Harrison NY police commit serious felony and only face a civil lawsuit.

M

Master Blaster

New member
The police are primafacia guilty of distribution of child pornography and sexual abuse of a child/ minor. They are only facing a lawsuit though, they should have known better shame on them. This just goes to show that the DA is not doing his / her job in Harrison NY.

Girl Sues Cops Over Sex Tape "Screening"
Claim: Teen's X-rated video passed around for laughs, "gratification"
MAY 27--A teenage girl claims that Westchester County cops last year confiscated a sex tape of hers during the execution of a search warrant and then showed the X-rated video to law enforcement colleagues for their amusement and "sexual gratification." According to a federal lawsuit, a copy of which you'll find below, the tape showed the New York girl "at age fifteen, naked and engaging in oral sex and vaginal intercourse." The girl, now 17 and identified as "Jane Doe" in the May 21 U.S. District Court complaint, charges that a trio of Harrison Police Department officers screened the video after it was retrieved from the bedroom of Joseph Porto, the girl's boyfriend (a law enforcement source told TSG that police examined statutory rape charges, but could not positively identify the male in the video, though they suspected it was Porto). The girl was present in Porto's home while the residence was being searched last May following his arrest on a felony marijuana distribution charge. The girl claims that police watched the video in her presence "while laughing," and that they put a camcorder in her face and "mockingly" asked her questions about the explicit video as it played. She also alleges that a Harrison detective told her, "I should beat your ass for this. I hope your parents beat your ass." The teenager claims that the investigator also retrieved anal beads from a bedroom, put them in her face, and asked, "What do you do with these--put them in your mouth?" The girl charges that cops subsequently played the video "sufficiently close to the cell in which the boyfriend was incarcerated so that he could hear the audio component of the video," and that they laughed about the video and made "repeated references by name to his girlfriend as she was depicted on the video." She also contends that the Harrison officers "thereafter played the video for other members of the department to watch for their amusement, sexual gratification, and to further degrade Plaintiff." Among other causes of action, the girl's lawsuit, which does not specify monetary damages, claims that her privacy has been violated and she was falsely imprisoned. Captain Anthony Marraccini said that he and his two codefendants deny all of the girl's "outlandish claims." Her lawyer, Jonathan Lovett, did not return a TSG phone message about the lawsuit. (8 pages)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0527082police1.html
 
LOL....so if an associate of a alleged drug dealer makes allegations against the police, the defenders of liberty leap up and screech their slogans:D

I love the critical thinking that goes on here...

WildcallmewhenthecaseisoversothisthreadsoundslikeitwaswrittenforadultsAlaska ™

PS Mods? just curious...what purpose does this whole thread serve?
 
It would seem that if they thought they had a great case, the first stop would be the US Att'y. Has that been done? This is a federal violation at the very least, if as they alleged.
 
LOL....so if an associate of a alleged drug dealer makes allegations against the police, the defenders of liberty leap up and screech their slogans

I love the critical thinking that goes on here...
Click to expand...

Exactly, we are talking about a 15 year old minor girl, who was sexually exploited by the adult drug dealer. Filmed and sodomized by an adult who exploited her vulnerability and hooked her on drugs so he could sexually exploit her. Now she has been victimized, humiliated and sexually abused by the POLICE, who should know better, and are supposed to be upholding the law. That is what we are talking about. How do we know this? Well you see in just about every single lockup in the USA they have video and audio tape of the cells where the prisoner's are held. So if they were doing what was alleged, playing the tape of her repeatedly for the incarrcerated dealer, her first abuser, they have become her second abusers.

