Photography is Not a Crime

154 responses so far ↓

• 1 Ms Calabaza // Feb 4, 2008 at 6:51 AM

  This is sick, but not surprising. Have you ever had the occasion to see who they hire to work in these jails? If you think this is bad, check out who are hired in nursing homes, and residential facilities for emotionally disturbed kids. Many of these employees are given fancy little titles like mental health techs and are paid $8 to $9 an hour. They don’t have an ounce of education on treatment but many of them become
  “experts” overnight. In my experience in dealing with them, I found two types: One, the ones that wanted to become the patient’s friend by bringing them cigarettes, beer, etc., or in the alternative the power-hungry who picked on certain patients giving them demerits and taking away privileges just because they could. Many times the people working in these facilities are more pathological than the patients and/or inmates. God save us or any of our loved ones from ending up in such a place.

• 2 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 3:40 PM

  OK I watched it. Here’s the thing. Being a smart ass is fine with your family and friends. When dealing with police? Not a good strategy. “Yes, sir. No, sir.” That’s it. Answer questions calmly and clearly. Provide whatever documentation they request — and not a frick’n fake ID that belonged to your dead sister. I don’t care how screwed up you are on drugs and alcohol — that kind of action is guaranteed to get you arrested.
  .
  When they ask if you are suicidal just say NO. K? No. This woman has a terminal case of dumb-ass. It doesn’t make the officers right, but it will be the death of her if she doesn’t learn how to behave like a normal, law abiding citizen. The tramp stamp just above her rear end, cat fighting with her cousin, belligerent to the officer when he arrived, handing him a fake ID, I’m guessing she has had prior run ins, god only knows what she said or did to the officer to start the badness rolling. Cops are human beings. There are good ones and bad ones. The ones in that film did not look like they were having fun with her.
  .
  I’m torn on this one.

• 3 Carlos Miller // Feb 4, 2008 at 4:09 PM

  FerfelaBat,

  While it might be common sense to simply do what police tell you to do, when they tell you to do it, or else be prepared for a beating, it really doesn’t say much for our rights as citizens.

  Cops are human beings, but they also need to have professionalism and responsibility when wearing the badge.

  It means they have to be patient when dealing with irrational citizens. It means they have to keep their tempers in check.

  While there are many cops who do abide by this professionalism, there are far too many that are unable to control their temper.

  This makes them just as irrational as the civilians they are dealing with. This does nothing to diffuse the situation at hand.

  She was ultimately charged with “disorderly conduct” and “resisting arrest”, so the fact that she was carrying her sister’s ID or fighting with her cousin were not taken into account when they wrote the arrest report.

  As far as her priors go, I did an online check over the weekend, basing it only in her county, and all she had were a couple of speeding tickets and a DUI about ten years ago, if I remember correctly.

  There was nothing that indicated she was a habitual offender.

  And what does her tattoo have anything to do with anything? Many cops have tattoos.

  I’m really surprised that you, as a woman, are torn with this one because as a man, I felt violated watching that video.

• 4 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 4:50 PM

  If I were a woman cop dealing with a screaming lunatic who had already been in a recent fight, I would want help handling her from a guy. I would not want to be a cop because I don’t want to have to walk into situations like the call that came in on this case. Domestic disputes always always suck ass because there are no innocent parties except the little kids. That’s not just a tattoo. That is a tramp stamp. Tattoos are not cause for arrest, but certain tattoos say something about the person who has had one placed on their body for display. Bikers have symbols indicating how many people they’ve killed, how many women they’ve raped, raping a cop is a special symbol. Tramp stamps? Say something about the person you are dealing with and it’s not a fine upstanding citizen character rec. I don’t believe her handing the cop her sister’s ID was an accident. He probably ran it, called her on her BS and demanded her real ID. From that point on she was going to jail. Should she have been treated the way she was treated? I don’t know. I wasn’t there.
  .
  Just because she is female — doesn’t mean I immediately feel sorry for her. Women can be far meaner and more violent than men. There are women who believe that being female means they should be treated like ladies. You have to act like a lady to be treated like one. Many women fail to understand that.
  .
  I don’t trust the news. It has been eaten by the ratings monster. I want to believe what I see but I find that the amount of truth in a story is always inversely proportional to the degree of outrage it generates. By that formula, this story is probably 80% BS.

• 5 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 4:55 PM

  “I would want help handling her from a guy. ” I mean a much bigger, much stronger guy. And I say that because odds are she will suffer far less damage.

• 6 Carlos Miller // Feb 4, 2008 at 4:59 PM

  Regardless of what led up to the arrest, nothing justifies them tearing off her clothes.

  Especially male deputies. That is not only a departmental policy violation at Stark, but it any other jail in the United States.

  And nothing justifies them leaving her naked in the cell for six hours, which is something the sheriff admits.

  Perhaps there is more to the story, but the sheriff is not helping us see the rest of the story because he refuses to release the rest of the video.

  And tattoos no longer have the same social stigma they once had. Almost every female under the age of 25 has what you call a “tramp stamp”. It’s a fashion statement or something.

  And if she was being so combative where they couldn’t handle her, don’t you think they would have charged her with assault on a police officer?

• 7 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 5:15 PM

  I guess we’ll eventually find out. And I don’t call it a “tramp stamp” it IS called a Tramp Stamp. And. If you get out of Miami, you will find it’s not a common. Very sexy in a bikini and in the low rise jeans with thong underwear showing. Tramp Stamp. That’s what it’s called. Men and women don’t pierce their tongues to help them eat food either.

• 8 Carlos Miller // Feb 4, 2008 at 5:21 PM

  When I lived in Arizona, it seemed as if all the girls had those tattoos. I don’t really notice them as much here. Or maybe I’ve just become oblivious to them.

  Or more likely, I’m not hitting the party circuits like I used to.

  And as far as the tongue piercing goes, I can assure you that a piece of cold metal on a woman’s tongue actually negates from the stimulatory response.

• 9 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 5:27 PM

  Seriously? Then why do they get them pierced? A dentist friend told me that they get a lot of dental repair business because those barbells break teeth. There has to be some good reason to get one to risk all that damage and pain.

• 10 Carlos Miller // Feb 4, 2008 at 5:33 PM

  Maybe some guys like them. Or most likely, think they like them because it’s different.

  But there is a reason why the tongue is used in place of other body parts in certain intimate acts. It’s soft. It’s moist. It’s sensuous.

  But by placing a cold piece of metal on it, it negates the experience.

  It’s basically having a foreign object between the tongue and body part.

• 11 FerfelaBat // Feb 4, 2008 at 5:37 PM

  An aquired taste, then.

• 12 Getbig.com // Feb 5, 2008 at 3:00 AM

  Complete violation of every rule. Men stripping women. She was handcuffed. Sheriff refuses to release more video because it will bury him. Looks like another cover up. She will get a million from this. But they will try to settle.

  How many more videos are they hiding. Too bad. Maybe now, many more women will come out and say what is occurring at that jail.

• 13 Pen Elope // Feb 5, 2008 at 9:52 AM

  Give power over others to an ignorant thug and you don’t have to have an imagination…..

  Glorify and empower the ignorant, for god’s sake do not let them start thinking for themselves, they are where the money is after all and all the power you can milk…….make them police themselves and commit heinous crimes under the umbrella of the ‘law’, this is the world we are living in. And don’t mistake the intellectual for intelligent on academic merit or status alone. There’s no genius in being a kiss arse sell out like mainstream media. i doubt this will solve anything……

• 14 bill gorden // Feb 5, 2008 at 6:05 PM

  I hope the governor FIRES the sheriff and the deputies.

  That was NOT BY THE BOOK.

  Plus it was wrong!!!

  We’re seeing too much abuse of power. On the other hand we are seeing too many LEOs getting murdered. But I do not think any one was in danger except the victim — she was the victim more than one way or another.

• 15 genewitch // Feb 5, 2008 at 9:09 PM

  ferfela, Just because someone has a tatoo, any tattoo, doesn’t mean they get their rights checked at the door.

  If you’re struggling with someone that is handcuffed as she was, you LIFT on the handcuff chain, and they stop, because it hurts like 8 bastards in a bastard boat. Unless they are on PCP. But since there was no mention of her being high on PCP or even inebriated, i doubt that was the case. It takes 2 people to restrain any one person if you’re trained to do it. and guess what training police have? there should have been 3 people in that room total, maximum. all female.

  Sorry but you smell like a troll, type like a troll, and act like a troll.

  Anyone who doesn’t plainly see that this woman’s basic human rights were violated doesn’t deserve to have an internet connection or contact with society.

  Who cares what she said to the police? she was in AWE that she had been arrested. She wasn’t SUPPOSED to get arrested. SHE HAD GOTTEN BEAT UP.

  It’s called “Psychological Shock”

  Don’t be a dunce. she didn’t deserve this.

• 16 sassymama // Feb 6, 2008 at 4:31 PM

  I have to agree with Ferfela!! Tramp Stamp — thats what it is - plain and simple. Girls only get them to show them off when they are wearing inapproiate clothing. I firmly believe you get treated the way you ask to get treated. Act like a normal and responsible human and you get treated like one. Act like a crazy person and you get treated like one.

• 17 FOR ME TO KNOW // Feb 6, 2008 at 6:21 PM

  I’M NOT SURPRISED THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENED. MANY AUTHORITY FIGURES SEEM TO TAKE THEIR POWER TO THE HEAD. IT SEEMED LIKE THE SHERIFF WAS HAVING A BAD DAY…..BUT IT STILL DIDNT GIVE HIM THE RIGHT TO TORTURE THE POOR GIRL. NOT ONLY SHOULD THEY ALL GET FIRED BUT THEY SHOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO WORK A JOB IN THE LAW FIELD AGAIN. AS FAR AS I’M CONCERNED WHAT THEY DID WAS WRONG. THEY SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH ASSUALT AND BATTERY, ASSUALT AND BATTERY WITH A DEADLY WEAPON(BECAUSE THE SHERIFF ABUSE HER WITH THE COP CAR) VIOLATION OF THAT WOMANS RIGHTS. WOW THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.

• 18 Carlos Miller // Feb 6, 2008 at 9:43 PM

  Sassymama,

  The only problem is, everybody’s definition of a “normal” human being is different.

  Perhaps you and FerfelBat view the “tramp stamps” as abnormal, but other people might look deeper into a person’s character before making a judgment.

  The definition of normality is very relative.

  The definition of Human rights is pretty concrete.

  At least in this country. At least it used to be.

• 19 FerfeLaBat // Feb 7, 2008 at 3:08 AM

  FWIW I took this one back to a private board for discussion and the reactions were about half and half. Some women believed that there is no justification for stripping anyone regardless of whether they say they are suicidal or not (joking or not) and others who believe that if you are acting like a crazed lunatic then all bets are off on how you can expect to be treated.

  One says: “I think that 90% of them (police) have serious anger/control issues and choose the police profession so they can exert that control freely. ”

  Another responded: “Well, I am withholding judgement too unless I get the whole story. I have seen both sides and here in Chicago there are plenty of bad cops but there are good cops too. I have worked in the ER when gang wars are brought in and believe me, we would strip those guys because we would never know if there was a buried knife or gun. I also dated a maximum security prison guard and did a 4 week rotation at the prison hospital. Safe is when they are stark naked and you know you won’t be knifed or shot taking care of them. ”

  Yet another said: “I’m with Ferfe on this one. We have only heard the woman’s husband’s side of the story. It will be interesting to hear everything that went on. My first clue that the woman might have had it coming to her was seeing the cops taping the whole incident. They were covering their asses because they knew she was going to be even more trouble than the obvious.”

  My response was: “She gave the cop at the scene her dead sister’s drivers license for ID. At the jail house, when they asked her the standard questions she gave them grief. When they asked her if she ever considered suicide she gave a smart assed answer. Do they take it as a joke and risk it? Or take her seriously and deal with it. She brought a good deal of that on herself from what I read. If she had given a valid ID, spoken respectfully and answered the damned questions like a normal person, I’m willing to bet none of that would have happened. Joke with the police about being suicidal at your own risk.

  The cops did not look like they were enjoying any of it. They were not taunting her or even talking to her. My impression was that a lot happened before they reached the point where they stripped her and put her in a cell alone. Six hours was against even their rules. But you give up basic rights when you act like an asshole to cops. They can hold you without charge for something like 72 hours.”

  To which one responded: “Nope. Sorry-I don’t care WHAT the hell she said to them. You do not strip a woman like that. Take away what might hurt her, but you don’t take all her clothes off her and treat her like an animal NO MATTER HOW she asks to be.

  She may have taunted them, but they should rise above her actions and be professional. Just like when a girl is drunk and begging to be f^&d-doesn’t mean you DO it. You pat her on the head, put her bra back on and deposit her at the door.”

  And I DO agree with that … in a perfect world. But. We’ve been manipulated and lied to by the media so many times in their quest for sensational ratings that I just don’t trust that we are seeing the entire story. If that is all there is to it and it is a straight on case of police abuse, then I will agree that the cops were completely in the wrong.

  GeneWitch - a Troll stops on a blog, says something completely outrageous and then is never heard from again. I am simply playing the Devil’s advocate and taking a different view of the topic. AND, I am explaining my reasons for taking an opposite view.

• 20 FerfeLaBat // Feb 7, 2008 at 3:28 AM

  I was in the Bahamas once and waiting to clear customs. A woman walked up to a Bahamian cop and asked him if drugs were legal there and if so, where should she go to get some. She also asked if the hotels were airconditioned because, if not, she was SOOOO outta there now. She also wanted to know why everything was taking so long.

  She was not kidding.

  The man had a machine gun and was in full uniform. TELL me she was not asking to be arrested or at least detained? People are dumb as a box of rocks sometimes.

• 21 Carlos Miller // Feb 7, 2008 at 8:59 PM

  FerfeLaBat,

  In this case, the media asked the sheriff to comment and he said no comment because of the pending lawsuit.

  They’ve also asked to see the rest of the video, but he has refused.

  They have given the sheriff opportunity to present the other side, but the sheriff has not said anything except that “it wasn’t a strip search”.

  Right.

  If this were simply an article based on the woman’s lawsuit with no video, then it might be easy to write it off as exaggeration on her part.

  But we’ve seen the video. And although the cops don’t look like they’re enjoying it.

  The woman looks like she is going through hell.

  We still have human rights in this country. And her human rights were violated that night.

• 22 Carlos Miller // Feb 7, 2008 at 9:02 PM

  And about your Bahamas story, maybe the woman was asking to be detained and maybe the cops had enough justification to detain and question her, maybe even search her luggage.

  But that still wouldn’t give them an excuse to rip her clothes off and leave her naked in a jail cell for six hours.

• 23 C L Jahn // Feb 8, 2008 at 12:01 PM

  Ferfe-
  you’re leaving key facts out of your equations:
  - the woman had just been assaulted
  - she had been hit the head and face
  - the attack was so vicious that a patch of her hair was lying on the ground next to here.

  So cop shows up, and asks for her driver’s license; she’s disoriented and and in pain and crying, and digs into her purse and pulls out a driver’s license. The Cop says “But this say’s your name is something else!” She realizes her error, and produces her DL, and explains about her sister dying and asks for the keepsake DL back.

  Now, yes, a DL is the property of the state. And there’s probably a law about seizing them when found. But remember, this woman has been badly beaten; she’s not thinking clearly. She’s the VICTIM that he has been sent to HELP. He utterly failed at that duty.

  He failed to uphold the laws he was supposed to be enforcing, and he failed as a human being.

• 24 Whee, Fun! // Feb 10, 2008 at 12:34 AM

  For you, FerfeLaBat, you can start practicing now…OK now repeat:
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!
  Yes, Massuh!

• 25 musegrrrl // Feb 14, 2008 at 6:41 PM

  I find it interesting how we all jump to conclusions about everyone in this situation. No one ever said that her response to the suicide question was a smart ass response. Can you not possibly imagine yourself being so disoriented because things are going so wrong and possibly sincerely answering the way she did? She was supposedly asked if she “had ever thought of harming herself.” Although, “now or ever?” may not have been the brightest answer at the time, I can still see how someone in her situation could have asked that.

  Ferfelabat, you make me sad. You have made so many assumptions about this woman and the situation. You weren’t there and I don’t care what someone is wearing or what kind of art is on their body or any of that…no one deserves that type of treatment! I don’t care how trashy a person is, they are still a human and deserve the human rights that you and I expect to receive.

  I agree that the cops made a mistake and I hope that this situation is really being investigated and that justice is served to whichever party is in the wrong.

• 26 Bishop Jerry Ogles // Feb 16, 2008 at 11:00 AM

  The brutality and humiliation experienced by Mrs. Steffey from those sworn to be protectors of the innocent is appalling and reprehensible. I am amazed that, since we do not know if Hope was truly guilty of the charges lodged against her, we DO indeed know that the behavior of all at the sheriff’s department WAS illegal. Ref: the Ohio State Revised Code. Strip searches (and that doesn’t mean those simply conducted to find contraband) MUST be performed by persons of the same sex. Failure to abide by this stipulation for any reason is a Class A Misdemeanor. Secondly, the act must derive from a legal warrant (didn’t happen here). Thirdly, a report must be submitted following the event (Did not happen), and finally, there must be compelling evidence of the necessity (there was not). So we can judge that the known criminals in the cell include every person there EXCEPT Steffey. Moreover this is the most immoral and disturbing piece of work I have ever known in seeing men fondling and pawing around on an obviously attractive female prisoner who was probably sought out for that very purpose.

• 27 FerfelaBat // Feb 19, 2008 at 3:29 PM

  Her response to the suicide question is in the article. Do you carry around two different ID’s in your wallet? No one is that screwed up that they can’t manage to choose the right ID if they do. And Everyone here seems to be making the assumption that she was just minding her own business in all this. A fight takes two people. How do you know she didn’t hit her cousin? How do you know anything at all? I stick to my belief that the amount of truth in a story is inversly proportional to the amount of outrage it generates. I wouldn’t wish that treatment on anyone for any reason, but someone or everyone related to this story is lying through their teeth and until they come out with the FULL story I reserve the right to doubt that she is Mary Mother of Christ and completely blameless in all this. It would be a real miracle if she was.

• 28 FerfelaBat // Feb 19, 2008 at 3:32 PM

  Bishop. Did you watch the same video I did? They stripped her and put her in a cell. I did not see any fondling. Must be wishful thinking.

• 29 FerfelaBat // Feb 19, 2008 at 5:08 PM

  In the news release, Swanson said, “I have reviewed this incident and feel comfortable that my deputies performed their rather unpleasant task in this incident in a professional manner that is consistent with the requirements of the law. However, an outside, objective review of our actions is always welcome and necessary to maintain the public’s trust of this office.
  “The duties and responsibilities of county jails across Ohio are set forth in the Minimum Standards for Jails in Ohio. Many of these obligations are unpleasant to undertake, particularly those dealing with difficult or troubled inmates, however, the regulations are necessary to ensure the safety of the inmate.

  “There is an annual inspection by the Bureau of Adult Detention of all jail facilities to include the Stark County Jail to ensure those standards are being followed. The Stark County sheriff’s office has had 100 percent compliance with those standards in the past three years,” Swanson said in the news release.

  Information on jail standards can be found at the Web site: http://www.drc.state….

  Last week, WKYC Channel 3 in Cleveland aired a video of Steffey being strip-searched at Stark County Jail.

  According to the news release, “To ensure we are performing in a manner directed in those polices and procedures, the Stark County sheriff’s office videotapes incidents when dealing with difficult or troubled inmates.

  “The video documentation is preserved for future reference if needed or questions or concerns are raised as to the procedure followed.

  “The parts of the videos that were released by the media were segments of the entire taping provided to the attorneys representing Hope Steffey in connection with the pending civil lawsuit.”

  Steffey, who was charged with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct stemming from the incident, was found guilty of those charges after a jury trial in Alliance Municipal Court in June 2007.

  http://www.the-review.com/news/article/3265662

• 30 Carlos Miller // Feb 19, 2008 at 5:45 PM

  FerfelaBat,

  Yes, there are two sides to every story, but we can’t create sides that aren’t there.

  First of all, we can assume that Steffey Hope did not hit her cousin because if she had, she would have been charged with assault and battery, not just disorderly conduct.

  Second of all, if Steffey Hope is lying about what took place in the room when they asked her if she had ever thought of killing herself, then you would think the sheriff would have already produced the video to disprove her claim.

