"RCMP Watches Women In Drunk Tank Have Sex" or "One Of The Women Was HIV Positive"

[Seil]

Link
Link 2


So I heard about this on CBC, there were two women in the drunk tank, where an officer was watching them - probably part of his duties - and then two women - one of whom was HIV positive - started having sex. The watching officer did not stop this, but instead called some of his colleagues over to watch.

Now, I think that urges to look at lesbians shouldn't transfer over from home, and that goes doubly at work, the officers should've known

a) That one of the women was HIV-positive
b) That they should probably stop that from happening

But instead, they stood and watched the cameras, probably high-fiving all the way. They were caught, and are now being charged with "Breach of Trust."

Originally Posted by Link 2

The RCMP officers remain suspended, pending the outcome of the preliminary hearing, and any possible trial.

Beacon readers offered their opinions on the suspension and possible charges against the RCMP officers:

Brett Berezan isn’t sure the officers should have been charged.

“What would you charge them for? I don’t believe they committed a crime. However, I see it as highly unethical an should warrant some disciplinary action from their superiors,” he said.

Alison Currie says the HIV-positive status of one woman makes all the difference.

[Aerozord]

I mean, should have like, informed the other person about the HIV I guess but, I dont know I dont personally believe someone has the right two stop two consenting adults from having sex.

If they know they are being watched and dont care, and those watching dont care, have at it.

But the HIV part, just something about having an authority informing others of a medical condition that doesn't sit right with me.

[Marc v4.0]

Uhm, this was in lockup, Aero, not a public display on their private property. It should have been broken up the moment it was noticed regardless.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Marc v4.0

Uhm, this was in lockup, Aero, not a public display on their private property. It should have been broken up the moment it was noticed regardless.

I know, but its just sex. Pleasurable and relaxing when placed in a stressful situation, in this case confinement. I have a very open view on sex. My only issue with it being done publicly is I do agree that you also have a right to not be subjected to seeing the act if you do not desire it. But if no one involved from those engaging in the act to all those seeing it I personally do not have issue with sex taking place.

My only issue with this is, being HIV positive one of the individuals was exposing the other to a health hazard and if she hid this information that was unethical. I find it abit stickier on if the officer should have informed her. I mean shouldn't informing a partner of STDs being the infected individuals responsibility? Yea I know, drunk, not in the right state of mind, so I guess for that reason you should stop it.

Though sex in public? Dont really find anything morally wrong with that

[Marc v4.0]

You guess for that reason you should stop it?

Fuck yes you stop it! How is it even something you could -consider- not stopping? How fucked up would you have to be to know that one of them has HIV, and the other doesn't know about it, and decide it's better to just keep quiet and watch?

What the fuck, man.

[Aerozord]

No, it is a health hazard, and would violate the consent and thus it should be halted so all parties can make an informed decision.

[Kim]

Plus, they were in a drunk tank. It stands to reason that they were drunk. By watching, the officers were taking advantage of people not in a position to consent to being watched.

ALSO, CONSENT IS FUCKING IMPORTANT, EVEN FOR VOYEURISM. Speaking as someone who is into the idea of someone watching me fuck, in an offline setting they goddamn better well ask my permission first.

Not to fucking mention that there's some really gross unequal power going on when two of the people involved are literally prisoners of the people watching.

Don't try and frame this as some sex positive, "If they were okay with it it's fine," and then neglect all the stuff that is important to that.

---------- Post added at 03:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:17 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Aerozord

I dont view "I was drunk" as something that exempts you from responsibility for your actions. If I was drunk and got into a fight am I forgiven because I was drunk? If I was drunk and started posting racist comments on twitter should everyone just forget it happened?

Being drunk is not a free pass. You drank too much you live with the stupid mistakes you did while drunk, any laws you broke, any people you insulted and yes anyone you had sex with. No one was forcing them to drink and no one was forcing, or even coercing them to have sex.

This is the sort of rape culture, victim blaming horseshit that just fucking disgusts me.

NON-DRUNK PEOPLE TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WERE DRUNK SO THEY COULD WATCH THEM HAVE SEX WITHOUT OBTAINING CONSENT TO DO SO, AND THEY DID SO WHILE HOLDING THOSE PEOPLE AGAINST THEIR WILL.

This is all that matters. It is an awful thing that shouldn't have happened. It should in no way be defended.

---------- Post added at 03:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 PM ----------

Also, it should be really damnably obvious what the difference is between something wrong that you did while drunk and something wrong someone did TO YOU while you were drunk AND THEY WERE SOBER.

There's a difference between doing bad things to other people and someone taking advantage of you! Who knew?

[Krylo]

Yeah my first thought was that it shouldn't have happened regardless of HIV positiveness and knowledge of that.

Like, that is just some skeezy coppin' right there. The HIV just brings it from terrible to 'holy shit are you fucking kidding me?'

You start with the layer of terrible that is nonconsentual voyeurism toward inebriated PRISONERS, and then add the layer of terrible of allowing someone to risk getting an, extremely, life threatening and, currently, incurable disease. . . so you can watch them fuck.

Just, the worst people.

[synkr0nized]

Originally Posted by Krylo

Yeah my first thought was that it shouldn't have happened regardless of HIV positiveness and knowledge of that.

Like, that is just some skeezy coppin' right there. The HIV just brings it from terrible to 'holy shit are you fucking kidding me?'

You start with the layer of terrible that is nonconsentual voyeurism toward inebriated PRISONERS, and then add the layer of terrible of allowing someone to risk getting an, extremely, life threatening and, currently, incurable disease. . . so you can watch them fuck.

Just, the worst people.

pretty much my take on it
These are some quality cops, for sure.

[Azisien]

The quote in the OP gave me a laugh. It was an outward laugh, but inwardly I felt a stab of sadness. Indeed, what will we charge them for? Time to discipline these rascals, with several weeks suspension with pay. No, several months!