Log in

View Full Version : Police officer rapes domestic abuse victim.



Bala Perdida
14th March 2014, 08:17
http://www.mercurynews.com/portal/crime-courts/ci_25318637/san-jose-police-officer-charged-rape?_loopback=1


SAN JOSE -- When the woman said she didn't want to stay home after arguing with her husband, the cop took her to a hotel.

He waited in the parking lot until a second officer left on another call. Then, according to an allegation that has shaken the San Jose Police Department and public trust, patrolman Geoffrey Graves returned to the room, where he shed parts of his uniform but left on his bulletproof vest -- and raped her.

The astonishing accusation spurred a five-month investigation into the September incident that led to the arrest Monday of Graves, 38, a Gilroy resident and six-year member of the police force.

Graves turned himself in to police and was booked into the Santa Clara County Jail on suspicion of one count of forcible rape. He spent no time in custody, quickly posting the required $100,000 bail. His arraignment is set for March 24.

Requests for comment were not returned by Graves, who before joining SJPD served with the Shasta Lake Fire Protection District from 2002 to 2004. It was not immediately clear whether he has hired an attorney.

SJPD's preparation for the fallout was evidenced by a department statement -- sent out first thing Tuesday after city officials, including City Council members, were notified the previous evening -- that immediately sought to portray Graves' suspected misconduct as an isolated case.

"This is an extremely serious allegation, and if proven true, the officer will be held accountable," police Chief Larry Esquivel said in the statement. "While this incident is very troubling and tugs at our integrity, it is an isolated incident and by no means a reflection of our officers who perform their duties with honor and professionalism on a daily basis."

Graves' arrest is easily the biggest public-relations challenge for Esquivel since he became the permanent chief in December after serving as the interim chief for most of 2013.


"There are certainly a lot of people in the community who are watching to see what the new chief will do in different situations," said Richard Konda, executive director of the Asian Law Alliance. "People are watching how he handles this."

The beleaguered police department already has been dealing with an exodus of officers, amid an acrimonious fight with the police union over wages and benefits, as well as rising crime figures.

"San Jose is still a pretty safe city," said Kyle Graham, a Santa Clara University School of Law assistant professor and former deputy district attorney. "But there is no way to spin this. It's not good news for the police department."

LaDoris Cordell, a retired judge who serves as the city's Independent Police Auditor, said that alongside the criminal charge, a complaint about the incident was filed with the police department's Internal Affairs division, which in turn is monitored by her office.

Any administrative or disciplinary actions against the officer would not occur until the conclusion of the criminal case. If Graves isn't convicted, he could still be eligible for department discipline, which relies on a "preponderance of evidence" of misconduct rather than the more stringent "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard required in criminal court.

"It's very sad and disturbing," Cordell said of the rape allegation.

Graves was one of four San Jose police officers who shortly after 2 a.m. Sept. 22 responded to a report of a family disturbance at the San Jose home of the victim and her husband. The officers noted that the couple had been drinking, but did not find evidence of a crime.

The woman, a hotel maid, told officers she wanted to stay for the night at a nearby hotel where she once worked. At 2:32 a.m., Graves drove her to the hotel. Police say a second officer in another patrol car followed them.

About 20 minutes later, the second officer told dispatchers he was leaving to respond to another call. Graves' patrol car remained in the parking lot for about 40 more minutes, according to a statement of probable cause written and signed by Sgt. Craig Storlie of the SJPD Internal Affairs Unit and Criminal Investigation Detail.

About 15 minutes after the second officer left, the woman was awakened by knocking on her room door. It was Graves, Storlie wrote. The officer entered the room, grabbed the woman, and pushed her onto the bed.

"The defendant took off parts of his uniform with the exception of his bullet proof vest," partially undressed the woman, and climbed on top of her as she "resisted with verbal and physical communication," Storlie wrote.

The report goes on to say Graves "forcibly engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim before leaving the hotel approximately 10 minutes later."

Carlos Vega, the deputy district attorney prosecuting Graves, said the attack was first reported to the California Highway Patrol, which then notified SJPD. Storlie's report said that occurred Oct. 13, three weeks after the alleged attack.