  But the sheriff has done the complete opposite and refuse to release the video of what took place in that room.

  Steffey Hope claims when they asked her if she had ever thought of hurting herself, she answered “now or ever”. She also claims in the her lawsuit that as soon as she said that, deputies knocked her over and pounced on her.

  We already know that deputies were filming the exchange.

  So if she is lying, then why hasn’t the sheriff prove it by producing the video showing something completely different that occurred?

  And about her choosing the wrong ID, I think it could happen to anyone.

  The other day I was walking into Costco and I wasn’t really paying attention and I showed them my Bank of America card.

  The lady at the door laughed. We both laughed. It was an honest mistake. Both the cards are similar in color and are in my wallet.

• 31 Carlos Miller // Feb 19, 2008 at 7:33 PM

  FerfelaBat,

  Your comment ended up getting moderated because you included two links, and I just came across it in my moderation folder, which is why it didn’t appear until now. To prevent spam, I have it set so it moderates comments with two or more links.

  What I find interesting about that news release is how the sheriff is now acknowledging that Steffey Hope was “stripped search”.

  Before, he claimed it wasn’t a strip search.

  The other thing is just because a jury found her guilty of disorderly conduct, doesn’t mean the deputies were justified in ripping her clothes off.

  Besides, the video had not surfaced at the time of the hearing.

  I would guarantee that no jury would have convicted her had they seen that video.

• 32 FerfelaBat // Feb 20, 2008 at 4:29 PM

  It’s Hope (first name) Steffey (last name). It couldn’t be a strip search because they left her naked for six hours. I’ve read through several articles and no one seems to explain why they removed her clothes. Even if she was crazy as a sprayed roach (which is what I suspect is the case) why take her clothes off? Have the ambulance people transport her to the psych ward and be done with her.

  This will eventually play out in the court system and the complete video will be part of the record. I reserve judgement. I just don’t trust these half edited youtube videos and sensationalist press reports.

  That video is bad enough that, if it were all there was? Every majors news station would have been on it. They don’t hesitate to report police brutality because it sell ads. The fact that they are NOT all over it sets off about a million “let’s wait for the other shoe to drop” alarm bells.

  There was a time in my life when I jumped all over things like this and made snap judgements based on the initial news. I got sucked in like a complete idiot only to have to eat my umbrage later when the full story came out. I have learned one very important lesson as I’ve gotten older: No one is innocent.

• 33 Damien V. Cross // Feb 26, 2008 at 12:05 AM

  I’d like to clear up a bit of confusion here. None of us know in full what happened but let me be the first to say that the police in this case are going to have their posterior ends handed to them in court, largely because of the following:

  1. The officer who responded did not have his dashcam turned on until both he and Hope were in the car.

  2. The Sheriff’s Department is obviously lying when they claim to have no more footage to release

  3. Standard operational procedure in corrections (take this from a corrections officer here) in ANY facility clearly states that officers of the same sex are allowed to perform strip searches or Visual Body Cavity Searches. What this includes is the inmate being given lawful and direct verbal orders to remove clothing. The officer will search the clothing and then ask the inmate to show their hands, open their mouths, lift their tongue, (in the case of males) lift genitalia or (in the case of females) lift the breasts, turn around, show the soles of each foot, wiggle the toes and then squat and cough…that’s it. In no way is the officer to ever lay a hand on the inmate during this search UNLESS they are a clear and present danger to themselves.

  4. The Sheriff is obviously lying when he says his officers did everything “by the book.” I wonder who’s book he was going by at the time because it wasn’t the established procedure.

  5. The Sheriff is also NOT calling this a “strip search.” I have to wonder what he does call it?

  I know what I call these factors put together…failure to follow procedure and that’s exactly what these officers are going to lose their badges to when the judge (who is hopefully in his right mind) hands down his decision.

• 34 Will Canuck // Mar 7, 2008 at 11:35 PM

  I find this story to be very disturbing partly for what happened to Hope but moreso from the posted reactions of many people who have seen the video and in particular from the Sheriff’s reaction.

  A talented law enforcement officer will defuse a situation. It’s amazing what 5-10 minutes of peace can do to the most volatile situation.

  I am confronted by angry and scared people every day who could easily be encouraged to “disturb the peace” but by approaching the situation with empathy I and my other talented colleagues tend to move things the other way. If the responding officer had slowed things down and really listened, then he probably wouldn’t have felt the need to take Hope in to custody. If he worked for me, I’d be recommending him for additional communication training.

  The conduct of the officers in the holding cell is bizarre. First of all, the rules I’m familiar with state that opposite-sex strip searches simply do not occur. The male officers needed to leave as soon as it became apparent that the prisoner was to be disrobed.

  Most of my female colleagues can defend themselves against much bigger opponents regardless of their gender. The argument that this single threat was beyond their ability to deal with as a group should be insulting to each and every female officer involved. If it is, infact, the case, they should be dismissed from the force and the force should review their hiring practices. If they “needed” to perform a suicide-watch strip, then they were obligated to have appropriate clothing to protect Hope and her dignity. I would expect them to treat her delicately and to talk soothingly and reassuringly to her as they “helped her” to remove her clothing and to don the lightweight protective clothing. Their lack of communication during the incident speaks to its “violent” nature. Things were being done TO her and no one was answering any questions.

  But what were the other options? How about not putting Hope in a cell at all? If they had concerns about her stability they could have kept her in sight at the booking desk. Or, as it sounds to me like she was already hurt when she arrived at the station, by transferring her to medical care, a suicide watch wouldn’t have been necessary as she wouldn’t have been isolated.

  Bottom line, the litmus test for any officer is am I treating, did I treat this citizen in the same way that I would treat a loved one. If any of the officers claim that this conduct would pass that test, I am glad I am not one of their loved ones. (Before any fellow officers crack back on this, I’m not talking about knee-jerk responses to life-and-death situations, I’m talking about a suspect who is already under your control. It is not the job or privilege of an officer to punish a suspect, our job is to serve and protect)

  Now everyone can have a bad day. In my opinion this group had a criminally bad day. There is no excuse for this behavior. Any citizen of the United States who argues that we don’t know what went on before, during or after this video was made and that it might in some way excuse or explain the officers basic disregard for the rights and basic self respect of Hope should think long and hard about what they are saying. In this video, Hope is already “detained” the officers have many options for what to do next. The duty officer can make the call, slow things down, make sure that things progress with ample respect for the suspect. By arguing that there may be a plausible excuse for this behavior, you are saying that in your world, anyone suspected of a crime forfeits their basic human rights. BTW. comparing prison procedures with jail procedures is not appropriate in this case.

  Which brings me to the sheriff. I don’t know much about American jurisprudence but I’d have to say that unless there is some element of law that I have yet to be exposed to, this man is a certifiable idiot. If he came back with a response that said “I am concerned with the allegations being made and we are actively investigating those allegations, therefore I cannot comment except to say that I have great faith in my force as a whole. If the allegations are proven we would act to serve the best interests of Hope and the public.” he might be worthy of his title. It’s how a responsible Sheriff would respond. However this guy is bucking to make old Buford T look judicious. He’s seen the video. His comment to all of the citizenry and anyone who has the misfortune of driving through his district is, if you get involved with our force on any misdemeanor and the conduct of one of my officers inflames the situation to a point where you are brought to our jail and you make an unclear statement in regards to an ambiguous question concerning any suicidal thoughts you may have had in the course of your life, then you can expect a team of men and women to forcibly strip you with a video tape rolling and leave you naked in a cell for six hours. When the “danger” has passed and you are brought in for arraignment, rather then returning your clothes, you will be paraded through court in a bullet proof vest like a pin-up girl. And what’s more, He as the supreme legal official will see nothing wrong with it and commend his staff for a job well done. Can’t you just hear the property values dropping in his precinct?

  To summarize, there is no excuse for the way Hope was treated. However well-trained and empathetic those officers might be on a “Good Day”, they missed the mark completely that night and for the credibility of the rest of the force they need to be reprimanded and the Sheriff needs to develop strategies to ensure that it never happens again. Hope needs to be compensated for the nightmare she endured.

  The fact that anyone would question any of those truths, makes me glad to be Canadian. I believe I will FLY to Florida this year, rather than chancing running in to a like-minded sheriff!

• 35 Ed // Mar 27, 2008 at 12:40 PM

  You people are UNbelieveable!!
  I am not naive enough to believe that she wasn’t giving the cop a hard time.
  But for you nitwits to suggest that she in any way remotely deserved to be treated that way!?!?
  If this cop can’t control himself, or call for an ambulance for a assault victim, then he needs to get off the force.
  And if he sexually attacks a prisoner, then he needs JAIL TIME.
  Saving her from herself….anyone stupid enough to believe that BS please raise your hand. This STRIP/RAPE was designed to humiliate and cow the victim into submission. FACT!!!

• 36 monet108 // Jun 19, 2008 at 12:05 PM

  How is the sheriff able to with hold the video? Isn’t that evidence. Doesn’t the state have the right to demand the video. I thought the government was for the people. Why is this being allowed.

• 37 Paul // Aug 4, 2008 at 6:16 PM

  The cops were not “covering their asses,” they were more likely taping this for personal or commercial use.

  And for Ferfe, who cites a cop in gangland Chicago who states he wants all arrestees searched, get a reality check. This woman is not some gang banger from the slums of Chicago, she’s a suburban housewife. That you’d even cite a quote from someone so devoid of the concept of context only shows your stupidity, and your source’s.

• 38 Paul // Aug 4, 2008 at 6:21 PM

  Will, I must say that you’ve tempered my hatred of the law enforcement profession. From everything I’ve experienced (several times), cops are nothing but degenerate thugs, like the ones that populate Stark County. I’ve never known them to improve a situation, and I’ve known them to greatly exacerbate problems, and conjure many new ones out of thin air. Good to know there’s at least one good one.

• 39 David // Oct 10, 2008 at 12:30 AM

  Why Are you saying that this was rape (WITHOUT PENETRATION)
  They did a cavity search!!!!

  In Ohio just sticking your fingers ware they do not belong is rape.
  that is the law and it will get you Life in prison with out parole in the state of Ohio.
  There are hundreds of inmates in the Ohio prison system doing hard time for this alone

  There are even bogus prosecutions and convictions in Ohio. A man doing life without parole because during a police drug raid he was in the act of changing the dipper of his newborn son and they charged him with rape you see touching a minor on there private parts with your fingers is RAPE! In Ohio
  O.R.C 2907.01 and O.R.C 2907.02
  ANY OBJECT!! finger or otherwise is rape.
  According to this law those officers are Guilty of rape. If it is not justifiable as it was not in the line of duty she was wrongly arrested and so they are without State Sanction. And what about those girls that toured the detention center and were strip searched ages 14, 15, 16
  these are children strip searched and cavity search without state sanction Ohio law states you cannot touch this area of a minor UNDER ANY CONDITIONS. that is also rape so why are they on the street instead of doing 15 to life and registering as a sex offender every six months
  you no a( tier 3 sex offender) as the law prescribes. it is amazing how the law is severe for the common peon. but badge wearing scum can do what ever the hell they please to who ever the hell they please when ever the hell they please.
  the lines are clearly drawn, they have that crooked nazzi cross and the rest of us all have the little yellow star. get the picture?

• 40 John 454 // Oct 11, 2008 at 10:25 PM

  Well the CantonRep paper has posted ALL the strip video, or what they claim to have of it. Unbelievable!
  http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=433316&r=0&Category=15&subCategoryID=0

  Officials at Stark County & the State saying they could see nothing wrong with this video. And a few people on other sites have agreed with them!

  BUT just so we’re all on the same page, lets review the video….

  First of all, this video STARTS after Steffy is already forced down on the bunk. The camera operator tells investigators she doesn’t know WHY the whole recording isn’t there. And the piece that is “missing” is exactly when Steffy claimed she was never asked to remove her cloths & was assaulted by the staff. No problems with the ‘magic’ camera…RIGHT?

  Plus what Swanson & the officials are saying is that not only is it ok for 8 people, men & women to be present, the men are also allowed to remove a woman’s cloths. EVEN if there are enough women there to do it.

  And if a woman ‘reacts’ to being stripped by men & women, with spectators also standing there, while being videoed, the men are not ONLY allowed to RESTRAIN her, they are also allowed to pull her arms in submission holds, while yelling for her to “STOP IT”.

  And then AFTER she is already stripped naked, its STILL ok for the men to put her in an arm bar submission hold, if she starts screaming while they force her crossed legs against her butt, while waiting to “change a mat”.

  And its also ok for the camera, which is supposed to be on the prisoner at ALL times, to deliberately swing away so you can’t tell what they are doing to her. No problem here too RIGHT?

  ===== Yeah, just having a couple men TWICE her size, and a couple women, JUST restraining her isn’t enough, if she doesn’t cooperate, they can also TORTURE her into SUBMISSION. =====

  And then once they leave, these “professionals” can have a good laugh…I guess they didn’t realize the camera was STILL running.

  THIS is what ALL the Swanson supporters are good with…RIGHT?

  Because Swanson and the “investigators” are OK with it.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDRsCkc-9k0

• 41 Anonymous // Oct 12, 2008 at 2:47 AM

  I wonder… well I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone was cleared of wrong doing except Hope. She was found guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.

• 42 robertus_maximus1776 // Oct 12, 2008 at 8:03 AM

  This is unconscionable and outrageous. These deputies and corrections officers need to be relieved of their badges and brought up on charges of assault, at a MINIMUM. The Sheriff of this wretched county needs to be FIRED, as this crap happened on HIS watch. My heart goes out to Hope and her family. As a parent of a little girl, I could not imagine anyone, ESPECIALLY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, treating her in this manner. I hope the court awards her an ENORMOUS sum of money to the point where the accountability of inappropriate police conduct goes ALL the way up the chain up command and strikes the FEAR of the US Constitutional RIGHTS of AMERICANS into the hearts of every badge-wearing THUG in this country. http://www.infowars.com is an excellent source of information regarding this nation’s downward spiral into absolute authoritarianism, as evidenced by the brutal and CRIMINAL treatment of a VICTIM of a violent crime.

• 43 joey // Oct 15, 2008 at 7:41 PM

  if you rape a person you go to jail, hope was raped on camera. police officers should get jail time no ifs ands or buts. what if a citizen raped a police officer they would have been in prison by now. we are losing our rights ,and now we live in fear. hope is very brave i hope justice is served.good luck with the case.

• 44 John454 // Dec 27, 2008 at 8:19 AM

  QUOTE “Anonymous // Oct 12, 2008 at 2:47 am

  I wonder… well I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone was cleared of wrong doing except Hope. She was found guilty of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.”

  Have you read her “trial” transcripts? Her whole trial was a farce. She was convicted because of jurors/people like you who would believe any story the cops came up with, even though they had NO evidence.
  Her lawyer was no Perry Mason either. She never questioned any of the conflicting testimony of the cop.

  This whole case stinks.

• 45 SouthAfrican // Jan 9, 2009 at 6:29 PM

  We also used to have police like this. There were always reasons why they deserved it. There may have sometimes been justification for heavy-handedness, but as always, there are two sides to every situation.

• 46 John454 // Jan 11, 2009 at 11:18 AM

  EVERYONE has to KNOW this was all a BS arrest and ’suicide prevention’.

  There’s just TOO many conflicting versions, TOO much evidence “missing”, a MONTHS long “investigation” that leaves too many questions, and too many illogical explanations for everything that was done.

  I have been lied to multiple times by the sheriff’s office.

  I had called the sheriff and asked about the “missing” hallway video, and asked if it would EVER be released to Steffey’s lawyers. (They had been asking for it for THREE MONTHS!)
  They told me at the beginning of May that it would be released in discovery.

  So you can imagine my surprise, when the following month they THEN claimed the video had NEVER EXISTED!!

  Yeah, they now claim that the camera was not functioning in the hall, the camera operator has no idea WHY.

  BUT then, as they force Steffey to the bunk to strip her, this electronic device heals itself, or repairs itself, and starts working again.

  I have to wonder how many times this camera malfunctioned BEFORE the Steffey case, and how many times AFTER???

  Just HOW friggen stupid does the sheriff think people are to buy into a fairy story like this?!?!?

• 47 Jones // Feb 16, 2009 at 10:41 PM

  I am assuming the police officer on the street was not one of the ones at the jail. I am assuming those are jail personal but I could be wrong. So I will start with the officer on the street. He gets sent to a fight between this drunk Hope girl and her sister or whoever. She leans on the officer when he gets there. Why would she do that and who wants a drunk bleeding woman hanging on them. Then she accidentally gives the wrong identificatioin. OK I believe that, it’s easy to give cops the wrong ID, just yesterday I gave a cop my grandma’s ID, honest mistake. From what I read there was no problem with the original arrest. She was acting like a drunk asshole, this family is lucky she is the only one getting arrested, some cops would have arrested all of the idiots. Don’t call the cops when you are drunk and fighting and then cry when they take action. Do you think this officer wanted to go referee a fight between another dysfunctional family. It was probably the 3rd time that day he had to go deal with a bunch of idiots.

  Once she was at the jail she was deemd suicidal by a doctor. Now if I’m working and my choices are put this girl on suicide watch, which means taking her clothing, or not putting her on suicide watch and risking my job I would do what I was supposed to do. It’s not their job to second guess a doctor. If she wasn’t acting like a crazy drunk this wouldn’t have happened. I don’t think any of those male officers looked like they were having a good time. I’m sure they are tired of dealing with drunk idiots.

  I like how she claims she was injured by the officers. Maybe she wasinjured when she was involved in a fight so brutal she had to call the police and got a bloody nose.

• 48 John454 // Feb 17, 2009 at 10:30 PM

  Jones, if cops don’t want to do their jobs, they should leave.
  They didn’t KNOW they would be asked to do this kind of work?? LoL

  She was acting like a woman that had just gotten beat up, and then assaulted by the cop on top of it, in the arrest video. The cop could have documented any of his accusations at ANY time, but he says he doesn’t “feel the need” to turn the camera on, until after he beaten her, then she cussing him out, and he wants everyone to believe she was this way the WHOLE time.

  Then the beginning of the strip video is “missing”. Later the sheriff says it is non existent, but he never realized that for FIVE MONTHS?!?!

  The doctor that diagnosed Steffey was called on the phone, he NEVER actually saw her.

  Not even an experienced doc can diagnose someone as suicidal after a couple sessions, these people claim to do it with a few questions and over the phone! BS!

  Then you say the cops can’t second guess a doc, but they & the nurse are the ones giving the doc his info.

  So how do you justify doing this to all the innocent people??
  “Yeah you may not be suicidal, but I want to keep my job.”
  What the heck are you thinking!??!

  Steffey also went to the hospital after she was released and she was diagnosed with a concussion.
  Symptoms of a concussion include:

  Passing out.
  Not being able to remember what happened after the injury.
  Acting confused, asking the same question over and over, slurring words, or not being able to concentrate.
  Feeling lightheaded, seeing “stars,” having blurry vision, or experiencing ringing in the ears.
  Not being able to stand or walk; or having coordination and balance problems.
  Feeling nauseous or throwing up.

  Gee sounds like they might have confused drunk with a concussion?
  With no breathalizer taken, its all speculation.

• 49 jones // Feb 21, 2009 at 11:23 PM

  Why would they give her a breathalizer she wasn’t being arrested for drunk driving although I’ve read she has been before.

  If she had a concussion and one of the symptons is memory loss then how can we believe anything she is saying, she can’t remember so she is just making up a good story to get sympathy and a lawsuit.

  I have had concussions and I have seen people with concussions and never seen any of them act like her. She was acting like a drunk not somebody with a serious head injury. I’ve had two concussions and both times I was so out of it I could barely talk let alone yell and scream like her.

  I don’t think it’s part of a cops job to let some drunk, or somebody he thinks is drunk but is really suffering from a concussion, to hang all over them.

  Also I really find it hard to believe that a woman, or anybody who is beat up by a cop is going to act the way she did. Your telling me this cop just kicked your ass and now your going to yell at him. If this cop really beat her up I would think she would be to afraid to act like that. I know if a cop kicks my ass I’m not going to yell at him and piss him off some more, unless of course I’m really really drunk. You admit she cusses him out after she claims he beat her, that makes no sense to me at all. Here is a good idea, this cop just kicked my ass for no reason, I’m going to cuss him out so he does it again. I’m not buying it John.

• 50 John454 // Feb 22, 2009 at 11:20 PM

  Well Jones, your not buying because you don’t have all the info I have collected. Or talked to the people that I have, if you had you’d know these cops for what they are.

