choice". We see it as a moral one. Why is it not a "personal choice" to molest children? What if someone likes to molest children? It doesn't matter because, morally, you should not. And you're causing harm to another. The question is why are animals not allowed inside our moral-consideration-circle. Why are they excluded?

I personally think that vegetarians are hypocrites if they're doing it for moral reasons alone. You could argue that meat is murder, but dairy is torture. But, you gotta take whatever steps you need to get there. It's hard, I know. Giving up dairy was really hard.

My argument usually isn't about sentience. It's about choices. Why cause harm to something you don't need to just for your pleasure when there are literally better alternatives? We do, indeed, have to eat, so I eat the lowest form on the food chain that I can to survive. They just also luckily happen to be the most nutritious.

Your video, Judge Dismisses Case Of Cop Molesting A Little Girl, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The problem with this is not so much the child's testimony. The problem is that the girl was molested, physically confirmed by the hospital, and there was evidence that the police official burned her clothing/diaper after the fact. If the offender had not been a former high ranking official, but instead just a regular person, then the circumstantial evidence would be sufficient to continue the case.

The judge did order the defendant to stand trial for a much lesser charge of lewd molestation. Clearly this was a case where the buddy system came into effect. Corruption exists even now in the legal system, but I had hoped that it had changed in the years since I had an issue with it.

When I was just turned 17, many years ago, I was dumb enough to help a friend retrieve a deer he had illegally shot. He was not strong enough to pick it up into his truck. I wasn't a hunter, so I didn't take into account that he might have broken the law. In any case, we were both arrested after he tried to flee the scene in the truck and outrun the game warden. When we went to trial, I was shocked to learn that I was being charged with the poaching of the deer and fleeing the police, both misdemeanors with high fines, and my friend was only charged with crossing the center line and speeding (in his flight attempt). My PD told me to take a plea and get reduced fines, so I did. My friend got even less in the way of fines and only traffic violations on his record. After the fact, when I got him alone and beat the crap out of him, he told me that his dad was a coffee buddy of the precinct judge and that was why he skated on the charges.

It is these types of situations that make it necessary for courts to be monitored by another method then just appellate courts, especially since most cases that appear before the higher courts are denied out of hand the majority of the time to avoid setting precedents.

Oh god, this guy plays the best creepy-molester character on Broad City.