However low a man sinks he never reaches the level of the police. – Quentin Crisp
The title of today’s column is the motto of many police departments across the United States, and is often painted on the doors of their cars. Unfortunately, what this usually translated into in real life is “To harass and control”, or as written on the police cars in South Park, “To patronize and annoy.” And where whores are concerned, it’s often “to victimize and rape.” We’ve discussed this subject at length before on a number of occasions, so I won’t repeat myself here; it’s just by way of introduction to two news stories involving police abuse of hookers. The first was published last Thursday, February 3rd in the Orlando Sentinel, and is paraphrased here both to update it with Friday’s events and to correct the bizarre bias of the author, who seems to believe that the cop’s shooting of a hooker was a less important story detail than his serious traffic accident in 1995.
Sheri Carter, a 29-year-old escort from Boynton Beach, Florida, died about 8:30 AM Friday (February 4th) after being shot on Monday by Jimmy Dac Ho, a 47-year-old police officer. Ho was arrested on Tuesday and tried to kill himself on Thursday; jail deputies found him hanging in his cell about 5 a.m. and he was taken to Wellington Regional Medical Center in serious condition, where he is being held under guard.
Ho was being held without bail on attempted murder and false imprisonment charges in the January 31st shooting, and with Carter’s death the charge has now been increased to murder. Carter’s boyfriend told police he got a text message from her about 4:21 p.m. Monday, saying that a client was acting “weird and scary”; either he or someone else [the story is unclear] called the police, who found Carter shot in her home and took her to Delray Medical Center in critical condition. She had been shot twice, in the stomach and in the neck, and was paralyzed below the waist until her death. Phone records showed that Ho had contacted Carter prior to her boyfriend’s text message, so detectives went to his home and told him Carter had survived. According to the arrest report Ho appeared nervous, changing his story a few times and claiming to have shot Carter in “self defense”. He said he planned to pay her for sex, but they didn’t have sex; Carter then wanted money and supposedly tried to rob him, and he claimed to have shot her in the struggle.
His employer, Florida Atlantic University, placed Ho on paid administrative leave Tuesday morning, and that afternoon he quit for “personal reasons.” Ho was previously a deputy with the Broward Sheriff’s Office between 2002 and 2004, but was fired in September of 2004 for violating “moral character standards” after pleading no contest to a misdemeanor “disorderly conduct” charge resulting from a domestic battery charge filed by his then-wife, Wendy Jane Ho. According to his Sheriff’s Office Internal Affairs file, Mrs. Ho also said that Ho had threatened suicide during the same general time period. Ho worked for the university police since 2006 and had disciplinary actions in his file that included a two-day suspension in November 2009 for making a student lick clean an elevator security camera lens that he admitted to spitting on.
“Well,” you might say, “clearly this guy was a bad egg. And the shooting was investigated, after all.” And to a degree, you would be right, though I must point out that many cops consider former colleagues who disgraced the force to be fair game. But the second story involves not just one cop but the entire police department of Surrey, England; this is excerpted and slightly paraphrased from an article which appeared last Friday (February 4th) in Harlot’s Parlour:
An abuse of process suit against Surrey Police was filed today at 2pm in Guildford Crown Court on behalf of Hanna Morris; the case aims to stop the prosecution of Ms Morris who reported a violent attack and now faces charges for brothel-keeping and money laundering.
On 16 September 2009, Ms Morris dialed 999 when two identifiable men, one who appeared to have a sawn-off shotgun up his sleeve, barged into a flat used by her escort agency, threw petrol around and threatened to torch the place. Anxious to protect the women who work for the agency, Ms Morris innocently helped the police investigation. Since then, the investigation against the dangerous men has been dropped, but Ms Morris is being prosecuted. Ms Morris gave the Surrey Police information on the understanding that it was needed to pursue the attackers; she was never at any point cautioned that what she was telling the police would be used as evidence against her, and without it they would have no evidence whatsoever. If the judge rules that there has been no abuse of process, Ms Morris will instead ask the court to exclude evidence obtained from her at any proceedings which result from the incident.