  The bottom line is that, even if she was everything the sheriff said she was, you still don’t have men stripping a woman naked, and then leaving her that way for HOURS!

  If they don’t give her a breathalyzer, WHY would they then claim she’s drunk? And yes, you can tell she’s been drinking, she never denied that she had been.

  How does a cop, who testifies twice, that he’s “out in the middle of no where” never start his camera until after he assaults the victim? And people there yell to get their own camera because “he’s beating her”.
  So we have the beginning of the arrest video non-existent.
  Then we have the beginning of the strip video “missing”, until it blows up on national news, then FIVE months after it was asked for, during the grand jury ‘investigation’, the sheriff THEN claims it’s non-existent too.
  They claim the camera “wasn’t functioning”, the camera operator “has no idea WHY it didn’t record the whole event”. But THEN it starts functioning again, JUST as they force Steffey to the bunk to strip her. (Yeah my electronics are always fixing themselves just in time too.)
  Plus the fact that I called the sheriff’s dept three months after the news had requested the rest of the strip video. The sheriff’s dept claimed THEN that the rest of the video would be released to Steffey’s lawyers during discovery, so they never claimed then that the video was “non-existent”.

  Then we have the nurse interview video. Except all that the sheriff releases is a short bit of audio, that has been HIGHLY edited and enhanced. This is the video that they claim Steffey admitted she was suicidal, the only problem is, she is being sarcastic, NOT suicidal. (Please don’t try telling me its not anyone’s job there to know the difference.)
  I called and requested a copy of that tape that was UNEDITED, I told them I was going to enhance the whole thing, to show it up for the ‘manufactured’ evidence it was.
  I was then informed that it was a medical record and they couldn’t release it.
  BUT THEY HAD ALREADY RELEASED IT TO THE NEWS PAPERS!!
  (This is the same excuse the sheriff used, in not releasing information, in the other lawsuit against him.)
  There have been FIVE women come forward with the same claims of abuse, including a woman that WORKS in corrections.
  And this doesn’t count the three teen girls that were strip searched in Stark County.
  This isn’t just one case of abuse, but an ongoing thing.

  YOU say SHE was the one acting up and an asshole…so where did you get this info? The sheriff?
  This is the same sheriff that said he would not try the case in the media, and that the whole story would come out in the grand jury investigation.
  Except that NO information that was presented to the grand jury can ever be released.
  So he either had to KNOW that no information could come from the investigation or he’s not a very bright lawman.
  And NOW he is saying that he won’t comment, and that the whole story will come out in Steffey’s lawsuit.
  Except that this case will NEVER go to trial, so no facts will EVER come out, and he knows this too.

  And as for the lawsuit Steffey is not just suing for money, but a change in jail policy also. I have talked to Ohio officials and this is the ONLY way to change policy. So if it was just money she was after, why complicate the suit with policy language?

  According to trial transcripts, yes she yelled at the one that attacked her and the officer told her to calm down, and according to EVEYONE, including the officer, she did.

  The disputed part is what happened next, the officer said that she then started yelling at him, but witnesses said it was because the cop started “pushing her buttons” about her dead sister and provoking her.

  I have seen concussions before too, but the symptoms vary.

  I also know that the sheriff’s dept kept information away from the grand jury investigators.
  But this is too long as it is….Later

  Excessive force — an application of force which, either by the type of force employed, or the extent to which such force is employed, exceeds that force which reasonably appears to be necessary under all the circumstances surrounding the incident.
  Force shall never be used as punishment. Only the amount of force
  necessary to control the situation shall be used.

• 51 jones // Feb 24, 2009 at 3:54 PM

  As far as the video camera goes, if they were trying to hide something they would have gotten rid of the whole tape. According to you what we see on the tape is wrong, men taking the clothes of a female prisoner, so why would they let that out. Why would they even tape it in the first place if they thought they were doing something wrong. The reason they video taped it was for their own protection. Imagine what type of allegations Hope would be making if that tape wasn’t around. She could say after they took her clothes they raped her and everybody would believe her.

  At least your now willing to admit she was drinking instead of keep playing the it was the concussion not the alcohol BS. Again the breathalizer, as far as I know, is used to measure somebody’s BAC who was arrested for drunk driving. I don’t think they use it when they arrest somebody who is of the legal drinking age unless it is a driving related arrest so they had no reason to give her a breath test.

  Bystanders said he’s beating her and yelled to get their own cameras. Where are these tapes? Who are these bystanders, her family and friends? Can a cop put his hands on somebody these days without people saying it’s a beating? The ofc does have the right to protect himself and from what I’ve read she was trying to hang on him.

  The acting up like an asshole didn’t come from the sheriff, I came to that conclusion on my own when I read she was drunk, oh I’m sorry she had been drinking, was fighting with somebody in the first place which caused the police to respond, was trying to hang on the cop, provided false identification and cussed the cop out. It my book 1+1=2 and all that adds up to somebody acting like an asshole.

  She admits she suicidal but now claims she was being sarcastic. This is supposed to be a grown, mature woman, why would she be sarcastic about something like that? Maybe the alcohol? Besides, I thought she was suffering from a concussion, she had all these symptoms from a concussion but she has enough wits to give a smart ass answer to a question. You can’t have it both ways John.

  As far as the lawsuit, I’m sure she truly feels what happened to her was wrong, that doesn’t make her right. Another motive she would have is just like you said, why would she ask for change if she just wanted money, well to make people believe she just isn’t after money, it worked on you. I don’t think she should be rewarded for her behavior.

  Thank you for defining excessive force for me, I didn’t know what that was but I just don’t see excessive force here. If they have to take her clothes because she is suicidal how else are they supposed to do it. I didn’t see anybody hit, kick, slap, knee or assault her in any way. They used the force which was necessary to accomplish what they had the legal right to do. They simply restrained her.

• 52 jones // Feb 24, 2009 at 4:33 PM

  Just watched another video that said She refused to talk to the special prosecutor who was investigating this incident because they didn’t want her lawyer present. Why is she hiding behind a lawyer? That makes no sense at all to not even talk to the prosecutor, that really makes me believe she is lieing, why else would she insist on having a lawyer present, she claims moral support, give me a break, it’s because the prosecutor would have gotten to the truth if her lawyer wasn’t there to tell her what to say. What a joke.

• 53 jones // Feb 24, 2009 at 4:56 PM

  John, since you seem to know so much about this case I have a question for you. What ever happened to the original person who assaulted Hope. Was it a friend or relative or just who was it.

  According to the 911 tape the caller said Hope had a bloody nose and a chunk of hair ripped out. Sounds like a pretty brutal fight she was in. Was anybody charged in that fight? If not then why? Are any of her injuries attributed to this fight besides the bloody nose and loss of hair or are the police being blamed for all the injuries except those that were documented on the 911 tape. If the caller didn’t say that on the tape would she be blaming the police for those injuries also.

  Where is the lawsuit against the person who originally assaulted her. Why is she not filing a lawsuit against that person. Maybe that person doesn’t have the deep pockets that the police have.

• 54 jones // Feb 24, 2009 at 8:08 PM

  BTW, she was CONVICTED by a JURY not some judge you could accuse of taking sides and I’m sure the jury heard a lot more then what the media has put out. It’s hard to get that many people to agree on anything so I’m sure the evidence against her was more than sufficient.

  Before you scream the jury didn’t see the video that doesn’t matter. As far as I know she wasn’t charged with anything that took place at the jail so that incident has nothing to do with her charges. Even “IF” she was mistreated at the jail that doesn’t mean she’s not guilty on the original charges. This was two separate incidents. Funny how she also dropped her appeal, what is she trying to hide.

• 55 John454 // Feb 25, 2009 at 11:09 PM

  QUOTE “According to you what we see on the tape is wrong, men taking the clothes of a female prisoner, so why would they let that out.

  According to me? What about you? You don’t think it’s wrong to have men present, and even participate in removing her bra and underwear?

  Plus the cops didn’t release it at first, Steffey’s lawyers had to go back and specifically ask for it. And I suppose the reason they did release what they did is because it’s the law that it has to be recorded, and it was before it all exploded in their faces when it went national.

  What is really amazing is that still, after the initial video, they have been able to manipulate what information they let out. When it’s something that could help Steffey’s case, then they use the excuse that they can’t comment on a pending case, but when its something that could make them look better, then its released.

  And a quick look at YouTube and you can see plenty of examples of cops doing stuff they shouldn’t while being recorded. So any theory that they wouldn’t, is blown out of the water.

  QUOTE “Imagine what type of allegations Hope would be making if that tape wasn’t around. “

  Yeah and imagine what the cops would be saying if that tape wasn’t around. They could deny that any men were there at all.

  QUOTE “Bystanders said he’s beating her and yelled to get their own cameras. Where are these tapes?”

  Well no kidding!! WHERE are these tapes? Why is it every tape out of Stark County is either missing footage, or edited??
  This is information the paper printed about the grand jury investigation. HOW they got information that I was told was not supposed to be released, I don’t know.

  QUOTE “She admits she suicidal but now claims she was being sarcastic.”

  No. I said she was being sarcastic, anyone can tell from the tape.
  Steffey & her lawyers have kept to the gag order, issued by the judge. Swanson & Stark County are the ones releasing information, if it’s favorable to them.

  QUOTE “o make people believe she just isn’t after money, it worked on you. I don’t think she should be rewarded for her behavior.”

  She is not getting “rewarded” for her behavior, she’s getting rewarded for the COP’s behavior.

  I also talked to the Ohio Secretary and he is the one that said the only way to change policy is to sue.

  QUOTE “I didn’t see anybody hit, kick, slap, knee or assault her in any way. They simply restrained her.”

  No they DIDN’T simply restrain her, two guys TWICE her size also put her in submission holds (manipulation) until she was yelling in pain, torturing her into compliance.

  QUOTE “Just watched another video that said She refused to talk to the special prosecutor who was investigating this incident because they didn’t want her lawyer present. “

  And yet the special prosecutor refused to say if the deputies were allowed to have their lawyer present, citing ethical reasons.
  Maybe they should look up ethics in the dictionary.

  BTW This video is wrong, according to the head grand jury investigator that I talked to, Steffey DID talk to them. (But he wouldn’t say if her lawyer was present or not.)

  QUOTE “What ever happened to the original person who assaulted Hope. Was it a friend or relative or just who was it.”

  It was her niece that attacked her, she wanted to drive Steffey’s car, and Steffey didn’t want her to. This is what the argument was about.
  The person that called 911 was her nephew, her niece’s brother. He called the cops on his sister!

  I suppose she isn’t suing her niece because she didn’t strip her and leave her naked for hours.

  As for the investigation, the cop testified that he didn’t finish the investigation, because he arrested Hope. But he did say that he turned over the investigation to the backup deputy, and the investigation was still never finished.

  QUOTE “BTW, she was CONVICTED by a JURY”

  Who had no proof other than the word of the cop and the arrest video, but the arrest video does not show what lead up to his arresting her.
  So basically the jury just took the word of the cop over Steffey & the witnesses.
  And yes, the witnesses were friends & family, and most were called by the prosecution.
  So if you accept when their testimony was against Steffey, you can’t then say they lied for her if they side with her.

  You seem to believe the cops every word, is there any reason you should? Are you a LEO or some type of correctional officer?

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDk9ZyYslTw

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bXh1fBiL0k

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfC4JV5eq0k&feature=related

• 56 jones // Feb 26, 2009 at 10:14 AM

  YOU - According to me? What about you? You don’t think it’s wrong to have men present, and even participate in removing her bra and underwear?

  No I don’t, not in this case, her clothing was removed from her because she was suicidal, they were not strip searching her. What if this wasn’t in a jail cell but in a hospital room and those weren’t police officers but doctors and nurses and they did the same thing because they believed she was suicidal, would you still think it was wrong just because the doctors were men?

  You - And a quick look at YouTube and you can see plenty of examples of cops doing stuff they shouldn’t while being recorded. So any theory that they wouldn’t, is blown out of the water.

  I have seen plenty of tapes of cops doing stupid things on youtube but I have yet to see a tape of a cop doing something stupid while being taped by another cop.

  You - I also talked to the Ohio Secretary and he is the one that said the only way to change policy is to sue.

  What policy, their policy says strip searches have to be done by members of the opposite sex so that policy doesn’t need to be changed. Your problem is you refuse to see this as anything but a strip search. If she was an an accident and male firefighters removed her clothing to provide aid would you consider that a strip search, and what if those firefighters were public safety officers, both cops and firemen.

  You - No they DIDN’T simply restrain her, two guys TWICE her size also put her in submission holds (manipulation) until she was yelling in pain, torturing her into compliance

  Those officers didn’t do anything wrong as far as use of force is concerned. Let’s assume it was all female officers and let’s assume she was really suicidal and taking her clothes was the proper thing to do, I say let’s assume because you will never admit it was. So assuming they were all female officers and they were justified in taking her clothes would you still claim they used to much force to accomplish it. How else are you going to remove somebody’s clothes against there will without using some force?

  You - And yet the special prosecutor refused to say if the deputies were allowed to have their lawyer present, citing ethical reasons.
  Maybe they should look up ethics in the dictionary

  This prosecutor was investigating this incident with her as the victim. They were not investigating her for criminal charges, her charges came from her contact with the initial officer, there was no need for her, as the victim, to have her attorney present, if she needed moral support why wouldn’t she have her husband with her, why her attorney.

  The officers on the other hand were being questioned as to possible criminal charges therefore they have the right to have an attorney present, that is in the constitution.

  You - BTW This video is wrong, according to the head grand jury investigator that I talked to, Steffey DID talk to them. (But he wouldn’t say if her lawyer was present or not.)

  So the grand jury did get her side of the story

  John the way I see it is this. 95% of the people who watch the video are outraged at what they see, they think it is disturbing video and think the officers should be charged with a crime. So how is it two jury’s ruled against her? Maybe these jury’s got to hear all the evidence instead of just watching a short video taken out of context. A grand jury didn’t indict these officers, what does that tell you, as Nancy Grace says, A grand jury will indict a ham sandwich.

• 57 John454 // Feb 27, 2009 at 5:36 PM

  I notice you evaded the question on if you are a cop or correctional officer.

  YOU- would you still think it was wrong just because the doctors were men?

  Yes, if men are stripping her against her will, Doctors, lawyers, police, whatever, its WRONG.

  Some other guy tried this same line of BS –Heres my reply to him:

  At first I wasn’t even going to reply to something so ridiculous, because I thought no one would buy this explanation.
  But then I remembered that voters put Swanson back into office.

  Ok so you are saying that if an ambulance had been called for Steffey, to treat her concussion, that the paramedic’s would have forcibly stripped her naked, while she screams for them to stop.

  Or that, when she went to the hospital, after she got out of jail, and she was diagnosed with a concussion, that the doctors then forcibly stripped her naked while she’s screaming for them to stop.

  And you are saying that someone you know, or you have knowledge, that someone going to the doctor for a concussion, or even if they were drunk, or seemed to be drunk, will be then forcibly stripped naked while they are screaming for them to stop.

  You know this for a fact…..right?

  I hope this sheds some light in the dark corners of your mind.

  YOU - I have yet to see a tape of a cop doing something stupid while being taped by another cop.

  Then you haven’t looked.

  YOU- Your problem is you refuse to see this as anything but a strip search.

  Its not a strip search. Nor is it a suicide prevention, even though they claim it is.
  Its an assault to “teach her a lesson”.
  If it was REALLY a confession, then why don’t they give me a UNEDITED copy of their manufactured confession?
  And for the record, you know as well as I do that she was being sarcastic, not suicidal. But for some reason you state it as a truth that she was suicidal, even though you know it’s not true.

  YOU- How else are you going to remove somebody’s clothes against there will without using some force?

  True, but they didn’t just use some force. They had enough people there to just restrain her, there was no need for the amount of force they used.

  YOU- there was no need for her, as the victim, to have her attorney present

  After what she went through and didn’t have an attorney, and your saying she didn’t have a need for one THIS time? There’s no way I would have talked to them without one. I have talked to these slippery thugs on the phone.

  YOU - So how is it two jury’s ruled against her?

  The first one the jury chose to believe the cop over the witnesses and Steffey, as I explained before.

  The grand jury is going to find however the prosecutor wants them to.
  How does the grand jury have a MONTHS long investigation and fail to find the person that said Steffey refused to remove her cloths??
  How do they FAIL to resolve the missing beginning of ever stinking video that came out of the sheriff’s office?
  How do they overlook the deliberate swinging away of the camera from her, just as she starts screaming at what they are doing to her during a “mat change”?
  How does the grand jury “investigators” ignore the fact that the sheriff’s dept kept information from them, even after both head investigators were told of this??

• 58 John454 // Feb 28, 2009 at 7:30 AM

  Will Canuck, I see by your post it looks as though you have experience and realize what is actually going on.

  In these videos the cops DO realize they are being taped, and having experience, they know how to make the most of it.

  As you stated, they never respond to Hope at the beginning of the tapes, there is no attempt to calm her at all, until she is screaming in the strip video. And then its nothing more than to tell her to “relax”. And from experience they have to know how effective that’s going to be once they have her agitated by not responding to her in the beginning.

  Anyone should be able to figure this scam out, when the wife asks you something just ignore her for a while, and see how upset she becomes.

  And then at the end of each video, they then try to ‘act’ like a concerned officer, or at the end of the strip video when the cop looks away from Steffey, like he hasn’t just pulled her pants down, what a joke.

  The fact that they stick to their poor excuses even as other corrections officials are condemning their actions says a lot too. But probably not as much as the laughter at the end of the strip video, when the cops THOUGHT the camera was off. This says volumes about their “concern” for Steffey.

  I have relation that are LEOs and I have friends in the sheriff’s dept that I have worked with for years. I also know and have friends that are guards at prisons.

  And its crap like this that makes their job harder and puts them at more risk.

• 59 jones // Feb 28, 2009 at 3:07 PM

  John since your so concerned, I will tell you, I am a retired police officer. Over 25 and I have dealt with people like her plenty of times. People who think they are too good or too high class to go to jail. Well the truth is if your not too high class to get into a drunken brawl with your family your not too high class for jail. She is to blame for what happened to her. If she would have just accepted the fact that she screwed up and had to sit in jail for a little while then we wouldn’t be talking about it today. If there is any truth to what I read about her being arrested before for drunk driving then she has been there before. Why didn’t anything happen to her that night, maybe she that night she was acting like a flaming ass. Apparently her first trip to jail wasn’t so horrifying since she decided to take a 2nd trip. She needs to accept responsibility for her actions instead of blaming others.

  I love how her husband talks like he was there when he says what happened. Where is he getting his information from, his wife, who according to you had a concussion and should be suffering from memory loss or is that just selective memory loss.

  Getting back to her lawsuit you say she is sueing for a change in policy. What policy is that? Because according to you this wasn’t a strip search so that policy doesn’t need to be changed, it wasn’t suicide precaution so that policy doesn’t need to be change, you think it was done to punish her and I’ll bet their policy already prohibits officers from stripping inmates as punishment so what exactly is her lawsuit trying to change?

  Your take on the doctor thing is absurd and just shows what a fantasy world you live in. I have seen doctors, both male and female, do things to patients against their will. It is their job, they are liable for people when they come in. When people are a danger to themselves the doctors have to act. If somebody is so drunk they are refusing medical attention for a stab wound do you think a doctor is just going to let them bleed to death.

  I have held males and females down to draw blood against there will when arrested for drunk driving. Yes, they scream like they are being murdered but it has to be done.

  The officers here were following doctor orders, why should they risk their jobs, and prosecution by ignoring the doctors and taking a chance that she did something to hurt herself. If you have a problem it should be with the doctor who ordered her into suicide prevention. I know I wouldn’t risk my job for some drunk, even if I didn’t agree with the doctor I still have to do my job. If they ignored the doctor and she killed herself they would be in prison today. Your telling me you would take that chance.

• 60 John454 // Feb 28, 2009 at 5:13 PM

  Wow jones, so you have dealt with people who thought they were too good, JUST like Steffey, huh?

  Sounds like you need some counseling or anger management along with these thugs.

  And I have met some cops like these criminals & apparently you.

  You spout off the same lame, “its policy” crap that these criminals are using to cover their butts. And you know it’s a load of BS, just the same as any cop that’s been around the block.

  Tell me that you have NEVER seen a cop abuse someone under the “color of law”. If you were one as long as you claim, you KNOW it happens.