The girl claims that police watched the video in her presence "while laughing," and that they put a camcorder in her face and "mockingly" asked her questions about the explicit video as it played. She also alleges that a Harrison detective told her, "I should beat your ass for this. I hope your parents beat your ass." The teenager claims that the investigator also retrieved anal beads from a bedroom, put them in her face, and asked, "What do you do with these--put them in your mouth?"
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that if this suit has been filed in federal court, two years after the fact, a copy of the interview/humiliation tape is in the possession of the plaintiff's attorney, if you read the complaint they also held her without probable cause, and in front of witnesses who were present, No doubt they also offended one or two of their fellow officers who may have been women. Yes critical thinking is severely lacking here.:) especially on the part of the officers involved.
 
I'm pretty sure that if this suit has been filed in federal court, two years after the fact, a copy of the interview/humiliation tape is in the possession of the plaintiff's attorney, perhaps there are even witnesses willing to testify.
Click to expand...

Cool...so the gravamen of your charge is that since a suit was filed, ipso facto it must be true?

Cool..

Now about those lawsuits against the firearms industry........:p

WildoopsdontwanttogoreyouroxAlaska ™

PS even the title of this thread is a farce.
 
I won't take any position about guilt or innocence I wasn't there. My question is why would the search team confiscate a video tape? It's unlikely to have been named in a search warrant for drugs. That just doesn't make any sense.

As far as the interview tape goes that's a non-issue. At least it would be in California. The DA would simply accidentally erase the incriminating portion. It's been done here before and the judge accepted the DA's word that his office erasing all of the incriminating portions of a taped jail house beating was purely an accident and could have happened to anybody. Case dismissed for lack of surviving evidence.
 
Cool...so the gravamen of your charge is that since a suit was filed, ipso facto it must be true?
Click to expand...

No Lawyers are a greedy bunch and its expensive to sue a government agency, especially in federal court. Lawyers usually file lawsuits like this only if there is some significant evidence, but we'll see.:)
 
Listening to the NY news it seems they police do not even feel a reprimand is in order and that the story is far from ones sided.

Again I love how so many on this site seem to automatically assume any story hurling an accusation at "Da' Gubimant" must be true and is worthy of a posting pile on. At the minimum this story is in its infancy and there are far too few facts to assume anything let alone call for a public hanging of the officers.
 
Being involved with several law enforcement agencies on searchs here is how I envision this search went.

Knock, knock- Warrant (early in the morning) secure all persons in the house. Hmm one is a scantily clad female who appears to be underage, not related to the drug dealer. Go to drug dealers room looking for drugs, see camera on tripod pointing toward bed (unless he goes against the grain of men and drug dealers he never puts anything away)

Someone thinks young girl, scantily clad, possibly sleeping in same bed with aforementioned drug dealer, could thier possilby be evidence of statutory rape on the tape. Could be. Should we review it to be sure. Answer-Yes.

Now then no search I have ever been one did we review the videotape a the residence. We are too busy worring about chain of custody, securing the suspects and other more pressing matters.

And I have never been on a warrant search where we videotaped while suspects were still present. You videotape only evidence and where it was found, not suspects.
 
Lawyers usually file lawsuits like this only if there is some significant evidence,
Click to expand...
or if they think the gov't might be inclined to just throw some money at it to settle rather than spend the money fighting it.
 
or if they think the gov't might be inclined to just throw some money at it to settle rather than spend the money fighting it.
Click to expand...
We have a winnah!

Same reason we have a family here suing various govt agencies for not warning them that dangerous bears live in the mountains.
 
Does a bear maul in the woods?!?

:p

Sorry!

I'll not comment on the suit outlined in the original post, as vile and disgusting as the posted story is, in all its sordid aspects. Ugh.
 
Last edited:
Come now the authorities always have the best of intensions and are above reproach Patricia Kohne could testify how profesional the officers in NOLA confiscated her gun for her own safety and I am sure the chicago officer had the best reason in the world for the beat down of the female bartender and warents are always served perfectly:rolleyes:
 
I'm sure the officers were a bunch of horn dogs and very inappropriate... but,

I'm having a hardtime equating a video the young girl voluntarily made with her boy friend being watched by these cops with a 'serious felony'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top