Ms Morris’ solicitor Nigel Richardson wrote to Surrey Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to ask for the prosecution to be dropped as it is “completely contrary to the stated aims of trying to improve the safety of sex workers” and that “it is hard to see how a prosecution in this case can do anything but . . . make would-be attackers more confident in their actions and increase the dangers for working women. . . the prosecution of this offence is likely to directly discourage the reporting of crimes against potentially vulnerable women and thus increase risks to their safety.”
It is possible that profiteering by Surrey Police and CPS is behind this and other recent prosecutions; under the “Proceeds of Crime” law the police keep 50% of assets confiscated during raids and 25% from subsequent prosecutions, with the CPS keeping another 25% and the Inland Revenue the rest. Ms Morris’s home and life savings have been frozen pending confiscation if she is found guilty.
Most Americans know that the federal government has given itself the power to steal the property of those accused of drug offenses, but the parent nation has exceeded its offspring in the tyranny department twofold: Once, by extending license for larceny on the excuse of any “crime” (rather than limiting it to drug “crimes”); and Twice, by giving the power directly to the police so they can more easily case potential victims and thereby concentrate on the fattest. After all, we couldn’t have the Surrey Police chasing hooligans who are very likely poor when they could instead rob a reasonably well-off madam, now could we?
Maggie,
Thanks!!! The police do this ALL the time to working girls. I had many cops want to be my LAST call of a tour. Guess the idiots thought I kept the money with me.
They also shake down drug dealers, “You pay us $$$ K each week and you keep your territory”. Same with hookers, but of course rape too.
Yes the cops can get FAR more from hookers and drug dealers than they can someone stealing a car, robbing a house etc…I usually do not put Call Girls in the same message as drug dealers, but it fits well on this as to what the police do. I recall many of these stories coming out on the alerts. I will watch for more.
Drug Dealing is a true crime, but made worse by police who wish not to stop it, but to profit from it.
Joyce
It’s nothing new; cops have been shaking down prostitutes at least since Roman times and it’s always much worse when our trade is prohibited than when it’s merely considered “seedy”. Back when strip clubs were considered a legal “grey area” they used to do the same to them. 🙁
These police abuse stories need to get more coverage in the media so that the public can understand the consequences of police militarization and the ridiculous “war on___” rhetoric. As a member of the military, it creeps me out to no end to see small town sheriffs up to big city chiefs using this insane terminology like they are at war with the American populace. Police emulation of the military is a terrible thing and really needs to be gotten away with.
I have a not perfect analogy to share, I realize there are flaws in this but bear with me if you will. Back in ’07-’08 I was in Iraq and we had seriously started to turn over a lot of responsibility to the ISF (Iraqi Security Forces, general term for IP and IA). This meant that we actually had to start getting warrants before we could raid a house for weapons and IED making materials. We had to have positive first hand evidence that this was going on in that home. Then the chain of command had to approve it usually up to Brigade level, then the ISF chain of command had to approve the raid. We had to be right because if went after the wrong house, guess what, we might have just created more insurgents. Now, parse that knowledge with how easy it is in the states for a warrant to be obtained, even after the actual raid. Am I saying would I rather live in Iraq? Of course not, but I think we should hold ourselves up to a much higher standard than that. It really worries me that PDs across the country feel the need to serve warrants on minor, usually non-violent, drug offenders with SWAT tactics that mirror what we do in the military. Yes, I’m OK with these tactics in the military because, ya know, insurgents are just a little bit more dangerous.
For any of you who believe it’s a minority of cops making the majority look bad, read about the systemic corruption of at least the Chicago and Atlanta PDs. Even better, read Balko daily at the Agitator, that man does better work than anyone else I’ve come across on the sad state of affairs in our legal system. Bit of a rant I know but it bothers me at times to think that this is what I’m defending.
Please, Americanus, feel free to rant about this subject as much as you like; it needs to be heard!
It’s a problem any time the police get to keep the money.
They get to keep the money they find on a hooker? Good reason to ignore car jackers and go after hookers. After all, they aren’t allowed to keep the recovered car.