  Yeah, you don’t have to put up with anyone “hanging” on you. As a cop, you can’t hit them directly, but you’ll slam them into something, like the goon did Steffey, and then claim it was just part of the arrest. And when she tries to get away from beating her and twisting her arm up behind her back, well that’s resisting huh!

  Even when witnesses said he exploded in a rage and slammed her on the car for no reason.
  OOPS I forgot you don’t have to believe anything the witnesses said in support of Steffey, only to convict her.

  And you have the guts to say I live in a fantasy world?

  I have a friend that’s a prison guard. He was attacked by an inmate. So the inmate was moved to a new location. He was all cuffed up, and as fate would have it, at the top of some stairs his leg chains snagged on something and he fell down the whole flight.

  I understand how this happens, and I don’t have a problem with it. This isn’t just about revenge, but about the safety of every guard in the prison.
  The inmates aren’t afraid of going through the system. They have already done that, usually more than once.
  They have to be shown that there will be consequences for attacking a guard, like I said for the safety of everyone.

  But that isn’t THIS case…THIS case is BS.
  You know it and I know it.

• 61 jones // Mar 1, 2009 at 12:24 AM

  Yes, I have dealt with people who thought they were to good to be arrested.

  Why would I need counseling or anger management because I have dealt with people who think they are above the law.

  Please tell me about the criminal cops you have met, what makes them criminals?

  You may think “it’s policy” is a lame line but it’s true. I’m sure this jail has a policy on how to handle suicidal inmates, lets not forget she was an inmate, but you don’t want them to follow that policy yet scream that they broke policy by having males present during a strip search. Do you want them to follow policy or don’t you, or do you want them to pick and choose what policies to follow. I had to follow policy even when I didn’t agree with them.

  I never saw a cop abuse somebody under color of law.

  You can’t hit them directly? Where did you get that information? I hit plenty of people directly and yes trying to get away from a cop who is arresting you is resisting arrest. Not putting your hands behind your back when you are told to is resisting arrest. While were on the subject are you serious, twisting somebody’s arm behind their back is abuse? In case you didn’t know when you are arrested the handcuffs go in back, if you don’t believe me ask her, I believe she was arrested for drunk driving before this incident. I read that somewhere, don’t know if it’s true, maybe you can confirm this for me, was this her 2nd arrest?

  Was one of the witnesses the family member she was brawling with? I have no idea who the witnesses were but if they testified on her behalf apparently the jury didn’t find them very credible. Before you go off and say they are just going to believe the cops your wrong. It’s very hard to convict somebody on just the word of an officer. I lost many cases due to lack of evidence because people come in and lie their ass off and it only takes one person to buy into it. So if your saying she was convicted on just the word of the officer and she had all these witnesses on her side then they all most have come off as a bunch of liars.

  The officer exploded in rage huh. What kind of history did this officer have. I’m sure if he was being accused of brutality his personal file was reviewed. Did he have a history of brutality, I am assuming not since I’ve never read anything about it in any article and I’m sure if he did that would have been brought up. What a coincidence, the first time this officer decides to explode on somebody the jailers decide to take her clothes for no reason.

  So when a friend of yours pushes a handcuffed and shackled prisoner down a flight of stairs you think that’s ok but it’s brutality when guards take a prisoner’s clothing because they are suicidal. Can you say hypocrite?

  You never answered my question. Maybe your just trying to avoid it. If you were in that same situation as a guard, and a doctor told you that an inmate was suicidal what would you do. Would you follow policy and take their clothing or would you ignore policy and hope they didn’t kill themselves knowing that if they did hurt themselves you would probably be sued, fired and charged with a crime? I wouldn’t risk everything I had would you?

• 62 Carlos Miller // Mar 1, 2009 at 12:44 AM

  Jones,

  What is your opinion on this video?

  http://carlosmiller.com/2009/02/28/seattle-deputy-caught-on-video-viciously-attacking-teenage-girl/

• 63 John454 // Mar 1, 2009 at 8:23 PM

  Ok now I have to think you have to be a troll.
  No way could you have been a cop and not seen abuse at some time. Either that or you think it’s ok for a cop to do anything to someone.

  Plus the fact you twist everything I have said into something else.
  And ignore everything you don’t want to respond to.

  As for me being a hypocrite, I am just pointing out that I do have an idea of the reality that people in your line of work have.

  Is it right if a prisoner gets injured after attacking a guard? Legally, no.
  But as you have pointed out there are certain realities that have to be faced.
  I realize that it looks as though I am going in circles. But comparing THIS case to Steffey’s is apples & oranges. And anyone can see that.

  If I had been in that situation what would I have done?

  Well first of all I would have had Steffey make her call, get someone coming to get her. Then I would have booked her, and by that time hopefully her ride would have been there and I could have disposed of her altogether.

  I have to ask the same question as her lawyer, what’s all the rigmarole for? This is a BS misdemeanor arrest, why all the complications?

  Swanson’s “policies” designed to boost jail population to justify a bigger budget? It seems he’s jailing every lil BS arrest that comes along, its no wonder he’s griping about funds & lawsuits.

• 64 jones // Mar 2, 2009 at 10:22 AM

  John, you say I avoid questions, I’ve asked you several times if she has a drunk driving arrest and still you won’t answer.

  Nice response to my other question. You would send the drunk suicidal girl home. That way if she kills herself you won’t be responsible because you let her go. Sorry but you would still be responsible for her so if she kills herself at home get ready to lose your job and get sued by her family who would now be saying, she was suicidal, you should have kept her in jail and put her on suicide watch. Her husband would be on the news crying, they knew she was suicidal, I don’t know why they didn’t put her on suicide prevention, it’s their fault she killed herself.

• 65 Duane Kerzic // Mar 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM

  My take on this is that the cop at the scene escalated what was going on because he didn’t know how to communicate. So basically he took a bad situation and made it worse. Not saying that’s criminal, just poor training and poor people skills.

  Then they get her to the jail. They ask a stupid question, they don’t ask do you do you feel like hurting yourself now, so Hope asks them to be more specific and they tackle her. This is another escalation by the jail keepers. It’s totally possible and probable that at some point in Hope’s life she felt like hurting herself but she didn’t feel that way at the moment. She wanted to answer the question truthfully.

  Also asking people about if they are feeling suicidal has been shown to not be very effective. People lie about it all the time. They even sign contracts stating they aren’t going to commit suicide and do so within hours of signing them. So it’s a question that’s not even worth asking because the responce to it has no value one way or the other.

  For the moment lets assume that Hope was suicidal. Do you think that excuses the force that was used against her? That would be the worst thing you could do to someone that was indeed suicidal. When people are assulted it just hurts them more. People that are suicidal need to be handled gentlely, not surrounded and subdued with force. Ok, if someone is about to jump off a roof that’s a different matter, but its not the case here. Punishing someone for feeling like hurting themself doesn’t stop them from hurting themself. It’s just barbaric.

  You also don’t leave a person that’s suicidal naked in a cell for 6 hours. You have to protect their dignity. Of course don’t want them to have shoelaces or other stuff like that. But you don’t strip their dignity from them by leaving them naked.

• 66 John454 // Mar 2, 2009 at 3:02 PM

  Jones Answer your question? If you had read this thread you’d have seen the answer, Carlos had already stated the answer.

  But I don’t want you to strain yourself, here’s Carlos quote:
  “As far as her priors go, I did an online check over the weekend, basing it only in her county, and all she had were a couple of speeding tickets and a DUI about ten years ago, if I remember correctly.
  There was nothing that indicated she was a habitual offender.”
  Actually if you look up the record you’ll see that the sheriff’s dept didn’t even know who they arrested. They got Steffey’s name wrong, including the court records, they spelled it “Steffy”.
  Not only did they get her name wrong, but also her birth date, which at first lead me to believe that she didn’t have ANY record. Then later I found out the idiots didn’t even know who they had arrested.
  YOU – QUOTE “You would send the drunk suicidal girl home.”
  See there you go again!!!
  Where’s the breathalyzer report that says she was drunk? How do you KNOW she was suicidal?? The “independent” opinion of a doctor that never even saw the patient?
  The sheriff’s “manufactured” evidence?
  And the idea of turning a wife over to her husband, and you claim that the police would be liable? Where did you ever get an idea like that?
  And since that isn’t what they did, now they ARE liable, how the hell do you explain that?
  Its just too bad the sheriff was able to control all the evidence, they should have been criminally liable too.
  And your “leap” at the idea of her husband on the news crying about it is just that a BIG leap, and nothing more than speculation and your opinion.

  Thanks, but no thanks.

• 67 Jones // Mar 2, 2009 at 3:40 PM

  John, a simple yes or no from YOU is what I am looking for. I am looking for YOU to CONFIRM Carlos’ statement since you apparently are a lot closer to this case then Carlos. Carlos also said he checked the internet, not the most reliable source, and he only checked in her county. People have been known to be arrested outside of their own county so how do we know she doesn’t have multiple arrests. It seems as if we have one confirmed drunk driving and then this incident but who knows, she could have more than that. Why don’t you tell us. You can’t even bring yourself to admit she has the one prior arrest that Carlos discovered, you had to quote him.

  Again, the police don’t give breathalyzer tests to everybody they arrest, just those arrested for drunk driving offenses.

  John, your right, we don’t KNOW without a doubt that she was suicidal. They did however have reason to believe she was suicidal, like you said a doctor said she was so yes they would be liable for her if they chose to ignore the doctor and send her home. You think the police can just walk away from somebody who is suicidal. I agree that they should be able to, they shouldn’t be held responsible but they are. John, I have had many people tell me over the years they wanted to kill themselves and every one of them went to the hospital and was petitioned for a psychological evaluation. Most of them went willingly but some of them went kicking and screaming but they all went. Were some of them just talking stupid and not really suicidal? I’m sure a lot of them were but it’s not my job to determine that. If I walked away from them, wrote a report that they said they wanted to kill themselves and didn’t do anything about it and they killed themselves I can guarantee you that I would be fired, sued and depending on the prosecutor probably charged with a crime. Again, you think somebody should risk all that to save her from feeling humiliated?

  You say they are liable how do I explain that. I explain that by saying they are not liable and so far two juries say I’m right. She was convicted of a crime and no criminal charges were brought against the guards. Sure she can sue, they might even pay her to go away but as far as I know she hasn’t received any money, until she does I think that makes them not liable.

  If you don’t like speculation then I’ll just let the FACTS speak for themselves. She was CONVICTED by a jury for her crime. The guards were EXONERATED by a jury.

  BTW, as far as the spelling of her name and date of birth being wrong, how do we know she didn’t use one of her fake ID cards when she was arrested.

• 68 imdateach // Mar 9, 2009 at 1:49 AM

  Jones - I’ve got some advice for you. Crawl back into the ignorant abyss whence you emerged. Your simplistic thought process is well-reflected in your third-grade level spelling and grammatical skills. To quote you:
  “You think the police can just walk away from somebody who is suicidal.”
  First of all, that was a question. Hint: It requires a question mark. They look like this “?”.
  Secondly, and more importantly, I think you’re missing the “big picture” here. What does it matter how many DUI convictions she had? (Notice the use of that handy little question mark) Would prior non-felony convictions render her less a citizen, thus ineligible to be regarded with even the most rudimentary level of human dignity?
  Didn’t you pick up on her husband’s attitude towards her during that telephone call or her nervous “giddy” behavior during the conversation? From what I can tell, they’re not a happy couple. Remember now, it takes two. Maybe he mistreats her? Maybe she’s been a rape victim? Nobody knows but her.
  The biggest clue is in her reply to the suicide question. Remember her reply? It was something to the effect: yeah, of course I’ve thought about it (who hasn’t?), especially right now. Any decent medical professional, especially those trained in Psychiatry and Psychology, should have immediately discerned the sarcasm and interrogated further. I get the feeling the doctor was just going through the motions. How sad.
  Please, just think about it. Forget about the lawsuit for a second. If this woman has had prior traumatic experiences in her life, how do you think she felt in that situation? Would you wish that on your mother? Your wife? Your daughter? Your sister? Your worst enemy? Have a little compassion for God’s sake.
  No, I am neither an LEO nor a health professional. I am a mechanical engineer.

• 69 jones // Mar 9, 2009 at 10:01 AM

  “You think the police can just walk away from somebody who is suicidal.”
  First of all, that was a question. Hint: It requires a question mark. They look like this “?”.

  That wasn’t a question that is why there was not a question mark.

  What I wrote was this. You think the police can just walk away from somebody who is suicidal. I agree that they should be able to…..

  I made a statement that he thinks the police can just walk away from somebody who is suicidal. I go on to say I agree they should be able to. If I was asking him a question that would imply I didn’t know how he felt so how could I agree.

  You obviously know how a question ends but it seems you have a problem with how a question starts. Most questions start with words like do, are, how, where, who, when, why etc etc. Next time you correct me make sure your correct first. Now to your questions.

  What does it matter how many DUI convictions she had?

  There seems to be a debate on whether or not she was drunk. A prior DUI conviction shows she has a history of drinking and that she makes poor decisions when she drinks. It doesn’t prove anything but it does help establish a pattern of behavior.

  I never said she deserved to be mistreated because she had a prior arrest. You understand your punctuation now work on your reading comprehension.

  Didn’t you pick up on her husband’s attitude towards her during that telephone call or her nervous “giddy” behavior during the conversation? From what I can tell, they’re not a happy couple. Remember now, it takes two. Maybe he mistreats her? Maybe she’s been a rape victim?

  I didn’t hear this conversation so I can’t comment on it.

  Any decent medical professional, especially those trained in Psychiatry and Psychology, should have immediately discerned the sarcasm and interrogated further.

  Maybe the doctor did screw up. I’m not defending the doctor. I’m defending the officers who have to follow the doctor’s orders. Even if the doctor acted too quickly in finding her suicidal who’s fault is that? When the doctor asked her a serious question maybe she should have given a serious answer.

• 70 John454 // Mar 12, 2009 at 6:55 AM

  Finally got back on. Been unable to for a while.
  At last!!

  http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_…109037&catid=3

  Investigator Exclusive: Billboard encourages women to report jail abuse

  STARK COUNTY — A story that already has people talking nationwide is certain to get more attention with a billboard that encourages former female inmates to report jail abuse.

• 71 John454 // Mar 12, 2009 at 6:59 AM

  The sheriff’s dept continues to avoid questions and give out information.

  My requests are going unanswered.
  I had asked the sheriff’s dept for an un-edited copy of the Hope Steffey/Nurse interview.

  I told them I wanted to “enhance” the whole tape and expose it for “manufactured” evidence.

  They NOW claim this is medical information and can not be released…but THEY HAVE ALREADY RELEASED IT! At least pieces of it anyway.

  So how DO you follow up on a dept that controls all the evidence??

  Apparently, even the cities can’t get information from the sheriff to settle their disputes.

  http://www.the-review.com/news/article/4538886

  QUOTE “The city of Alliance still is waiting for Stark County to answer some unsatisfied public records requests that have been pending since the dispute started almost a year ago. Similarly, The Review’s request for records to provide information for its Jailbreak series that ran early last month remain unsatisfied.”

• 72 John454 // Mar 31, 2009 at 8:29 PM

  UPDATE:
  Got some more documents from the sheriff’s office. After 5-6 months of waiting for them.
  Of course I didn’t get everything I asked for, and they blacked out some names on the reports.

  Got a copy of the BCI investigation.

  The sheriff has always maintained that Steffey was ASKED to remove her cloths and refused.

  According to the BCI document Steffey was NEVER asked to remove her cloths! This is from THEIR OWN REPORTS!!

  So how the hell is the sheriff still selling this LIE?!!??!

  This isn’t the only lie this documentation exposes, there are more.

  Most of the “investigation” consists of them rubber stamping everything the cops allege as the truth.

  Nurse Coren Lennon is supposedly the one that said Steffey should be put on suicide precautions with no suit. The jail psychologist Thomas Anuszkiewicz just approved her evaluation, which doesn’t seem much like an ‘independent’ opinion, like he alleges.

  It also says that the Stark County sheriff is aware of an FBI investigation into this.
  I also had been aware of it, since I contacted the FBI, but didn’t want to post anything about it. But apparently its no big secret!

  I am so freaking pissed all over again, about this, after reading this crap from the “investigation”!!
  What a joke!

• 73 anonymous citizen // Apr 9, 2009 at 11:58 AM

  I just discovered this–April 2009. And where? An Islamic extremist posting on Youtube who was defending the beating of a woman in Pakistan for leaving a house with a man who wasn’t her husband. So the extremist said, “Hey, it’s no different than what you do in the US,” and put up a link to the Steffey video.

  So, thanks sheriff, for justifying violence to women on the other side of the world. Actions have consequences–especially in today’s inter-linked world. And in a sense, he’s right–what the police did to Hope Steffey is, in fact, WORSE than what the Islamic extremists did in Pakistan.

  I’ve read this entire chain, and I’m ashamed to be an American citizen. How anyone can defend what happened to this woman is beyond me (and yes, I’ve read all the bogus arguments).

  What puzzles me (I almost said “most puzzles,” but there is just too much here) is how the police women could take part in this and then look in the mirror the next morning.

  Check out the beginning of the video. They put her in the cell, fully clothed. Great, no problem. Then she stands in the door–not trying to get out, just standing there–and says something. Then the male policeman charges in, slams her against the wall, and throws her to the floor and they start in. I give up: What could she POSSIBLY have said in the United States of America to justify that? I have no idea. All the outrageous crap from the fascists in this chain can’t begin to justify it.

  Meanwhile, in my own town, police beat up (”resisting arrest”) a woman (!) in diabetic shock who was driving erratically. They thought she was drunk. She hadn’t drunk anything at all. Should she have been driving? Probably not. Does that justify beating her up? Absolutely not. Nice police work. Oh? You want to know what happened to the police that beat up the woman? Absolutely nothing. Didn’t you know that a badge gives you complete license to beat up whoever you want? Welcome to the USA.

• 74 John454 // Apr 9, 2009 at 11:12 PM

  This is the BCI report that Agent Christy S. Palmer sent to John D. Ferrero, Prosecuting Attorney Stark County Ohio.
  Dated April 16, 2008 BCI Case #: SI-76-08-14-0147

  This is part of page 3

  http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y39/Zemo999/?action=view&current=BCI-Report.jpg

  Sheriff Swanson has ALWAYS maintained that Steffey was ASKED & REFUSED to remove her cloths.
  But here’s the BCI’s OWN REPORT that PROVES this is a LIE!
  And then they try to explain away their first lie with another lie, about why it was done this way without asking Steffey to do it voluntarily.

  They are trying to say that Steffey was resisting enough that EIGHT people (5 women, 3 men) couldn’t take the chance of ASKING her to remove her cloths, or EVEN TELL HER WHAT WAS GOING ON!!!
  What a crock!!

  I did NOT see any resisting in the video, I saw eight cops parading her to the cell, with her in cuffs.

  In fact EVERY video I have seen she is in cuffs!
  And the ONLY times I have seen her react to the cops is after they have assaulted her or in the process of stripping her naked.

  But apparently catching the sheriff’s dept in a lie isn’t a big deal to our “independent” BCI investigator, Christy Palmer, who seems ready to accept ANY excuse the sheriff’s dept wants to use.

  The report also goes on to say that they lowered Steffey in a slow controlled manner to the floor. Except that Steffey says she was thrown to the floor.
  She also told her husband in a phone call that she thought the cops had broken her nose.
  And she was treated by the nurse for the injury.
  And in page 4 of this report Christy Palmer even states that Steffey reported that her nose was making “crunching noises”.

  So I guess this is proof of a second LIE! (Or third)

  And still Christy Palmer, the “independent investigator” doesn’t think twice about accepting the word of the cops over the VICTIMS in spite of proof.
  BTW, Christy also references a video that she says “proves that she was lowered in a slow controlled manner to the floor”. As far as I know, THIS would have to be on the ‘non-existent’ beginning of the strip video.
  On May 5th when I asked about the “missing” video, I was told it would soon be released.
  Now here again it looks as though it’s referenced…even though they NOW claim it does not exist.
  Interesting. (I have filed a request for this video.)

  This isn’t so much an investigation report as it is a smear campaign against Hope Steffey.

  The cops can polish this turd as much as want, this STILL STINKS!

  BTW I don’t know why they bothered to black out the names of Nurse Coren Lennon and the jail psychologist Thomas Anuszkiewicz, aren’t they PROUD of the work they do?