The department launched an investigation, and Graves was placed on paid administrative leave Oct. 17.

"Physical evidence corroborates the victim's allegations. The victim positively identified the defendant during the investigation of this incident," Storlie wrote.

After five months, police, in cooperation with the district attorney's office, obtained an arrest warrant for Graves.

Graham said most police cases involve allegations of excessive force or manipulation of evidence.

"But this is an officer allegedly committing a serious felony that just came out of the blue," Graham said. "You're left asking: What officer would do this? That's exactly what a good defense attorney will ask at trial."

Such an appalling case of corruption within the ranks of those who supposedly are there to protect the community. It sickens me to hear this, especially living so close to that government authorized monster. Also I didn't know whether this belonged in discrimination or non-political, but it felt better here.

The Jay
14th March 2014, 08:25
When's the public hanging taking place? I would like to attend.

synthesis
14th March 2014, 08:46
Too bad he'd be in protective custody.

Sinister Intents
16th March 2014, 15:53
When's the public hanging taking place? I would like to attend.


Too bad he'd be in protective custody.

I'd rather it be a public beating of this pig first, then on to a crucifixion, then stone him to death. Fucking pigs like this don't deserve protective custody, they deserve death pure and simple. Every day I hate cops more and more and my family gets pissed when I voice my disgust. "Oh, they're on our side." "They're the good guys." "You'll be happy if you're in an emergency situation and the cops come." I don't trust pigs, They scare the fuck out of me more and more.

Comrade Jacob
16th March 2014, 15:59
If I said what I would like to happen to this guy I'd just get people going: 'You typical blood-sucking Stalinist'.
Sinister intents summed it up.

Brutus
16th March 2014, 16:34
When's the public hanging taking place? I would like to attend.


I'd rather it be a public beating of this pig first, then on to a crucifixion, then stone him to death. Fucking pigs like this don't deserve protective custody, they deserve death pure and simple

Yeah, let's hang our way to a perfect society. And you call yourselves progressives...

Loony Le Fist
16th March 2014, 16:37
I'd rather it be a public beating of this pig first, then on to a crucifixion, then stone him to death. Fucking pigs like this don't deserve protective custody, they deserve death pure and simple.


If this guy is convicted (in a fair trial--something that never happens when police are involved) of this crime I think he should have to serve out life in prison. The prisoners love when cops come to visit. :grin:



Every day I hate cops more and more and my family gets pissed when I voice my disgust. "Oh, they're on our side." "They're the good guys." "You'll be happy if you're in an emergency situation and the cops come." I don't trust pigs, They scare the fuck out of me more and more.

You ought to tell them about Warren v. DC that clearly demonstrates the true legal intent of police departments. Here is how it's defined in Wikipedia, "A police force is a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder." Note that it, quite accurately, points out nothing about them being there to protect citizens or being on their side.

Sinister Intents
16th March 2014, 16:47
Yeah, let's hang our way to a perfect society. And you call yourselves progressives...

No, we'll just kill the fucking disgusting leeches in life like Mitt Romney, Police officers like that rapist, and other disgusting people who've committed atrocities.


If this guy is convicted (in a fair trial--something that never happens when police are involved) of this crime I think he should have to serve out life in prison. The prisoners love when cops come to visit. :grin:

Indeed! Hopefully he'll get what's coming to him


You ought to tell them about Warren v. DC that clearly demonstrates the true legal intent of police departments. Here is how it's defined in Wikipedia, "A police force is a constituted body of persons empowered by the state to enforce the law, protect property, and limit civil disorder." Note that it, quite accurately, points out nothing about them being there to protect citizens or being on their side.

Awesome thanks for this! I'll bring this up when the shitty discussion occurs again because I'm daft to keep my mouth shut about my communist beliefs.

Rosa Partizan
16th March 2014, 17:00
while I understand the loathe and disgust towards such people, and I myself feel very upset about how the legal system fails so many of those sexual abuse and rape victims, I do not believe that the death penalty would be a solution to ANYTHING in a progressive, openminded society.

