From the Courthouse News Service:
Sexual assault of confidential informant
BROOKLYN — A New York police officer did not secure summary judgment on claims that he sexually assaulted one of his confidential informants. He argued that his accuser’s testimony is replete with inconsistencies and improbabilities, but she has plausibly argued that she did not resist him because she feared his authority as a cop and his threats of retribution if she ever told her story. Because he acted outside the scope of his employment, though, the city is not liable for his actions.
Here is the Court’s judgements which outlines the ‘facts’ and their interpretation of them.
Without going into the details of the case what is obvious is that this was all avoidable. The officer should not have been meeting alone with the confidential informant especially when they are of a different gender. This is a failure of the agency to impose effective procedures, a failure of line management to enforce them or a breach of them by the officer. Meeting a confidential informant alone is foolish and outdated. The risks to all parties are huge and there is simply no operational benefit. Situations like this are inevitable where officers are allowed to meet informants alone.
This just seems like such an outdated way of operating bu it is one that is easily fixed. A review of your agency’s procedures will rapidly indicate how risks are being managed within your agency. While you may upset a few detectives you will protect both the agency and the public.
And you will even protect some officers from themselves!
Have a read at one of our books Managing risk in Undercover Operations It will tell you the structures you need to protect everyone. It takes a bit of work but It will cost less than the legal fees incurred in one case.
And if you want us to look at what you’ve got drop us a note info@hsmtraining.com We deal with this type of thing everyday in one form or another.