• 75 John454 // Apr 9, 2009 at 11:20 PM

  A few things get bent out of kilter in the news sometimes, heres a post to resolve a few of them.

  At Steffey’s trial it was brought up that she ’slipped a cuff’, the arresting officer testified at her trial that she TOLD HIM ABOUT IT, and was NOT trying to escape.
  She was suffering from a concussion and she testified she was sick to her stomach with her hands forced behind her.

  Same as her dead sisters license, the officer also testified that she was NOT trying to pass herself off as her dead sister with a PHOTO ID.
  So all the ’speculation’ on that issue can now die.

  The cop also had a body mic & remote for his cruiser video, when asked WHY he didn’t turn it on BEFORE assaulting Steffey, he testified in court that he “didn’t feel the need” to do so.
  I asked the sheriff’s dept if thats the way taxpayer supplied cameras are supposed to be used.
  They said it “All depends”. I said you don’t have a written policy for when the cameras should be turned on? They said Yes, do you want a copy?
  I said yes, send it to me. (Thats been like July of 2008, na da so far.)

  Then we have the papers reports that there was “confusion” about who the victim was….OMG this is SO lame!

  First we have Steffey’s cousin ON TAPE telling them they have to KNOW she’s the victim.

  Second we have all the witnesses telling the cop Steffey was the victim.

  Third we had the testimony of the cop HIMSELF saying that he went to his car to document Steffey’s injuries.

  Forth the guy that actually called 911 was Steffey’s nephew, who is the brother of the 6 month pregnant niece that attacked Steffey. (This niece also testified that she had been drinking also.)
  HE CALLED THE COPS ON HIS OWN SISTER!!!!

  Seem “confused” to any of you?

  Also Steffey’s cousin told the niece that SHE had called the cops, so she wouldn’t get mad at her brother. She testified that the niece then threatened her.

  BTW this nephew was NOT at Steffey’s trial, he took off back to another state where he lived. (I guess maybe he didn’t want to have to testify against his sister.)

  WOW, puts a little bit of a different slant on what you have heard maybe huh??

• 76 Carlos Miller // Apr 10, 2009 at 2:08 AM

  Thanks for keeping us updated John454

• 77 John454 // Apr 10, 2009 at 7:37 AM

  I have filed with the Ohio State Atty General’s office for more info.

  I received a letter yesterday that said they are in the process of gathering everything I asked for.

  So I may have a LOT more to sift through later, just hope it gets here before the good weather.

  But even without the new stuff I would have to write a book to tell you & everyone what I have run into and found while looking into this.

  The State’s Atty seem to be a LOT faster than the sheriff’s dept!
  I had asked for everything they had last summer, after I read the trial transcripts. Never got back to me and so I had to ask again, then from my second request I had to wait almost 6 months for the info. And I STILL didn’t get everything I asked for.

  So I assume they are fighting a delaying action, hoping that the case is settled, and that I drop the requests and looking into this.

  But Steffey isn’t even the point of all this, its the fact that they are STILL doing this BS policy. And who wants to wait until its your wife, sister, aunt, or mother this happens to?

  For me this isn’t over until this crap is stopped.

  PS Your welcome

• 78 John454 // Apr 10, 2009 at 7:38 AM

  When I get more I’ll post…..

• 79 lawyaman // Apr 12, 2009 at 3:16 PM

  I have read all the submissions to this post and have been impressed with the quality of the comments. It’s been a thought provoking discussion. Kudos to John 454 for his research on this, his position and that of others has been well reasoned and well stated. I have found Jones’ comments to be well reasoned and well stated as well. Personally, I agree with the Jones side of the argument and will add my reasoning. First of all, I am a lifelong resident of Stark County Ohio. If I encounter a situation which requires police intervention, the Stark County Sheriff is who I call. So I don’t have theluxury of some, who would call for the firing and suing and criminal investigation of that office. The safety and security of myself and family depends upon the Stark County Sheriff, so I am not interested in decimating their policing ability for the sake of Hope Steffey. Before you judge me, stop to consider how much of your own family’s security you would relinquish if this had happened in your jurisdiction. Please don’t start quoting Ben Franklin to me, I have no intent of abdicating my liberty for security, it’s just that in this situation, it’s not worth it.
  There has been a lot of talk so far about our precious “rights” as Americans. It’s true,we have rights, but none are absolute. They are all tempered with responsibility, and those who act irresponsibly sacrifice their rights, and therefore their liberty. I’d like to take this opportunity to point out some rights that Hope Steffey and her family had, that they chose not to exercise. They had the right to choose not to drink alcohol. They had the right to behave responsibly at their get-together so that state intervention was not needed. They had the right to intervene in the altercation between Hope and Leanne so that it did not become violent. They had the right to treat Hope’s injuries themselves, or transport her to an appropriate medical facility. They had the right to ask Leanne to leave the party. In short, the “liberty” we as Americans so valiantly prize is manifested mainly in our right to keep the state out of our lives…so long as we are capable of acting responsibly. When we act irresponsibly, the state has an obligation to intervene, and when it does, it intervenes on behalf of the state’s interests, not necessarily the person who called them. By the time you have requested the state to help you solve your problem, you have already ceded a great deal of your liberty.

• 80 NYCPhotorights // Apr 12, 2009 at 3:52 PM

  There has been a lot of talk so far about our precious “rights” as Americans. It’s true,we have rights, but none are absolute. They are all tempered with responsibility, and those who act irresponsibly sacrifice their rights, and therefore their liberty.

  Lawyaman:

  Leaving aside your obvious bias because of your concern for your local sheriff I wish to address this point. Just because someone is arrested does not mean they give up all rights. Even while under arrest people have a RIGHT not to answer ANY questions and Police do not have a right to beat or abuse prisoners in any way and even injured prisoners have a RIGHT to proper medical care (one of the posts indicates the prisoner was suffering from a concussion). People have been known to die from untreated concussions.

  What appears to be lacking in many local police departments is professionalism as many of the cases recounted in this blog reveal. So pardon me if I have no sympathy for your precious sheriff if he and his department are sued or investigated. They too made choices - they failed to uphold the constitutional rights of their prisoner. Now let the chips fall where they may.

• 81 Carlos Miller // Apr 12, 2009 at 4:01 PM

  If I encounter a situation which requires police intervention, the Stark County Sheriff is who I call.

  But who is going to intervene when you are being assaulted by this same sheriff’s department as in the case of Hope Steffey?

• 82 lawyaman // Apr 12, 2009 at 4:06 PM

  As you may have noticed from my username I am an attorney. I have noticed in speaking with clients that they believe they can simply tell me only their side of the story, and since they’re paying me, they expect that I’ll just accept what they say without further inquiry. When they find out that I won’t represent them without knowing the whole story, they get upset. The same is true when people call the police. They think that because they have requested police intervention, they are akin to customers at a restaurant who can order the police around like waiters. As Americans, we generally have the right to go about our business without state intervention, but if we give up that right, (by acting irresponsibly) we are no longer in control. People have tremendous difficulty understanding that. They believe that if they are on their own property they are free to act any way they want. I think Hope Steffey found out the hard way, that that is not true. I have read the complaint Steffey’s attorney’s filed in federal court. What we have not seen is officer Gurlea’s account of what happened, so we should reserve judgment until we do. Somewhere above someone mentioned Steffey’s conviction for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct, and said that the jury discounted her witnesses’ testimony. As Officer Jones correctly pointed out, in legal parlance that is referred to as the jury finding the testimony non-credible. I pity Mrs. Steffey’s attorney’s in the federal suit if they have no option but to rely on those same witnesses. As for the video, obviously because of the pixilation of the images it is hard to see exactly what happened, but it’s difficult to make the case that this went beyond a clothing removal and became a “search”. If it is not a “search”, the same-sex-officer regulation does not apply, and no prima facie violation has occurred. A jury will then be left to its own lights to determine whether the exigencies of the circumstances allowed the officers to act as they did. I would remind everyone that the officers in the Rodney King trial were acquitted. Jurors will think very carefully before decimating their police forces. They will only do so if the “victim” can prove they acted responsibly. I don’t believe Hope Steffey meets that criterion.

• 83 Carlos Miller // Apr 12, 2009 at 4:13 PM

  I think jurors will have a hard time accepting the fact that police can strip you naked and leave you naked in a cell because of some remote comment she may have made.

  Women jurors will especially find this hard to swallow and men jurors will probably think this could happen to their wives, sisters, mothers, daughters.

  The fact that she is a white female with a non violent past makes it impossible for us to compare to the Rodney King incident because we all know the odds are stacked against a black man with a long criminal history as King had.

  Jurors are not going to care about the technicalities on whether or not this was a “search” or a “suicide prevention” because what they see on video looks like a sexual assault.

  And just because people request police intervention doesn’t mean they give up their rights. Not in this country.

  And why haven’t we seen Officer Gurlea’s account?

• 84 NYCPhotorights // Apr 12, 2009 at 4:32 PM

  lawyaman:

  Don’t forget that two of the officers involved in the beating of Rodney King were found guilty in the subsequent Federal trial though.

• 85 Voice of Reason // Apr 12, 2009 at 8:30 PM

  As a rule, I prefer to be sensible and to debate facts. However, for personal reasons, I have difficulties remaining levelheaded when I’m confronted with certain types of things. I’ll give some ammunition right now to people who wish to characterize me as unreasonable and somebody who shouldn’t be listened to.

  Based on all the facts, not the video by itself, it’s my feeling that the officers involved in this case have forfeited the right to be treated as human. I’d be pleased if somebody were to end their lives. I’m disappointed that this hasn’t happened. A conservative once told me that some people need to die. I agree with him, though perhaps he had other people in mind. If I sat on the killer’s jury, the killer would go free.

  There’s a point to mentioning this, and perhaps it’ll do some good. To LEOs (good and bad) out there, and to their apologists, try to understand that one thing has changed. Due to the Internet, there’s more people out there these days who know about this kind of thing and who feel exactly as I do. Some of those people sit on juries. Both big cases and small ones. Over time, you’re likely to see a trend. There’s going to be less blind faith in LEOs.

  The era of physical and sexual abuse, fraudulent charges, lies, retaliatory raids, First Amendment violations, “attitude adjustments”, “throwdowns” (planted weapons), outright murder, and cover-ups isn’t coming to an end. It’ll never end. However, it’s past time for insiders, the people who set the rules, to rethink the “code” a bit. Possibly modify it a little.

  The “code” is the problem, both in this case and in most cases of this type. It’s not true that “cops are bad”. However, it also isn’t true that (as LEOs frequently claim) a few “bad apples” cause the whole barrel to be treated unfairly. Many, or even most, LEOs support the “code”. LEOs who support the “code” are criminals. Is there a LEO out there who’s able to contest the preceding facts?

  If you’re a LEO and you support the “code”, it doesn’t matter whether or not you do the kinds of things that Mr. Miller writes about. You may be appalled by some of those things. However, if you support the “code”, you don’t deserve to be a LEO. You personally are damaging society in a serious and fundamental way. If a LEO who supports the “code” leaves the force or is killed, this benefits society far more than the removal of a thief (or a blogger, for that matter).

  As a side note, some people may protest two things, in particular, that I’ve said. They’ll state that this case isn’t sexual abuse and that “throwdowns” don’t happen any longer.

  With respect to sexual abuse, if you feel that way, put aside this case and look at what they did to Abner Louima. They sodomized him with a plunger. Even “jones” might have difficulties with that one.

  With respect to “throwdowns”, the Fong Lee case came to light quite recently and in a somewhat more shocking case that happened just two months ago, they killed a 73-year-old man at a quiet and peaceful family barbecue. He was a black man who was holding a sports drink, so they shot him and planted a “throwdown” in front of everybody without even trying to hide it. This was the Bernard Monroe case in Louisiana.

• 86 lawyaman // Apr 12, 2009 at 9:49 PM

  CM-I think jurors will have a hard time accepting the fact that police can strip you naked and leave you naked in a cell because of some remote comment she may have made.

  I think jurors will first ask themselves whether or not they would do something that would put them in a position to be strip searched. If they can see themselves ending up in the same situation, they will be very sympathetic toward her. If they can’t see this happening to them, they will be much less sympathetic. That will be determined by the trial testimony. As for the “remote comment”, I’m not sure what you’re referring to.

  CM-Women jurors will especially find this hard to swallow and men jurors will probably think this could happen to their wives, sisters, mothers, daughters.

  Perhaps, but again this will boil down to whether they feel Hope Steffy was an innocent victim or someone who caused her own troubles. That will largely be determined by the trial testimony regarding what occurred at the Weimer Road location. Again, I live here, and I don’t fear the Sheriff’s Department.

  CM-The fact that she is a white female with a non violent past makes it impossible for us to compare to the Rodney King incident because we all know the odds are stacked against a black man with a long criminal history as King had.

  But then, I think the King beating was quite a bit worse than this, so maybe that evens things out.

  CM-Jurors are not going to care about the technicalities on whether or not this was a “search” or a “suicide prevention” because what they see on video looks like a sexual assault.

  The will have to care about that difference. The nature of a civil suit under U.S.C ss 1983 requires the jury to find that the officers in question violated a victim’s clearly established constitutional right. Evidence that police violated their own policy would make that determination much easier. As for this being a “sexual assault”, that will depend on whether or not they had justification to remove her clothes.

  CM-And just because people request police intervention doesn’t mean they give up their rights. Not in this country.

  Normally police would not have the right to come onto the property without probable cause, a warrant or consent. This is the right to exclude, when you call them onto your property, you give up that right. When you break the law in front of them by resisting arrest and acting disorderly, they can take you into custody, so your right to be free from restraint is now gone. If you insist on behaving irresponsibly you can and will lose them all, even in this country.

  CM-And why haven’t we seen Officer Gurlea’s account?

  That’s an excellent question. Steffy was convicted in the Alliance Municipal Court after a jury trial so there is certainly a trial transcript. I’ll pick up a copy and scan and post it. Another note, Steffy was initially represented in her criminal case by Jeff Haupt who was an excellent defense attorney (now deceased). However, he requested and was allowed to withdraw from the case after two months. Steffy was then represented by a much less experienced attorney.

  NYCP-Don’t forget that two of the officers involved in the beating of Rodney King were found guilty in the subsequent Federal trial though.

  That is true, but that suit was filed following a three day riot that left 53 people dead. In light of that atmosphere, it’s somewhat amazing that two of the four were again acquitted.

• 87 Duane Kerzic // Apr 12, 2009 at 11:20 PM

  lawyaman,

  You make some good points. Thanks for joining in.

  I hope you get the transcript. That would be very helpful.

  I think we are dealing with two separate acts though. I don’t see what Hope did in the street as a reason for her to be treated as she was in the jail. By this I’m saying she was completely wrong in the street. Lots of people get arrested for resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Those people don’t get their clothing ripped off of them in the jail. They don’t get held in a cell naked for a couple of hours.

  While I’ll agree the video isn’t the best I think it’s pretty clear that her clothing is getting forcibly removed. She’s still got handcuffs on.

  In the jail they had many choices on how to handle this. I’m sure they have a time out chair of some kind. They also must have cells that don’t have anything in them except for smooth walls. They also must have cells that allow for continual observation. They probably have stretchers that allow them to restrain a person with padded restraints like they use in a hospital. My point is that if they were concerned about a suicide risk there were other things they could have done other then what they did.

  What they did was the most intrusive and obnoxious thing they possible could have. Do you think we can agree on that?

• 88 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 7:22 AM

  lawyaman,what about the lies the cops have been caught in?

  What will the jurors think of that?

  Or will this be like her first trial, and they never get that information.

  And what about the sheriff’s policy, seems to be unconstitutional, they won’t be allowed to correct that?

  I also saw the lawyer switch you mentioned and wondered why this happened.

  And once you read the trial transcripts, its very easy to see that Tracy is a VERY inexperienced attorney.

  I have to wonder about your claim that YOU don’t fear the sheriff’s dept.

  I doubt that any of the people that work there, or interact with them on almost a daily level would feel any different.

  So I guess I miss what the point of this statement is.

  Then the cops are claiming that this was done for her safety?!?! Try going here: http://www.sheriff.co.stark.oh.us/mr020219.htm

  A prisoner had been there TWENTY SIX times and NEVER exhibited ANY suicidal tendencies….UNTIL he too was placed on suicide watch!!

  So the sheriff’s policies are not only getting lawsuits, they are contributing to the deaths of prisoners?

  And the sheriff CONTINUES these polices!

  Will they be charged with murder the next time they drive a prisoner to take their life?

  So people that see this would also be comfortable having the cops show up on their doorstep on an investigation?

  They’d feel comfortable talking to deputies?

  I’m doubting that they would. So it seems like cases would be harder to solve with less cooperation.

  And this would make it less safe for EVERYONE.

  So much for the claims of safety.

  And your statement about what the jail policy is.
  By LAW, men can’t be present during a strip search, body cavity search, and they’re not even supposed to be where they can SEE women in the showers.

  But Swanson’s “policy” ‘SAYS’ its ‘ok’ for men to not only VIEW a forced stripping naked of a woman in a ‘suicide prevention’, they are allowed to PARTICIPATE and help remove her cloths!

  HUH? All these laws to keep men away, but Swanson wants us to believe that THIS “policy” he dreamed up is “OK”, because he SAYS so?

  Does this sound logical and reasonable? (Or moral?)
  Also Swanson can argue that it is allowed, but WHY was it done by men when there were enough women there?

  The sheriff’s lame excuse is that he doesn’t have the luxury of having an all male/female CERT team.
  So if they don’t have enough women for a “suicide prevention”, how do they have enough for the strip searches and cavity searches, which by LAW have to be same sex?

  Its all BS!

  See thats the whole point of this, yeah the cops may have enough “laws/polices” to cover what they did….by LAW (or what the sheriff claims is policy), but they will NEVER have enough lame excuses to disguise what was REALLY going on.

• 89 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:05 AM

  BTW the link that I referenced

  http://www.sheriff.co.stark.oh.us/mr020219.htm

  After I posted that, and pointed out the fact that by the sheriff’s OWN webpage, this seems to be a cause in inmate deaths, it was taken down and left blank.

  Then after I posted that I had already saved the page, and posted a copy of it in one of the papers comment columns, the page was back on the site again.

  I have no doubt they have an excuse as to why it as blank for a couple months.
  They always seem to have an endless supply of them.

  They did take this page down though:

  Link to Stark county Sheriff’s webpage that states they have not found a weapon in YEARS with strip searches.

  http://www.sheriff.co.stark.oh.us/jail-facts.htm#health

  Not to worry, I have that one saved too.

• 90 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:10 AM

  In the CantonRep paper they wrote this:
  QUOTE “When she pulled out her sister’s ID, Gurlea turned his attention to Zorger, but Steffey interrupted them. That’s when Gurlea arrested her for disorderly conduct, according to his report.”

  This is NOT what was said at trial.

  On page 123 & 129 of the trial transcript Gurlea claims that Steffey “poked him in the chest” and THAT’S when he decided to make an arrest.
  But the “poke” is disputed by witnesses.

  Then Gurlea claims another reason to arrest Steffey was that he was afraid that the yelling would generate more calls to the sheriff’s dept.
  But at trial, (page 130), he says he’s “out in the middle of nowhere”. He AGAIN admits being “out in the middle of nowhere” in cross examination and states that the houses are hundred of yards apart and he never saw anyone come out of their house. (page 135).

  Conflicting testimony?!?!? Yeah folks, we have plenty.

  Then at the top of page 138, when asked if he knew Steffey had been “smacked against the car and that she fell to the ground” Gurlea says he was told by a witness, and I quote: “And when they went out, they found….they discovered this altercation occurring.”
  (A quick change from what he WAS going to say, and I suspect that he was going to say “they found, her laying on the ground unconscious”, but that would mean admitting that he KNEW she was indeed knocked unconscious and in need of medical attention.)
  Steffey’s lawyer asks straight-out if he knew she had been knocked out.
  He replied “I don’t know for a fact that she lost consciousness that night. This is the first I’ve heard about it.”

  Him & his backup “investigated” this and he hadn’t heard about her condition until this trial?!?!!?

  See? Nothing the cops say makes sense, its all BS and lies.

• 91 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:15 AM

  Oh also wanted to mention that my copy is missing page 133, during the arresting officers testimony.

  I have asked for this page, REPEATEDLY, since last summer, and STILL have not gotten it.