They get to keep the money they find on drug dealers, but not casual users? Good reason to add a few grams of whatever drug they’ve found so they can charge the casual user with “intent to distribute” and keep the money.
They get to keep the fines charged to those photographed running red lights? Good reason to make the green light shorter and the yellow light almost instant.
Police departments have a budget, paid for by taxpayers. That should be the money the police have to work with. If it isn’t enough, they had better advocate raising taxes, cutting something else, or both. All monies taken from criminals (real or manufactured), fees, fines, etc. should be given to charity.
Also, prisons should not provide a profit to anybody. Prisons should never be money-makers. Prisons should be run at a financial loss and funded with taxes. You want more prisons and more people locked up in them? Pay your taxes.
When those red-light cameras started to go up all over, the excuse was “safety”. But when every major safety nonprofit, including the prestigious National Transportation Safety Council, started publishing figures proving that red-light cameras literally doubled the number of rear-end collisions (tripled if the light was also shortened as they usually are), there was no corresponding rush to take down the cameras. There are various devices available which allow the license plate to be read while distorting a camera’s view, but not all of them work and the ones that do are illegal in some states.
Here are a number of studies demonstrating that red-light cameras increase accidents and a collection of media reports on the subject.
The Mythbusters tested several “beat the camera” techniques and devices. None of them were very good, and the ones that worked a little bit were both illegal and obvious.
Actually, one thing did work very well, and wasn’t obvious when in use: a James Bond rotating license tag changer. Highly illegal, of course.
For a little schadenfreude when it comes to red light cameras:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-hermann-police-tickets-20110201,0,6988221.story
Hi Maggie!
I run Whiskey Fire, and I just linked your place in regards to the strange Planned Parenthood “stings” and how they coalesced with the “trafficking” hysteria.
I came across your stuff a bit late in the research process for my post — to my annoyance, because if I’d seen it earlier, I would have known you’d already explained what I was looking for!
Suffice it to say you’re now on my blogroll, and you run an impressive site.
Best,
Thers
Hi, Thers! Thank you so much for the kind words, and I hope you often find the blog helpful and informative! 🙂
Thers, I wished I were an American citizen, so that I could sign the petition. Alas, I am not, so all I can do is share your concern and your horror at the smear campaign against Planned Parenthood. They had already framed ACORN, then they misrepresented Shirley Sherrod, now PP. What’s next?
I sometimes wonder if “tolerance” is really a foreign concept to so many people in America.
I read that crap about Planned Parenthood and how they went ‘undercover’ in one or two places and are now blasting Planned Parenthood as a whole. By all means, let’s use child sex slavery and trafficking as an excuse to be rid of anything we don’t believe in *sarcasm*.
Brandy
It really is awful. The ridiculous smear-job against Planned Parenthood that was in the news lately is really all about trying to get all of their federal funding cut.
What’s truly scary about this is that PP provides women with advice about all sorts of issues, from contraception to cervical cancer screenings. It would be a public health disaster if they were to have their funding ripped away. A lot of younger, poorer women especially would be deprived of a crucial source of medical support.
With Maggie’s kind permission, here is an e-petition you can sign to tell your Representative to back off from defunding Planned Parenthood:
https://secure.ppaction.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=12524
Signing the petition would help, writing or phoning your representative would also be wonderful. If you don’t know how to find your Rep, use this site:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Planned Parenthood is not perfect, but they have done a lot of good, practical work for women who have needed help, and they deserve support.
You have that permission. If Planned Parenthood doesn’t do the job, who will? A government bureau whose policy can be changed at the stroke of a pen? I can see it now, “abstinence-only birth control”, having to sit through 20 hours of graphic late-term abortion films before getting the morning-after pill and quotas of how many black women vs how many white women get this or that help, perhaps even a mandate that x percentage of birth control pills be issued to men. No thanks. 🙁
In the “parent nation” there is, at this time, a rather nasty puritanical attitude bubbling away and not always under the surface.