The Lizard King
16th March 2014, 17:16
while I understand the loathe and disgust towards such people, and I myself feel very upset about how the legal system fails so many of those sexual abuse and rape victims, I do not believe that the death penalty would be a solution to ANYTHING in a progressive, openminded society.

This. Executing rapists does, not in any way, help us advance towards our goal as a class. Rather spend your time and energy on preventing things like this from happening in the first place, and work to abolish the conditions that give rise to crimes like these. While the intense hatred towards cops for situations like these is completely understandable and justified, our primary critique should be their class interest, namely the continuation of bourgeois rule. Materialize the fuck up, people.

Brutus
16th March 2014, 17:51
No, we'll just kill the fucking disgusting leeches in life like Mitt Romney, Police officers like that rapist, and other disgusting people who've committed atrocities.
Because evil people should be punished, right? I'm loving this moralism!

Sinister Intents
16th March 2014, 17:53
Because evil people should be punished, right? I'm loving this moralism!

Lol, I see what you're getting at. Yeah, I am wrong to say what I'm saying, but I just fucking hate cops so much....

Punishment doesn't do a whole lot, rehabilitation would be significantly better, but some people cannot be rehabilitated, I don't feel like derailing the thread, unless this wouldn't count as derailing...

bad ideas actualised by alcohol
16th March 2014, 17:58
I understand the, somewhat knee-jerk, reaction to these kinda things. This stuff is very emotional and is bound to get emotional responses. However, I am inclined to agree with Brutus that we can't hang our way to a better society. A purely emotional response out of a feeling of revenge isn't going to get us much further. I hate to be the "it's the material conditions, dummy"-guy, but it's the material conditions. There are reasons why these kinda events regularly happen. These lie in the structural sexism in our society and in the way the police-force operates within the broader structure of the existing society as a whole. Surely these things must be the focus of the rage.

BIXX
16th March 2014, 17:59
I am against the death penalty, but I am not against these fucks being killed. The death penalty implies a state apparatus or a systematic set of laws set forth by the community (which I have said time and time again, I see no reason to subordinate yourself to the community. This doesn't mean you can't work with it, but you should be doing so out of an egoistic impulse IMO). However, if someone were to kill these people, I wouldn't be unhappy. I might actually enjoy the fact that they're gone.

Systematic punishment is based in moralism 100% of the time, individual vengeance tends to be more personal.

I don't know. I can't help but say if they died I'd be happy.

Rosa Partizan
16th March 2014, 18:04
yeah well, this is kind of something different. I wouldn't cry for a rapist neither. But I would not approve of having neither the state nor random folks to decide about life and death.

(this sentence sounds so grammatically wrong, but I can't put my finger on it. Could a native speaker help out?)

Sinister Intents
16th March 2014, 18:05
yeah well, this is kind of something different. I wouldn't cry for a rapist neither. But I would not approve of having neither the state nor random folks to decide about life and death.

(this sentence sounds so grammatically wrong, but I can't put my finger on it. Could a native speaker help out?)

Makes sense to me :) So it's good I'd say

bad ideas actualised by alcohol
16th March 2014, 18:06
yeah well, this is kind of something different. I wouldn't cry for a rapist neither. But I would not approve of having neither the state nor random folks to decide about life and death.

(this sentence sounds so grammatically wrong, but I can't put my finger on it. Could a native speaker help out?)

Either instead of neither in both cases and or instead of nor.

BIXX
16th March 2014, 18:08
yeah well, this is kind of something different. I wouldn't cry for a rapist neither. But I would not approve of having neither the state nor random folks to decide about life and death.

(this sentence sounds so grammatically wrong, but I can't put my finger on it. Could a native speaker help out?)


I honestly believe most people would choose life, which is why I am ok with letting folks decide life and death. Of course that's a whole different discussion that might actually be very interesting, I think I'll start another thread on it.

(Your sentence looks good to me :) )

synthesis
16th March 2014, 18:11
I'll just be very blunt and say that if this guy wasn't going to be in protective custody, as he hasn't been convicted of a federal crime, he would almost certainly be killed by other inmates; sad to say, in a lot of people's eyes being a cop is a worse and more deserving crime than being a rapist.