  Lets see if you get it in your copy there lawyerman……

• 92 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 10:03 AM

  John - I have to wonder about your claim that YOU don’t fear the sheriff’s dept.

  Why do you have to wonder about that, maybe he is a law abiding citizen and therefore has no reason to be afraid of the police.

  John - The sheriff’s lame excuse is that he doesn’t have the luxury of having an all male/female CERT team.
  So if they don’t have enough women for a “suicide prevention”, how do they have enough for the strip searches and cavity searches, which by LAW have to be same sex?

  A strip search probably doesn’t have to be done by the CERT team, just female deputies, or males depending on who is being searched. In a strip search your looking for contraband and most are probably done with little, if any, resistance by the prisoner. Cell extractions, suicide preventions, and other situations where you have somebody physically resisting would probably call for the CERT team when possible. You might have 8 female deputies working but only one of them is on the CERT team so for strip searches you have 8 available but only one available if the CERT team is needed. A strip search can also be done by one deputy so it wouldn’t take an entire team.

• 93 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:09 AM

  What they did to Hope WAS NOT suicide prevention. There is no need to strip someone of all their clothing, leave them naked for hours and remove their dignity to prevent them from committing suicide. If anything an assault of this nature is more likely to trigger a reaction of worthlessness in the individual and help lead to a suicide. This is a form of punishment and degradation. Plain and simple.

  If Sheriff Swanson thinks this is suicide prevention he needs to be at the very least retrained. I don’t think any jury is going to have trouble seeing past this one.

• 94 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 2:43 PM

  Duane do you think an inmate has ever used their clothes to kill themselves?

  The way to prevent this from happening in the future is to remove all liability from jails/prisons when an inmate commits suicide. That way if somebody kills themselves they don’t have to worry about getting sued/charged.

• 95 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 3:11 PM

  jones,

  by your logic we should outlaw clothing all together. after all you just never know when someone might commit suicide with their clothing.

  People kill people all the time with firearms. Yet its legal to own them. I could go on.

  If you are concerned about someone killing themself with their clothing there are lots of alternatives that are far less intrusive other then stripping them of their clothing. I’ve already pointed out some of them.

  People that are suicidal should not be punished for feeling that way. Hope was effectively punished for possibly admitting to being suicidal. Your ignorance of suicide shows.

  Like I said before the other options where to restrain her with medical restraints to a stretcher, to put her in a cell with a smooth inside so that she could not use her clothing to hang herself, to use a time out chair, to just watcher her on a very regular basis.

  There is no excuse for what they did.

  Of course jails need to be accountable if someone hurts themselves while in their care.

• 96 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 3:24 PM

  Duane - by your logic we should outlaw clothing all together. after all you just never know when someone might commit suicide with their clothing.

  If they don’t have reason to believe somebody is suicidal then their would be no reason to take their clothes.

  Duane -People kill people all the time with firearms. Yet its legal to own them. I could go on.

  They don’t let you bring your guns to jail

  Duane - If you are concerned about someone killing themself with their clothing there are lots of alternatives that are far less intrusive other then stripping them of their clothing. I’ve already pointed out some of them.

  Your right, there is more then one way to skin a cat

  Duane - People that are suicidal should not be punished for feeling that way. Hope was effectively punished for possibly admitting to being suicidal. Your ignorance of suicide shows.

  I don’t think it was punishment, they were trying to save her from herself

  Duane - Like I said before the other options where to restrain her with medical restraints to a stretcher, to put her in a cell with a smooth inside so that she could not use her clothing to hang herself, to use a time out chair, to just watcher her on a very regular basis

  If they strapped her down you would be crying about that to.

  Duane - Of course jails need to be accountable if someone hurts themselves while in their care.

  This is the problem, they are held civilly accountable and can also be held criminally accountable. You want these men and woman to risk everything they have just so she doesn’t have to go through a humiliating experience. I wouldn’t risk my job or my freedom just to protect her from some embarrassment she brought upon herself.

• 97 Voice of Reason // Apr 13, 2009 at 3:44 PM

  John454 said, “They did take this page down though: Link to Stark county Sheriff’s webpage that states they have not found a weapon in YEARS with strip searches. Not to worry, I have that one saved too”.

  It’s good that John454 saved the page before the police pulled it, but actually, here’s a link to a live copy that everybody can read right now:

  http://web.archive.org/web/20080210011321/http://www.sheriff.co.stark.oh.us/jail-facts.htm

  The link is complicated and might trigger the site’s spam filter. If that happens, I’ll post it a different way.

  John454 said that no weapons had been located for “YEARS”. The part that he was referring to actually says “no weapons have been located for MANY years” (emphasis mine), so his point may have been stronger than he realized.

  On a related note, if a document is publicly funded, and it hasn’t been sealed by court order or classified, doesn’t that mean that any web site can host it? If the police are pulling potentially embarrassing documents, and people like John454 are saving copies, maybe this site or similar sites should consider hosting some of the copies. The archive site that I used above is good for some things, but it’s got some limitations and problems.

• 98 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 5:08 PM

  Jones QUOTE “I don’t think it was punishment, they were trying to save her from herself”

  If you believe that BS, with all the proof of the Sheriff’s dept lying, then theres probably nothing anyone could say to enlighten you.

• 99 John454 // Apr 13, 2009 at 5:18 PM

  QUOTE “John - I have to wonder about your claim that YOU don’t fear the sheriff’s dept.” UNQUOTE

  I think our lawer poster said that.
  I never call the cops. You have a 50/50 chance that they will even get there in time, then you have a 50/50 chance of them finding anyone. And even if an arrest is made the perps are back on the street later, or overnight, depending on the charge.
  Then you have a thug that wants to ‘even the score’ for you calling the cops on them.
  The last time I had a couple guys trying to break into my house I took care of the problem myself.

  QUOTE “A strip search “probably” doesn’t have to be done by the CERT team, just female deputies, or males depending on who is being searched. In a strip search your looking for contraband and most are “probably” done with little, if any, resistance by the prisoner.”UNQUOTE

  More BS…..”probably”…..your as good with the lame excuses as the sheriff.

• 100 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 5:19 PM

  jones said, If they strapped her down you would be crying about that to.

  I don’t think so. If I would have complained about it I would not have suggested it as an alternative. It wouldn’t have been as preferable as a padded cell with clothing on or putting her on some kind of watch.

  jones said, This is the problem, they are held civilly accountable and can also be held criminally accountable. You want these men and woman to risk everything they have just so she doesn’t have to go through a humiliating experience. I wouldn’t risk my job or my freedom just to protect her from some embarrassment she brought upon herself.

  Of course people working in the jail have to be civilly and criminally liable for what they do and don’t do. How else could we expect them to respect any type of standard of care if they weren’t. Of course they should have to risk losing their houses. When I get in my car and drive it around I’m criminally and civilly liable for how I operate it. It’s time that all forms of law enforcement start being held personally accountable. Maybe, just maybe they will think twice before the do something stupid.

• 101 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM

  Duane - Of course people working in the jail have to be civilly and criminally liable for what they do and don’t do. How else could we expect them to respect any type of standard of care if they weren’t. Of course they should have to risk losing their houses. When I get in my car and drive it around I’m criminally and civilly liable for how I operate it. It’s time that all forms of law enforcement start being held personally accountable. Maybe, just maybe they will think twice before the do something stupid.

  Duane, what I meant by risking their job/freedom was that is what they would be risking by not doing what they did. If they didn’t follow orders and she killed herself they would be fired and probably sent to prison themselves.

  Personally I don’t think Hope Steffey would have killed herself if they put her in a cell with her clothes on, however, I would not risk my livelihood and my freedom on it.

  John, I said “probably” because I have done strip searches and was never meant with any resistance, so based on my experience, strip searches are not confrontational.

• 102 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 7:16 PM

  Wow, let me read that again, we both think that based on what we know, Hope wouldn’t now have killed herself with her clothing on. I do want to say one other thing on the clothing, if they took her belt and her shoelaces I wouldn’t be upset in the least unless they tossed her to the ground to take them from her.

  jones, I guess my problem and your problem with what happened are also about the same but I don’t really know for sure.

  If the guards were “following orders” please take my comments to refer to those giving the orders. If the guards were making it up as they went along please take my comments to be directed at the guards.

  I’m very upset at the treatment she recieved. I think that treatment was not only inappropriate it is posssibly criminal. Where exactly the direction for that treatment came from I don’t know. But my comments are directed at the source of the direction for that treatment. Be it a person, a policy (in this case the person that wrote the policy), or the guards themselves.

  If the guards were simply following orders that could be assumed to be lawful orders then I’m not holding the guards resonsible.

• 103 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:19 PM

  Duane - If the guards were simply following orders that could be assumed to be lawful orders then I’m not holding the guards resonsible.

  That is what I have been saying. They were given orders that they had to follow, even if they didn’t agree with them. If the order wasn’t a justifiable order then the blame is on the one giving the order which was the nurse/doctor.

  If I was a guard and was told by a doctor that somebody had to be put on suicide watch and that meant taking their clothes I would follow that order, even if I didn’t agree with it, because if I didn’t and the person killed themselves I would be held criminally responsible for their death.

• 104 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:20 PM

  Jones said - John, I said “probably” because I have done strip searches and was never meant with any resistance, so based on my experience, strip searches are not confrontational.

  I meant I was never met with any resistance.

• 105 lawyaman // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:30 PM

  Today I spoke with a friend of mine who is a police chief in a jurisdiction not far from where Hope Steffey lives. I asked him for his take on the situation. He said that the suicide watch/clothing removal is an absolutely routine occurrence in any jail. It has to be because the problem of inmate suicide is extremely common. (Google jail suicide, you’ll see what I mean). Inmates hang themselves with anything available, clothing, towels, bedsheets, they tear the mattresses apart and tie the cloth strips together to hang themselves. So simply removing belts and shoelaces is completely inadequate. A plaintiff’s attorney would have a field day with a jailer who said, “I didn’t think he could hang himself….I took his belt and shoelaces” My friend said that he felt it was foolish of Sheriff Swanson (whom my friend knows personally) to allow opposite sex guards to strip a female inmate. I asked him point blank if he considered Swanson a buffoon. He said “no, but Tim’s a black and white guy, if the law does not require him to use same sex guards for a clothing removal then he’s not going to do it.”

• 106 Carlos Miller // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:30 PM

  Since when are LEOs subjected to follow orders from doctors?

  That doesn’t make sense at all. The doctor may suggest something but when the woman is in jail, they are the ultimate authority, not the doctor.

  And where in the guidelines does it justify stripping a person naked and leaving them naked for six hours to prevent suicide?

  Jails have had guidelines for dealing with suicidal patients since at least 1989, in which they give the inmates paper outfits to put on.

  http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE4D61F39F935A15751C0A96F948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

  Besides, what indication did she give that she was suicidal?

  From what I understand, all she said was something like “you mean like right now” when asked if she was suicidal.

  That just seems like she was trying to clarify the question.

  Besides, do we have any evidence that there is actually somewhere from where one can hang themselves from within the cell?

• 107 jones // Apr 13, 2009 at 8:41 PM

  Since when are LEOs subjected to follow orders from doctors?

  Carlos, if a doctor told a guard that an inmate had to go to the hospital because he was possibly having a heart attack and the guard said I’m not taking him because I think he is faking and the inmate died of a heart attack who’s side would you be on, the guard’s or the doctor’s?

  I guess technically the guards would not have to take the orders from the doctor but if they didn’t and something bad happened it would be the guard who would lose their job and get criminally charged so a doctor’s order does carry a lot of weight in jail.

• 108 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 9:23 PM

  For all, there is absolutely no way to accurately predict who will and who will not attempt suicide. People that pass present day screenings routinely attempt or commit suicide within hours of screening. People that don’t pass a screening don’t make an attempt. So when a doctor, who by the way isn’t a medical doctor, that hasn’t even met the patient makes a diagnose it’s what amounts to quack science as is a lot of the science that’s used in the law officer world. Don’t believe me look up the research on this. Finding a way to accurately predict suicide is considered one of the most important things to figure out in the world of suicide prevention.

  I don’t know exactly how many people in jail commit suicide. About 33,000 people commit suicide and about 545,000 attempt suicide in the USA in a year. About 90% of these people have a treatable mental illness for which they are not being treated. Suicide isn’t the result of one occurrence in a persons life like is often reported. It’s the result of ongoing mental health problems that are often time hidden. All most all people that end up committing suicide do give some king of warning in advance that they are thinking about it but it’s often missed.

  For jones, yes if the doctor told them a suicide watch was needed they needed to do it. I disagree with the method, not the watch. Did the doctor tell them to jump her and rip her clothing off? I don’t know. Is this how they regularly get the clothing off of people in that jail who they place on a suicide watch? I think this is also what Carlos is referring to.

  It’s uncalled for to leave her naked for 6 hours in any case. That is totally wrong and there is simply no excuse for it.

  Certainly a confrontation with as much violence as seems to have gone on in the video was not needed nor warranted no matter what. As I said there were other choice like not leaving her alone.

  For lawyaman, it’s not just prisoners that will do anything. If you are concerned about someone tearing up clothing to hang themselves give them an environment where hanging is impossible. Don’t use a cell with bars or other hooks that make hanging one self possible. Don’t have any furniture in the room. Don’t have a mattress in the cell. All very easy to accomplish.

• 109 lawyaman // Apr 13, 2009 at 10:03 PM

  CM-Besides, do we have any evidence that there is actually somewhere from where one can hang themselves from within the cell?

  CANTON, OH — An attempted suicide was reported early Tuesday morning at the Stark County Jail.
  Sheriff Tim Swanson said deputies observed a male inmate hanging from a jail bar door around 1 a.m. on the first floor of cell block B. The inmate used a towel that was torn into strips to create a cloth. Deputies also found a suicide note.
  Source– Massillon Independent May 20 2008

  CM-Besides, what indication did she give that she was suicidal?

  CM-From what I understand, all she said was something like “you mean like right now” when asked if she was suicidal.

  CM-That just seems like she was trying to clarify the question.

  If you read the complaint filed in federal court, Steffey’s attorneys do not really question the justification for the clothing removal, nor do they question the use of male officers to carry it out. They do allege that the force used was excessive and that it could have been effected without so much “chaos”. The complaint states that Steffey was to be asked a “series of questions” we don’t know how many questions she was actually asked, but allegedly, when she answered “now or ever” to the question about harming herself , a signal was given to effectuate the clothing removal. Remember of course that most of the information available on this topic comes from the complaint, which is naturally one-sided and biased (as it should be) in favor of the plaintiff.

  Regarding leaving her naked for six hours, I agree with you, if they had a paper jumpsuit available , they should have provided her with one.

  Duane, you are one utopian soul…You will of course volunteer to pay the increase in taxes when we mandate a one to one guard to inmate ratio at the Stark County Jail (so no-one is ever left alone to commit suicide) or to completely rebuild the jail so as to “hang-proof” all the cells.

• 110 Ridge // Apr 13, 2009 at 10:21 PM

  Hmmm, I didn’t know I was a tramp because I have a tattoo designating my service to America in the Vietnam war. I didn’t know that getting one would give permission to any police officer to treat me like crap, arrest me, strip search me, then leave me naked for six hours on the jail house floor. And FerfelaBat, I hope this never happens to you, but if it does, remember, you must have somehow deserved it.

  Lawyaman. The Sheriff is not there to protect you or your family. It takes only seconds for someone to break into your home and kill you and your family. Call 911 sometime and see just how long it takes just to get the info on the air. Then time the response. And God help you if the Sheriff i already on a serious call because you will wait until that one is taken care of. Or God forbid, you live in a rural area. Where the response time may be 30 to 60 minutes or more. How you felling about that “protection” now?

• 111 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 10:23 PM

  lawyaman said, Duane, you are one utopian soul…You will of course volunteer to pay the increase in taxes when we mandate a one to one guard to inmate ratio at the Stark County Jail (so no-one is ever left alone to commit suicide) or to completely rebuild the jail so as to “hang-proof” all the cells.

  I think that depends on how many prisoners on average at any given time are considered to be suicidal. According to Sheriff Swanson Swanson reports that there were 11,767 inmates processed and booked into the Stark County jail in 2007. of these they say In 2007 the mental health staff conducted 5,296 mental health assessments due to information received during the medical assessment at the time of incarceration. In 2007 there were 473 incidents where inmates were placed on suicide precautions. Of these instances 135 involved female inmates. they go on to say, The Sheriff’s staff has been very successful in dealing with suicidal inmates given that 11,767 inmates were processed and 5,296 had mental health issues. In 2007, 11 inmates attempted to kill themselves while in the Stark County Jail. They attempted this by hanging or cutting themselves.

  It seems to me that 2, 3 or at most 4 cells would probably meet the needs without any problems. If they have these problems they need to do something and refitting a couple of cells would be less then what they are going to end up paying Hope.

  Further there just aren’t that many suicides in Ohio jails according to the sheriff, In 2007 the Ohio Bureau of Adult Detention reported that 17 inmates killed themselves in Ohio Jails.

  It sounds to me after reading what you posted the sheriff is maintaining a public nuisance where people are able to commit suicide without much trouble.

• 112 Voice of Reason // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:09 PM

  Excuse me for intruding, but I’d like to point out that, as near as I can tell, one relevant issue hasn’t been discussed at all in this thread.

  LEOs and apologists seem to be a bit wary of me, and I assume that’s because I usually (though not always) focus on facts. I’m still waiting to a response to facts that I’ve posted on multiple threads, not just the latest Pataky thread. However, WRT this case, I’m distressed that one simple issue doesn’t seem to have been addressed by anybody. I’d genuinely appreciate a calm response from either side. If it matters, calm works best for me.

  I’m referring to the trigger event. That seems important to me. Possibly you disagree. The key point is that a frightened and confused woman apparently said three short words that were followed instantly and without hesitation by violent action. Is this, or is this not, exactly what happened? No handwaving, mumbling, or name calling, please. True or false. Is this what happened, or did something else happen?

  If all of this really happened because the victim answered, “Now, or ever?”, the whole thing sounds like an “attitude adjustment” to me, but more importantly, it sounds exactly like a totally unjustified “attitude adjustment”. I’d have said exactly the same thing as the woman did, precisely the same three words, and I’d have been quite sincere. Based on past issues related indirectly to his own life, Mr. Kervic might be able to understand this. Conceivably, some LEOs and apologists might be able to understand it for personal reasons as well.

  The following statement is just an opinion, but it’s a sincere one: These people intentionally punished a frightened and confused woman because she’d made a remark that they considered to be “flip” or disrespectful. That’s all there was to it. That’s bad enough by itself, but please think about it. You’re stressed, you’re confused, somebody barks something at you that you honestly don’t understand, you answer as honestly as possible, and the next instant, moments later, you’re going through something that feels very much like a rape.

  Did the words “Now, or ever?” justify what happened? Should the police have acted on these three words instantly, without hesitation, and violently? Doesn’t the fact that these three words were apparently acted on instantly, without hesitation, and violently demonstrate that this was an “attitude adjustment” and therefore, taken in context, the moral and possibly legal equivalent of a rape?

• 113 Voice of Reason // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM

  Typo. That was supposed to say “still waiting for a response to facts”.

• 114 Duane Kerzic // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:23 PM

  V of R,

  I thought I covered that someplace.

  I personally believed at one time this happened because instead of saying “No” she said “Now, or ever?”. I thought I’d pointed out that it’s possible she was suicidal at one time but maybe not at the present time and wanted to be sure of the question she was answering.

  When I lost my brother to suicide 2 years ago I learned lots about it. This blog isn’t about that so when I write about suicide here I try to stick to the facts at hand. This item and the other item where I’ve talked about it happen to overlap. People that admit to having feelings about hurting themselves are less likely to do anything. My brother wouldn’t make contact with me for for 9 days prior to his death and I was away in a remote area without much phone access for the previous 16 days. He knew I was the one that would probably decect him having a problem.

  So if she really wanted to kill herself she wouldn’t have answered “now, or ever?” She would have answered “No.”