If the subject of the authorities confiscating the assets of criminals comes up in conversation among a group of people approval of this is almost 100%. Ask if they would also be in agreement that fraudulent benefits claimants should be forced to repay money they’ve received illicitly and you tend to get a shocked “no”.
People all over the Western world are amazingly naive when it comes to government; Westerners routinely assume that “most” specimens of politician, cop, etc are honest and believe that government will only use powers for the specific reasons they were granted.
In the East, people are far more pragmatic; it’s a matter of faith that officials are always evil and corrupt and will exploit their power to its fullest, and in Asia nobody even believes it’s wrong to lie to cops, tax collectors, etc as people in the West believe. That’s why American authorities can’t suppress Asian massage parlors; the operators simply ignore the law because government is something to be avoided, lied to and worked around, like hiding one’s valuables and livestock from a warlord who rides into the village with his horde every so often. It’s a healthy, sensible attitude and Americans would be much better off if they learned it, as the Russians eventually did after centuries of Mongol domination.
And yet we would be worse off in a world without police, or so it seems… The cities of the Western countries — where people mistakenly believe that most cops and politicians are ‘good’ — are much safer than the cities of the East, and of Third-World countries — where people usually don’t make such mistakes.
The police is an unavoidable idea, if you believe that there are things that should be considered crimes (say, murder) and that should be prosecuted and punished if they happen. All in all, it’s better than conditioning (Clockwork Orange) to make criminal behavior impossible.
I’m as appalled as anyone else by all the examples of police stupidity, brutality, and even sheer evil that you mention, Maggie. I just don’t see many plausible alternatives. Like democracy, about which Churchill famously said that it was the worst political system with the exception of all the others.
The police are a necessary evil, and the laws governing them should reflect that instead of pretending they are a positive good. Police should be held to a far higher standard of accountability, just as members of the military are, with double or even triple penalties for any offense and dismissal without criminal penalty for a certain number of independent accusations even if they can’t be proven in court. In our society it’s the exact opposite; police are held to a lower standard, excuses are made for their behavior and the most egregious offenses are routinely excused or punished “administratively” even if proven in court.
Indeed. And all of this because we’re afraid of criminals. We see someone being mugged, we think we need to ‘free the police’ even more so the muggers can be caught and kept in prison.
Ben Franklin was really right. They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
And as Maggie herself has said in another post, freedom and safety are and always will be opposites.
I’ve never understood that; I’ve always seen cops as much more dangerous than criminals. With a criminal one is on equal footing and can count on the help of others (running to a well-lit area, etc). But the cops don’t even need to sneak; they can attack openly in broad daylight in as large a number as they need, and if their prey runs every man’s hand will be against him. 🙁
Part of it is the romance. The movies TV series with good cops catching bad bandits and saving damsels in distress from fates worse than death.
Also, most people who had the experience of facing bandits felt powerless. They actually didn’t manage to ‘run to a well-lit area’ or something like that, either because of lack of experience or prensence of mind, or because they were unlucky. They just stared, dumbfounded at the thought that they ‘are in danger’ now. Not everybody is resourceful or streetwise.
To these people, the idea of a policeman who is some sort of superman they can call via 911 who will kick the bandit’s ass for whatever he did to them is… appealing.
I suppose; that kind of thought-process is alien to me. I’ve always been self-reliant and never took anything lying down; every time I’ve ever been in danger my mind never stops trying to think my way out of the situation. And when I need help, I always call someone I know and trust; the idea of relying on a complete stranger to save me strikes me as the height of absurdity and self-destructiveness.
I’m reminded of Matthew Hopkins, the famous English witch hunter; the confiscation and/or “freezing” of assets, the physical violence with which witches/harlots are treated and the overall obfuscation of justice is disgusting.
[…] Surrey, brothel madam Hanna Morris rang police after two armed and masked men robbed her establishment. She was the one who was […]
[…] sex workers who are attacked can expect to be arrested or abused if they go to the police. Ask Hanna Morris, who reported an armed robbery in 2009 only to find herself arrested and the police utterly […]