I honestly don't know that it's about "punishing him for his crimes" - okay, that element is definitely there - but there's also an aspect of it that wants people like this to have to suffer the same consequences as anybody else would, without the political protection afforded such people by their positions in society. (cf. Rodney King riots and the reaction to the Zimmerman trial.)

Rosa Partizan
16th March 2014, 18:12
I honestly believe most people would choose life, which is why I am ok with letting folks decide life and death. Of course that's a whole different discussion that might actually be very interesting, I think I'll start another thread on it.

(Your sentence looks good to me :) )

yeah awesome, do this, please. There is one main reason why I don't think that in our current society, direct democracy (i.e. deciding about life and death respectively the laws concerning this) would work out. But let's keep it for this thread of yours.

The Jay
16th March 2014, 21:26
Yeah, let's hang our way to a perfect society. And you call yourselves progressives...

Towards a perfect society you say? How Idealist of you.

The Jay
16th March 2014, 21:33
No, seriously Brutus. If you are against the death penalty that's fine and dandy, but if you think that this gives you a moral high ground then you have a lot of ground to cover before your proposition beats out mine.

consuming negativity
16th March 2014, 22:15
Either the person should be killed or not; why argue over who is pulling the switch?

Firebrand
16th March 2014, 22:55
Something about this whole case bothers me though. I mean am I the only one who thinks this can't have been the first time he's done it. I mean most people don't just launch into something on this scale. Maybe it started out with harassment and the boys in charge turned a bind eye. Maybe he got away with more and more until he finally actually raped someone. Maybe there's other victims that were too afraid to come forward, or were silenced. Maybe all this is only just coming out because of the new boss. The timings are too convenient.
Ok reading that over maybe I sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist but there's something that doesn't sit right about this story. It stinks of the kind of bureaucratic arse covering, and protect your own mentality that we all know exists in law enforcement.

Regarding the executions of rapists/right wingers/people who looked at me funny, i'm sure everyone here has a secret list of people they'd like to line up against the wall, a fair proportion think it would be morally wrong and would never actually implement it, others have no moral objections but are worried about the precedent/potential for people getting carried away and so would never do it, and there are some who would be the first to break out the firing squads given half a chance. But we all occasionally get to daydream about the look on the evil capitalistTM's face as you aim your ak47 at him/her (equal opportunity purges of course).

Alexios
17th March 2014, 00:03
lol @ teenage bloodlust

Sinister Intents
17th March 2014, 00:06
lol @ teenage bloodlust

Lol @ useless post, and I'm 21

synthesis
17th March 2014, 00:13
Something about this whole case bothers me though. I mean am I the only one who thinks this can't have been the first time he's done it. I mean most people don't just launch into something on this scale. Maybe it started out with harassment and the boys in charge turned a bind eye. Maybe he got away with more and more until he finally actually raped someone. Maybe there's other victims that were too afraid to come forward, or were silenced. Maybe all this is only just coming out because of the new boss. The timings are too convenient.

Ok reading that over maybe I sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist but there's something that doesn't sit right about this story. It stinks of the kind of bureaucratic arse covering, and protect your own mentality that we all know exists in law enforcement.

I think it's beyond question that this isn't the first sexual assault this guy has been involved with. Criminals almost never get caught for their first crime.

Sinister Intents
17th March 2014, 00:15
I think it's beyond question that this isn't the first sexual assault this guy has been involved with. Criminals almost never get caught for their first crime.

So, does this officer deserve to be killed like I hope he does?

BIXX
17th March 2014, 00:30
lol @ teenage bloodlust


Even if it is "teenage bloodlust" that doesn't make it any more incorrect as a course of action.

synthesis
17th March 2014, 00:36
So, does this officer deserve to be killed like I hope he does?

I think most decent people would have a visceral emotional reaction to stuff like this; that doesn't mean the treatment of the crime should ultimately be based on that reaction alone. I think the whole notion of "justice as punitive" is archaic and appeals to the worst aspects of human nature: socially sanctioned brutality.