• 115 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 13, 2009 at 11:35 PM

  Voice
  From what i have read on multipal Websites and papers That is the phrase she used. I have used it more then once in my life when being ask things i was unsure about and ( for give the pun)
  all be damned if i was ever attacked like that you bet your ass i would have every one of those Sherrifs dep.s heads on a platter…… Not once did i hear any one say that this woman was demianing to the police officer EXSEPT from the cops point of veiw. there are Multipal witnesses that say Hope was first attacked at The place where the crime was first reported. Then the footage of the “rape” i think the sherrif at this point has realy screwed the pooch. SO WHAT IF SHE HAAD BEEN DRINKING thats not the point she didnt fight back as far as we know from what has been said by the reporters in this case. and NO where has it been stated she was drinking and/or on other substances of illegal use. Now if the sherrif would show us some proof that miss Hope had been an issue. IE. doctors transcrips video tape recording of the conversation then maybe i would be more willing to be on the sherrifs side BUT in no way do i condone ( even suicidal muderers ) thier rights to warm “paper clothes” or some other type of coverings.
  ABD

• 116 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 12:39 AM

  Note to Duane Kerzic:

  Didn’t mean to make you post details here about what happened. A forum on your site, where people who’d be helped by the details might see them, would be better. Said that last week. Thought I might have offended you at the time. Hope not.

  Regarding the woman’s remarks, you said, “I thought I covered that someplace”. You probably said exactly what you remember, but I’m not sure that anybody, including you, has addressed some specific points. You’ve certainly talked about these points in general terms, but allow me to state them precisely and bluntly:

  1. The police reacted instantly, without hesitation, and with violence to three simple words. 2. This fact demonstrates that the whole thing was an “attitude adjustment”. Note that no weapon was involved, or we’d need to look at the speed of the response differently. 3. The “attitude adjustment” component (regardless of what the woman said or didn’t say) is sufficient in and of itself to justify classifying this incident as similar to a rape from a moral and possibly a legal perspective.

  I’m not saying that my reasoning is correct. However, if I’m mistaken, exactly where is the error here? Point 1, point 2, or point 3? Which point, please?

  I appreciate your response. FWIW at least one of the points that you made about suicide is inaccurate. It’s actually a myth. A widely-believed myth, but a myth nonetheless. When I say this, I mean absolutely no offense. That would be regrettable, considering the circumstances under which you’ve done your research.

  However, your response is off-topic WRT my points. My points aren’t about suicidal people or proper procedures for dealing with them. You people are debating that just fine without my assistance. I’ve got nothing to add to that debate at this point.

  I’ve stated my concerns carefully in two postings now. If they aren’t clear, we’ll leave it at that.

  Mr. Kerzic, you don’t need to respond further (unless, of course, you’d like to), and I take it that LEOs and apologists won’t touch these points unless they’re able to reframe them.

  On the other hand, I see that ALL BE DAMNED has posted a response while I’ve been typing. I like the handle. Look forward to seeing what he’s said.

• 117 Duane Kerzic // Apr 14, 2009 at 12:44 AM

  I just wish i knew which one the myth was. That poeple that talk about it are less likely?

• 118 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 12:51 AM

  Note to Duane Kerzic:

  I’m aware that I might have come across just now as missing some straightforward points that you made. The points were related to what the woman said and how she should have been interpreted.

  I didn’t address your points, except to make a general statement that I’d be willing to clarify at another time. I wanted to make it clear that I understand the points, or at least I believe that I do. However, WRT this case, I’m focused on the speed and violence of the police response, not on suicide-related issues. In my opinion, these are separate matters.

• 119 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 12:54 AM

  Note to Duane Kerzic: You’re up late. Yes, that’s the one. I should have stated that explicitly in my posting. And yes, I’m aware that I might have misread you. I haven’t gone back to check, but you might have been speaking about something different.

• 120 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 12:59 AM

  Correction. I’m thinking of Mr. Miller’s timezone. I’ve seen him working on the site during what must be the middle of the night for him.

  Mr. Kerzic, I’d be pleased to discuss some of the non-case issues that have been raised, but I’m not sure that this is the proper forum for it.

• 121 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 2:25 AM

  Note to ALL BE DAMNED: Well, you feel strongly about the case. My feelings are about the same. In fact, I might feel more strongly than you do. Additionally, we’re in agreement on the key points.

  Thanks for confirming a fact that I wanted to double-check (the exact words that were used).

  I assume the handle ALL BE DAMNED means debate isn’t the point. If that’s the case, it’s foolish of me to say anything else. However, if you’d like to make LEOs and apologists uncomfortable and possibly provoke some thought, don’t channel Howard Beale as much. It’s too easy to dismiss him in real life. Focus on points that can’t be waved away. That’s important, because people tend to mumble or make vague gestures when you hit them with facts. Your current posting gives people too much wiggle room. Use a browser that spell-checks form entries for you. Firefox can do that. Finally, the Caps Lock key doesn’t make your arguments stronger, though it’s useful in some cases.

  However, it’s possible that none of this makes any difference. I’ve never really believed that rational discourse accomplishes anything anyway. It’s just that I’m more comfortable with it.

  BTW DAMNED on a different thread, you said that you’d like to “read more of” Mr. Miller’s “writings and ravings”. If you didn’t see my note on that thread, I thought I’d mention that you’ll find a Deeper Archives panel on the right side of each page.

• 122 Voice of Reason // Apr 14, 2009 at 3:45 AM

  This will be my last posting on this thread unless somebody addresses me or responds to one of my existing postings.

  Final remarks:

  1. This case both is, and isn’t, about suicide. I acknowledge that I raised the issue of suicide myself in one context. However, the only thing that really matters is the speed and violence of the police response. It wasn’t about a search or suicide prevention. If you can’t point out the errors in my posts, it was about an “attitude adjustment”.

  2. When I re-read the posting from the person who believes that this case isn’t important because the victim was a “dumb-ass” who had a “tramp stamp”, it’s difficult for me to see apologists as anything more than animals in a literal sense.

  They share human language, which is significant, and I believe that they’re able to grasp abstract concepts in a dim and fuzzy way. However, they’re missing something fundamental, the thing that makes us human. These are the people who mocked Abner Louima, Patrick Dorismond, and Tyisha Miller’s family. Bonobos have been shown to have compassion, so as a rough approximation, these people rank somewhere below Bonobos.

  3. I’d ask any apologist who believes that I’ve characterized him or her inaccurately to read the next to last paragraph of post 112. The paragraph in question doesn’t prove anything by itself. I simply believe that it might be helpful for you to imagine how another human being might have felt, “tramp stamp” and all.

• 123 lawyaman // Apr 14, 2009 at 6:31 AM

  There were many things stated that I could comment on, but not enough time to do so, sorry. One thing I will comment on is that the circumstances surrounding the psychiatric evaluation and the police response to it come from the complaint filed by Steffey’s attorneys in federal court. Swanson has largely remained tight-lipped about it, (as a litigant should) preferring to wait for a courtroom to explain the department’s side of the story. So what some of you seem to take as factual gospel about those circumstances is a one-sided, biased report filed as a complaint by Steffey’s attorneys.

• 124 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 14, 2009 at 2:32 PM

  Voice
  The reson i leave so much wiggle room here was exsplained in post 123 by lawman hes right the only facts we can debate realy are the ones give by reporters and/ or Hope steffy
  and while its very fun to read what people say about these things and yes i do feel very strongly about this case. I live in rural Nebraska
  where our only law enforcement happens to be THE SHERRIF
  But besides that i have my daughter and my wife to worry about out here. No slighting you there voice and no mean to make offences.

  Note to Voice yes i did thank you very much and hope you and i can cross blades and wits again on something else in this forms ………

• 125 Voice of Reason // Apr 15, 2009 at 2:55 AM

  Back solely to respond. Note to ALL BE DAMNED: You said, “no mean to make offences”.

  Thanks for your postings. I’ve enjoyed them. Seriously, regardless of the side that you post on (and, for the moment, we’re in agreement about things), you might be angry, but you strike me as honest, and you don’t appear to be as full of yourself as I am or as some of the apologists are.

  Offense at what? I wasn’t sure until recently, but it appears that I’m only rattled by certain kinds of irrationality and one other thing that’s related to territory. I posted something recently about preferring calm interaction, but I’ll need to retract that. Too restrictive for an open forum.

• 126 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 15, 2009 at 3:15 AM

  Note to Voice
  I would love to get your email adress at some point Voice it seems we have alot in common and would like to Talk about other points in other cases on this site besides the forms.
  And yes i am a whipper snapper ( under the age of 40) and would love to gain more wisdom.
  and calm open postings are good Gives me some real meat to bite on in these forums I am still learning how to comunicate better so any Critisom is welcoem and forgive my spelling.
  as for this case i look at it two ways the first is this
  1. if i where an officer and someone just came in with fresh blood on them what would i do in that situation would i say “oh screw it they are in cuffs must be a bad guy ” or do i say ” I better have a look at this this could be an injury that needs Imidiate attention”
  2. isnt this the person who was assaulted why is she here and the the person who assaulted her…
  3. whit regaurd to the ? asked by Police conserning suicide ” is this person being sarcastic if not is she clarifiing a ? ask by the NURSE
  i have more but i will leave these ? and or statments for those of you who would like to debate more

  Note to Voice
  heres my email if you would like to send an email to me ( NOTE TO TROLLS AND THOSE WHO SEND SPAM THIS IS A TRASH EMAIL)
  Kenbankers@rocketmail.com

• 127 dateach // Apr 15, 2009 at 3:17 AM

  Voice:
  I thoroughly enjoyed your discourse. If you would be so kind to point me to the site where you post on a regular basis, I would be happy to indulge my intellect.
  If I am not mistaken, I believe the conversation ended as follows:
  Nurse: “Now or at any time?”
  Hope: “Yeah, like right now would be a good time”….
  inferring to commit suicide.
  Cheers,
  dateach

• 128 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 15, 2009 at 3:20 AM

  Forgive my earlier post it seems Dateacher posted befor i could edit and that NEGATES the edit function so THERES your answer voice on why you never see the edit function

• 129 Voice of Reason // Apr 15, 2009 at 4:53 AM

  Note to ALL BE DAMNED:

  It’s a long message, but I’d be the last person who should complain about that I’ll try to respond to all of the points.

  1. You said: “I would love to get your email adress”. I’ve had E-mail off and on over the years. In fact, I’ve written E-mail servers and clients. Right now, I don’t have an E-mail address, but I’ll think about setting one up. Not this month, though.

  2. You said: “It seems we have a lot in common”. The Internet is different than real life. However, there’s nothing wrong with trying to connect with Internet people as long as you don’t take it too seriously.

  3. You said: “And yes i am a whipper-snapper, under the age of 40″. If you’re in your 30s, you’re not a whipper-snapper. You’re in the prime of your life. Twenty-somethings are healthier as a group, and their lives are more interesting, but thirty-somethings are still reasonably healthy, they’ve established themselves, they’re more secure, they’re raising families, they’ve still got the previous generation to rely on and talk to. It doesn’t work out this way for everybody, but it seems to me that the thirties are pretty good for some people.

  You aren’t the whipper-snapper that I was referring to. He’d be about 8 to 18 years younger than you. And I’m older than you are, but I’m not old enough to warrant respect based on that.

  4. You said: “would love to gain more wisdom”. I’m the most intelligent person that I know personally, except possibly for one individual that some of you would have heard of, and I’ve probably got about 5 points on him. Not clear. However, I’m also one of the least wise persons that I know or that I’ve ever met. I’ve got no wisdom. It’s not the same thing.

  5. You said: “Gives me some real meat to bite on in these forums I am still learning how to comunicate better so any Critisom is welcoem and forgive my spelling”. O.K. that I can do. I’m not here permanently, but while I’m here, I won’t be shy about offering criticism.

  As far your spelling goes, have you tried the Firefox web browser? Some versions underline misspelled words automatically while you’re typing them.

  6. You commented further on the current case. Your reasoning appears to make sense, but I’ve summarized my own feelings in previous postings and I’ll probably leave it at that.

  7. You said: “heres my email”. Thanks. If I set up E-mail again, I’ll keep it in mind. BTW to reduce spam, don’t post the actual E-mail address in the future. Replace the at-sign part with the words “at-sign” or make other changes of that type.

  8. In another posting, you said “THERES your answer voice on why you never see the edit function”. That’s probably part of it, but I’ve made some postings late at night when nobody else is around, and it’s still an issue. Don’t worry about it. It’s not a big deal.

• 130 Voice of Reason // Apr 15, 2009 at 5:52 AM

  Note to “dateach”:

  1. You said, “I thoroughly enjoyed your discourse”. Thank you.

  2. You said, “If you would be so kind to point me to the site where you post on a regular basis, I would be happy to indulge my intellect”.

  I’ve posted to Wikipedia and contributed to projects under various handles, but though I’ve been involved with this kind of thing since before the modern Internet existed, this is one of the first non-technical sites that I’ve dealt with. There is no “regular basis” site. This might be the first and last one, and I expect that it’ll be a temporary situation.

  3. WRT the current case, I’d seen reports that the psychiatric evaluation proceeded one way, and you’ve stated that it proceeded a different way.

  A quick web search shows numerous hits for the “Now, or ever?” wording and just one so far for the wording that you’ve stated. To complicate matters further, Mr. Miller believes that the wording was similar to the one you’ve stated, but slightly different.

  I’m not sure what to think. If the wording you’ve stated turned out to be correct, I’d probably still believe that the incident was an “attitude adjustment”, but it would be more defensible from a legal perspective. A lot would depend on a phrase I’ve used several times, the speed and violence of the police response.

  Certainly, I’d need to revise the picture that I’ve painted, which is black and white with no shades of gray at all. However, I’d only need to revise the picture up to a point. Additionally, I’d continue to believe that the “tramp stamp” poster and his friends were sub-human and, in fact, sub-Bonobo.

• 131 John454 // Apr 15, 2009 at 7:41 AM

  lawyaman
  So what some of you seem to take as factual gospel about those circumstances is a one-sided, biased report filed as a complaint by Steffey’s attorneys. UNQUOTE

  I have read their own reports, and let me tell you you haven’t seen BIASED until you have seen these.
  The investigator basically spellchecks the cop reports and then rubberstamps them as fact.

• 132 dateach // Apr 15, 2009 at 7:52 AM

  Voice:
  The recording is posted on You Tube. Have a listen:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTjRdDuBz1k

• 133 John454 // Apr 15, 2009 at 8:16 AM

  I have questions about this case.

  When the cops investigated the complaint WHY didn’t they have EVERYONE there, that was a witness, fill out a written report? They took a written from the alleged attacker & her brother, but FAILED to get anything other than an oral report from anyone else. And nowhere is there any mention of what they said in any police reports that I have found yet. (Only the trial.)

  When was Steffey read her rights telling her she did NOT have to talk to the cops? (yet according to Swanson’s ‘policy’ they say you can be stripped for not talking too)

  And when you call the sheriff’s office WHY will they not talk about ANY general rules or policies, once you mention Hope Steffey’s name? (I know they can’t talk about that case, but they clam up entirely.)

  Why do they laugh, when you ask for the person responsible for handing out info under the Freedom of Info Act.

  And WHY do they hang up on you when trying to ask for this information?

  And most of all WHY would anyone believe anything these cops said without proof after getting caught in their own lies?

• 134 John454 // Apr 15, 2009 at 8:26 AM

  dateach
  Voice:
  The recording is posted on You Tube. Have a listen

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e3LrhDs84g&feature=channel

  Yeah you can clearly tell Steffey is being sarcastic, NOT suicidal.

  And when I asked for the WHOLE unedited tape to enhance it and show it up for the “manufactured” evidence it is, the sheriff’s dept THEN claimed it was medical evidence, and couldn’t be released!!!

  WTF they ALREADY released their version of it, but now claim its private??

  This is one of MANY reasons I don’t believe the cops.
  (Not to mention their own report that proves them as liars.)

• 135 John // Apr 15, 2009 at 10:57 AM

  John454,

  Talking and wringing your hands about how corrupt those cops are won’t do anything to get that tape in your hands. You need to take action.

  Partner with a non profit specializing in freedom of information requests and get advice. Call the talk radio station in Canton and respectfully bring the topic up thereby raising the story’s profile. Call national news outlets and ask to speak to the reporter covering your region and be prepaired to spoon feed them both sides of the story. Do Something. It doesn’t have to be an all day deal - 15 minutes per day until you get the resolution you want.

  If you feel that passionately about it take ownership of it and make it happen. Good luck and keep us posted!

• 136 Voice of Reason // Apr 15, 2009 at 2:40 PM

  Note to “dateach” and John454: Thank you for the links. I’ll check them out later today.

• 137 jones // Apr 15, 2009 at 3:05 PM

  She didn’t sound like she was being sarcastic to me

• 138 dateach // Apr 15, 2009 at 4:15 PM

  Jones, get a clue. How thick is the grass in your left field of indifference?
  Here’s an interesting angle:
  Sarcasm - Late Latin sarcasmus, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein, to bite the lips in rage, from sarx, sark-, flesh
  1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
  2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule
  Kinda gives you a little perspective on her state of mind doesn’t it? I honestly believe she was not suicidal that night.
  No doubt, she was already inflicting enough pain on herself and certainly didn’t require aid and abetment from individuals sworn to serve and protect.
  dateach

• 139 jones // Apr 15, 2009 at 4:41 PM

  If she was joking around, which I guess can’t be proven one way or the other, then she brought this upon herself. How about acting like a grown up and saying no I don’t want to hurt myself.

  What if she did kill herself that night and this tape came out. Then the nurse said I thought she was just joking so I didn’t put her on suicide watch. The nurse would be fired and probably charged with her death. Would you risk all that if you were in her shoes?

• 140 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 15, 2009 at 5:28 PM

  Ok jones let me put it this way to make it a little simpler for you to understand
  You just had the holy living shit beat out of you by a known asalent your friend calls the cops but instead of helping you they AGAIN beat the shit out of you and then say YOU DESERVED it by not complying. Then the Nurse hired by the cops ask you a few questions to see if your going to hurt your self…….. What would you do ” sit there and tell them you just had the shit beat out of you so of course your NOT suicidle”
  Now we all act difrently in difrent situations ill give that to you so PLEASE DONT pull that card
  Next you probibly belive well i had it coming i acted the fool. Hope “according to wittness reports and sworn testamony” Kept her cool tell the “peace officer” attacked her for no reason.
  So even if it was someone WITH OUT A BADGE gives them the right to beat the hell out of someone because they are confused in pain and “possable concution” makes them a little off kilter and hands them the wrong “keep sake drivers licence of a dead sister”. and yes jones i have read the police reports thanks to JONES and the “independent assesment of the investagation” and both seem to me to be Full of holes and ? that need to be answered for. I am trying to keep an open mind that maybe they had a good reason But with a daughter of my own and a wife with no law enforcment to count on but the sharriffs office I think we all need some answers to this. and yes if i was the nurse and i was UNSURE or thought it was a joke i would calmly ask her to clearify her answer and if she would not well there are other types of restraints besides TEARING OFF HER CLOTHES . like lets see here ankle cuffs that also chain your hands to your waist and a few other things i know they had access to.
  KEN

• 141 Voice of Reason // Apr 15, 2009 at 6:42 PM

  I’ve listened to both versions of the audio, the versions mentioned previously by “dateach” and John454.

  It’s possible that either side will agree or disagree with me here in places. These are opinions, not facts. Feel free to tell me that I’m mistaken.

  1. Steffey did say, “Well, right now’s a good time” quite clearly. “dateach” is correct about this (though the exact wording differed slightly from the wording that he posted). The sound quality on the audio is terrible, though, so I don’t know if she also said “Now, or ever?” at some other point. That wording seems to be mentioned in numerous places on the Web, but I haven’t checked to see if anybody has provided media files.

  2. Steffey sounded sarcastic. “dateach” and John454 are correct about this. “jones” is incorrect. He didn’t want Steffey to sound sarcastic, so she didn’t sound sarcastic to him. Obviously “jones” could try to make the same point in the other direction, but if this became a contested issue in a legal case, jurors would most likely disagree with him. However, “jones” could have, and should have, pointed out that, from two out of three standpoints (as explained below), it might not make much difference.

  3. From a legal standpoint, Steffey’s statement makes it easier for the LEO side to justify her classification as a potential suicide. It doesn’t matter that she was being sarcastic.

  This doesn’t actually change the unpleasant picture that I’ve painted previously. As I’ve said before, a lot depends on the speed and violence of the police response. Additionally, it doesn’t affect points that other posters have made previously about what happened afterwards. It does mean that a potential-suicide flag might be legally defensible, whether or not it’s appropriate or relevant to subsequent actions. It’s got nothing to do with what’s reasonable.

  4. From a medical standpoint, a sarcastic remark doesn’t justify a potential-suicide flag, but it doesn’t rule out suicidal intent either. In some cases, medical staff would view a sarcastic remark as a refusal to answer. I assume that refusal to answer might trigger a potential-suicide flag. Perhaps somebody in the audience can confirm this.

  5. From a LEO standpoint, Steffey was being “flip”. Subsequent events weren’t about searches or suicide prevention. I stand by my opinions that this incident was an “attitude adjustment” and that the “attitude adjustment” component, taking other factors into account, was sufficient in and of itself to justify the classification of the incident as a rape.

  6. While I was typing this, “jones” backed down on the sarcasm issue, but added two new points in post 139 that are quite important. I disagree with the first point and I agree with the second one.

  First, and most importantly, “jones” said that “she brought this upon herself”. He’s saying that, because the victim did something inappropriate that triggered an incident, she deserved whatever happened to her, no matter how disproportionate the response and no what matter what the intentions of the victimizers. He’s saying that the victimizers aren’t responsible for the decisions that they made.

  I’ll make a sweeping statement. It’s extremely common for conservatives, LEOs, and apologists to say that a victim of any crime was “asking for it”, no matter how reprehensible the crime and no matter what actually happened. The only thing that’s important, the deciding factor, is whether they identify with the victimizers or with the victim. This was the case for decades during periods of racial violence (read up on lynchings, or the public eviscerations or strangulations of blacks who were “asking for it”), it’s still the case with respect to sexual assaults (up to and including rapes), and it always has been, and always will be, the thing that happens when LEOs cross the line.

  The “asking for it” people are reprehensible, and I’m not going to use the word “probably” in this context. The “tramp stamp” poster falls into this category. I’m sorry to see “jones” support this crowd.

  I’d ask parents in the audience to think about the “asking for it” logic from a different perspective. Imagine that you’ve got a teenage daughter who’s been raped. Put the Steffey case aside for a moment and think about a rape that involves penetration. Let’s say that your daughter disobeyed you, went to a rough part of town at two in the morning, and was gang-raped. The rapists say that she was “asking for it” because, they claim, she was wearing provocative clothing. Your daughter did something inappropriate or at least dangerous that triggered an incident. Are the victimizers responsible for the decisions that they made? Yes or no? You must answer one way or the other.

  Is the scenario absurd? No, because the “asking for it” crowd sometimes answers no, right up to this day. As long as it’s not their daughters who have been raped. As a side note, the “asking for it people” aren’t identifying with rapists consciously, but they lack empathy for young women who they consider to be “lowlifes” (”after all, she was wearing provocative clothing”), so it works out to the same thing.

  The classic response from the apologist side would be to say, yes, the rapists are responsible, but police in the Steffey case aren’t responsible, it’s not the same thing, because, well, they’re police, and Steffey was sarcastic, and she was a lowlife, and she had a tramp stamp.

  It’s my opinion that people on both sides of an incident are responsible for the decisions that they make. Additionally, I don’t buy an argument that’s sometimes made, the argument that “well, both sides did something wrong, and we’ll leave it at that”. That ignores the issue of proportionate response.

  I agree with “jones” on the second point from post 139. It’s related to some of the issues that I mentioned previously. “jones” suggests that if medical staff were in doubt, they’d be inclined to flag somebody as a potential suicide specifically to minimize their own exposure to litigation. This seems obvious to me. However, as I said in point 3, it doesn’t change things much.

  7. In post 140, ALL BE DAMNED has commented on the “asking for it” and “proportionate response” issues. He’s also tried to make “jones” see things from the victim’s point of view.

  I’ll note that the latter task can be difficult and is sometimes impossible. When I was young, I used to believe that you just needed to say something like, “Look at this. Think about it. It’s horrifying.” I made no progress, and I was sometimes told to “Go back to Russia”.

  To clarify things for readers who aren’t familiar with the Russia remark, it used to be common. In the past, if you disagreed with anybody in authority, the assumption was that you must be a Communist. Authority was good and Communists were bad. If you didn’t agree with authority, then you didn’t belong here, and you were supposed to leave.

• 142 John454 // Apr 15, 2009 at 11:08 PM

  The nurse would be responsible!??!?!

  Then why the hell aren’t they responsible now?

  Even a experienced doc can not tell when someone is suicidal, but these people claim to do it in minutes, with a few questions??

  Heck there’s not even an actual doctor there. He diagnoses and prescribes, the very LAST option they are supposed to use, OVER THE PHONE!!

  When’s the last time YOUR doc would diagnose you and prescribe for you over the phone, especially for something as serious as this?

  Sounds like malpractice for SURE, and probably criminal charges too.

  And what about all the innocent people? Our whole system is supposed to be setup so that an innocent person is not punished, but here we have PROBABLY hundreds of innocents being abused. (Even allowing for the standard ratio of 9 times the usual cases in jails.)

• 143 dateach // Apr 15, 2009 at 11:11 PM

  It’s been my experience, from the LEOs I’ve known over the years (my father was a deputy), that the qualifying terminology applied to the behavior of both the citizen as well as the officer is “reasonable and prudent.”
  As it was explained to me, rational behavior is discerned by an interrogative application of this phrase:
  “Would a reasonable and prudent person do…?”
  Obviously a subjective inquiry, such as this, cannot aver to a rigorous proof. Prejudice is an unfortunate cancer of the intellect, an inescapable condition of our pitiful three-dimensional physical existence.
  In other words, everybody is biased and has their own individual definition of what is reasonable and/or what is prudent.
  dateach

• 144 John454 // Apr 15, 2009 at 11:26 PM

  John // Apr 15, 2009 at 10:57 AM
  John454,
  Talking and wringing your hands about how corrupt those cops are won’t do anything to get that tape in your hands. You need to take action.

  Thanks for the suggestions. I have taken some actions, some of which I had not posted.

  I got a hold of all my Reps about this. (Which did little.)

  I contacted the FBI early on, and they gave me some direction.

  And I have contacted Steffey’s lawyers, and relayed a couple incidents that I had run into while looking into this case & talking to people.
  I volunteered to testify if needed.

  I also tried to get more media attention, by contacting everyone I could think of, including the Opra & Dr Phil show.
  I wanted them to have the chance to meet Dr Phil’s polygraph expert and have a chance to clear themselves on national TV. Even volunteered to have one myself.

  As for the tape, I have turned to the state for more info.

  BTW heres 30megs (600 pages) of “investigator” Christy Palmer’s unbiased report.
  Spell checked the cops reports and then rubber stamped them as fact.

  This isn’t so much an investigation as it is a smear campaign against Steffey:

  http://rapidshare.com/files/220961285/Christy_Palmer_Special_Prosecution_7-13-08.pdf

• 145 Carlos Miller // Apr 15, 2009 at 11:31 PM

  John454,

  I think the only thing left for you to do is start a blog.

  Seriously.

• 146 Duane Kerzic // Apr 15, 2009 at 11:37 PM

  John545,

  You are correct and I’ve been trying to point this out. Even a experienced doc can not tell when someone is suicidal, but these people claim to do it in minutes, with a few questions?? There is currently no way to tell if someone is suicidal at any given time or how likely they are or are not to make a suicide attempt. There isn’t even a way to tell if they are likely to commit suicide or not within hours or even minutes. It’s impossible.

  Are there things that make an attempt more likely? Yes. Being very depressed (major depressive disorder) and under the influence of a drug that reduces inhibition make it more likely but it doesn’t indicate one way or the other if an attempt is going to occur.

  So these people, in the jail, are practicing junk science when it comes to deciding if they are going to place someone on a suicide watch or not.

  Also this jail has a serious problem with suicides. They have had two in the previous 3 years. With only about 17 occurring annually in all the jails in Ohio this jail stands out as a bad place. This place has a relatively very small population also when taken in the context of places like Columbus, Cincinnati, Toledo, Cleveland, and Dayton. So the Sheriff isn’t doing such a good job at protecting and properly treating people at all.

  The response is out of proportion to what they are trying to prevent. Even if it could be proven that Hope was suicidal at the time the response is totally wrong.

  Remember when discussing rape that it is a crime of violence. It is not a crime of passion, love or sex. Rape is the forceful taking of something to which you don’t have a right. Rape is about control and power, nothing else.

  Nobody asks to be raped. Nobody asks to be abused. Nobody asks to be assulted. Nobody asks for any of these things. They are about control and power by the actor plain and simple. That is why we have defined them as crimes. If you read most laws you’ll see the things that we have chosen to define as crimes against persons all tend to be things where the actor is doing something to control the person they are acting against.

• 147 dateach // Apr 16, 2009 at 4:02 AM

  Duane:
  I’m not convinced that you nailed the definition of rape. Using force to take something that is not yours has a different flavor. For instance, aggravated burglary could qualify under that pretense. But rape? No, my friend, that is something different altogether.
  Although I wholeheartedly applaud your inclusion of fact. It is never about lust, love, pleasure…. It’s ALL about power. Power isn’t gained by removing or taking something away, rather it’s gained by giving.
  Power has no meaning in terms of material things. It’s intangible.
  Historically, power has been acquired by inflicting, or literally, Fu(king weaker individuals. After all, that “F” word has its origins from the German “flicken” or strike.
  Do you know the origins of the word “sodomy”? Trust me, it has nothing to do with “lifestyle”. History tells that after victory it was customary for an army to take material things whence they conquered. After that, they inflicted. The most violent and humiliating methodology involves forced anal penetration. I’ll not state my conclusions on this one. It’s not important to this forum.
  Rape has nothing to do with the acquisition of anything. It’s all in the giving. In this case, it was (as Voice put it) an attitude adjustment.
  dateach

• 148 John // May 26, 2009 at 3:26 AM

  This is the BCI report that Agent Christy S. Palmer sent to John D. Ferrero, Prosecuting Attorney Stark County Ohio.
  Dated April 16, 2008 BCI Case #: SI-76-08-14-0147

  This is part of page 3

  http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y39/Zemo999/?action=view&current=BCI-Report.jpg

  Sheriff Swanson has ALWAYS maintained that Steffey was ASKED & REFUSED to remove her cloths.
  But here’s the BCI’s OWN REPORT that PROVES this is a LIE!
  And then they try to explain away their first lie with another lie, about why it was done this way without asking Steffey to do it voluntarily.

  They are trying to say that Steffey was resisting enough that EIGHT people (5 women, 3 men) couldn’t take the chance of ASKING her to remove her cloths, or EVEN TELL HER WHAT WAS GOING ON!!!
  What a crock!!

  I did NOT see any resisting in the video, I saw eight cops parading her to the cell, with her in cuffs.

  In fact EVERY video I have seen she is in cuffs!
  And the ONLY times I have seen her react to the cops is after they have assaulted her or in the process of stripping her naked.

  But apparently catching the sheriff’s dept in a lie isn’t a big deal to our “independent” BCI investigator, Christy Palmer, who seems ready to accept ANY excuse the sheriff’s dept wants to use.

  The report also goes on to say that they lowered Steffey in a slow controlled manner to the floor. Except that Steffey says she was thrown to the floor.
  She also told her husband in a phone call that she thought the cops had broken her nose.
  And she was treated by the nurse for the injury.
  And in page 4 of this report Christy Palmer even states that Steffey reported that her nose was making “crunching noises”.

  So I guess this is proof of a second LIE! (Or third)

  And still Christy Palmer, the “independent investigator” doesn’t think twice about accepting the word of the cops over the VICTIMS in spite of proof.
  BTW, Christy also references a video that she says “proves that she was lowered in a slow controlled manner to the floor”. As far as I know, THIS would have to be on the ‘non-existent’ beginning of the strip video.
  On May 5th when I asked about the “missing” video, I was told it would soon be released.
  Now here again it looks as though it’s referenced…even though they NOW claim it does not exist.
  Interesting. (I have filed a request for this video.)

  Its no wonder the grand jury found that the cop’s actions didn’t rise to the level of “criminal culpability”. How could they with the BCI investigator spellchecking the sheriff’s own reports and passing them on as FACT.

  This isn’t so much an investigation report as it is a smear campaign against Hope Steffey.

  The cops can polish this turd as much as want, this STILL STINKS!

  BTW I don’t know why they bothered to black out the names of Nurse Coren Lennon and the jail psychologist Thomas Anuszkiewicz, aren’t they PROUD of the work they do?

• 149 John // May 26, 2009 at 3:32 AM

  UPDATE:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgmyQvB3XSQ

  Ok heres a video you won’t see on the news.

  Heres the cops taking Steffey to the cell to strip her naked. This shows what was going on outside in the hallway.

  The quality of the video is pretty bad. It will seem to ’skip’ frames for quite a while in some places, but then take a bunch in a row at other times. Why it does this, I don’t know.
  All the cameras at the sheriff’s dept seem to be in bad shape and “malfunction” right at critical moments.

  I had to cut this video in half, it was 20 minutes long, from the time they took her in to the time they left the hall in front of her cell. So I cut off the front of it when they took her in.
  Heres a link to the whole thing that should be good for a while:
  http://rapidshare.com/files/232400098/Production_Done.wmv

  WHY does it take 20 minutes outside the hall to show a “suicide prevention” that only took 4 min?

  The building camera, seems to skip a lot of frames, so you’d think it would be a shorter video.

  But as you can see after they have closed up the cell after assaulting her, they all stand around and have a good laugh, so this will add some more time to the video.

  As you can see from the video the big dufass in the white shirt, he stays at the door to the cell looking in all the time Steffey was being assaulted, and then he stays back around her cell afterwards, looking in….GEE, I wonder WHY?
  Then afterwards he’s joined by another officer who didn’t get a chance to help strip Steffey and he starts walking down to have a look too.

  WHY DON’T THEY JUST SELL TICKETS?!?!?!?

  BUT THEN the camera seems to malfunction, and the next thing you see is a empty hall.
  WOW, …..MORE “missing” video from Stark County Sheriff’s Dept.

• 150 dateach // May 27, 2009 at 7:08 PM

  Nice job John:
  I downloaded the second video that you chopped off. For wgat it’s worth, my comments follow. Times are relative to the video I downloaded.
  0:32 - 1:24 Two white shirts, no motion
  1:24 - 3:01 All multi-shot, the switching from single to multi-camera is irregular in time. An automated system would show some kind of pattern for switching. It is important to the case to know this.
  There are several periods in this time frame where there is no human movement.
  1:24 - 1:52
  1:52 - 2:24
  At 2:24 I see a white shirt (UL corner) and it looks like it disappears at 2:45 “poof”
  3:01 - 3:12 One white shirt, no motion
  3:12 - 4:16 One white shirt, some motion
  4:16 - 4:27 Multi-shot
  4:28 - 5:55 One white shirt, some motion
  This is where things get interesting!
  Look at exactly 6:03 as slow as you can. There are two frames that are totally out of place. It looks like Hope is flipping the camera off!
  Look at 6:31 - 6:36. The gait of the person looks unnatural. Now run your player backwards from 6:36 - 6:31 and everything looks OK. This whole tape has been doctored.
  7:03 - 11:53 Almost five minutes there are two people with no motion.
  dateach

• 151 John // Jun 3, 2009 at 7:57 AM

  Datech, you might be interested to know that the BCI did NOT gather this evidence, it was given to them by the sheriff’s office.

  The FBI investigation seems to be going the same way as the last one, I don’t see any change, except now they will try saying that this is the “official” investigation and that it found nothing.

• 152 John // Jun 5, 2009 at 7:33 AM

  Ukrainian woman should get day in court over botched translation at jail

  By Shane Hoover
  CantonRep.com staff writer
  Posted Jun 04, 2009 @ 05:51 PM

  CANTON —
  A jury should hear a Ukrainian immigrant’s claim that a botched translation led to her wrongly being placed on suicide precautions at the Stark County Jail, a federal judge ruled this week.

  But an appeal of that decision by the county and Sheriff Timothy Swanson means Valentina Dyshko’s case won’t go to trial next week as scheduled.

  Dyshko, of Lake Township, filed her lawsuit last year.

  In court papers, her attorneys say the jail employees violated Dyshko’s constitutional rights by communicating with her through an unqualified interpreter, and that the sheriff’s office has no policy on how to handle detainees or inmates who don’t speak English, which is contrary to national standards.

  Further, Dyshko’s lawsuit says she missed three doses of medication for a serious blood disorder while in the jail, and that the ordeal caused her severe emotional distress and led to her being hospitalized.

  The county argues that Dyshko’s rights weren’t violated and that the jail staff acted reasonably.

  Neither David Malik, an attorney for Dyshko, nor James Climer, an attorney for the county and Swanson, would comment on the ruling.

  The appeal to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals will take months to complete.

  JAILED FOR A MISDEMEANOR

  On March 10, 2006, Dyshko turned herself in on a misdemeanor warrant issued by Stark County Family Court. The charge, related to the home-schooling of her children, later was dismissed.

  She speaks little to no English and sheriff’s deputies were unable to communicate with her. Unable to get a translator from a local Ukrainian church, the jail staff enlisted the help of a woman who is the mother-in-law of a corrections officer, according to court papers.

  The interpreter spoke to Dyshko over the phone and asked her about her health and whether she was suicidal, and reported that Dyshko wanted to kill herself.

  Dyshko was placed on suicide precautions. She voluntarily removed her clothing and was given a quilted gown to wear, which she maintains didn’t stay fastened.

  She spent the weekend in jail, but was allowed to make phone calls to relatives and the Ukrainian Embassy, according to court papers.

  COUNTY SEEKS DISMISSAL

  The county asked U.S. District Court Judge John R. Adams to dismiss the case, saying Dyshko’s constitutional rights were not violated.

  Procedures exist for communicating with Spanish-speaking inmates, but Dyshko was the first Ukrainian-speaking inmate encountered by the jail, and there was no reason to believe the interpretation was incorrect, the county argued.

  In his ruling, Adams said a jury could reasonably conclude that Dyshko’s rights were violated and should hear the case.

  He noted that, according to a translation of Dyshko’s comments at the jail by a different interpreter hired by the county for this case, Dyshko actually said, “Why would I want to die? I want to go to my kids.”

  “A reasonable jury could conclude that this entire circumstance could have been avoided if a policy existed within the jail for attempting to obtain foreign language interpreters when the need arose,” Adams wrote.

  Referring to the sheriff’s deposition, the judge took aim at what he called Swanson’s “declaration that the occasional foreign-language speaker resembles a space alien whose existence in Stark County does not require his attention or the promulgation of a policy.”

  Dyshko’s attorneys also represent Hope Steffey, a Salem woman who is suing the jail over its use of suicide precautions. That case is pending before another judge in federal court.

  http://www.cantonrep.com/crime/x726828320/Ukrainian-woman-should-get-day-in-court-over-botched-translation-at-jail

  COMMENTS:

  Huh?!?!? A woman TURNS HERSELF IN, for a misdeminor and instead of being released on her own recognizance, she is instead held naked for THREE DAYS!??!?

  Over a home schooling issue!?!?

  The interpreter doesn’t look like the main problem, the main problem seems to be Sheriff Swanson’s gestapo jailers.

  Why didn’t they just call their SWAT team and have her forcibly stripped naked like Hope Steffey, over yet another misdemeanor.

  Hopefully Ohio will take away the responsibility for the ’safety’ of inmates from Sheriff Swanson’s staff, since its very apparent they can’t do the job responsibly, before taxpayers are caught paying out millions for their abuses.

• 153 dateach // Jun 7, 2009 at 2:52 PM

  This is an absolute travesty!
  Swanson’s “declaration that the occasional foreign-language speaker resembles a space alien whose existence in Stark County does not require his attention or the promulgation of a policy.”

  A SPACE ALIEN? WHAT????

  Does the “honorable” sheriff have ANY idea how many native-speaking Ukrainians reside in Stark County? One of my good friends lives there. Oh, and she, her husband, and both children speak fluent English and Ukrainian. What a crock!
  How can such an incompetent oaf continue to be employed by taxpayer money?
  Truly sad and pathetic.

• 154 John // Jun 8, 2009 at 11:58 AM

  dateach, sad and pathetic?!?!?

  If Dyshko could, and DID, acording to this article, call the Ukrainian Embassy, how could the sheriff hold her naked for THREE DAYS?!?!

  There wasn’t anyone at the embassy that spoke Russian???

  Not sad and pathetic…more like criminal comes to my mind…

  Speaking of criminal, heres the first in a series of videos that shows the sheriff’s dept for the LIES they have told.
  They have always said Steffey was “physically abusive”, lets let the videos speak for themselves.
  (I am also trying to get the audio portion of the tapes, so we can do just that.)

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEhyDgQojKs

Leave a Comment