In reality the WPD has always been more reactionary in their enforcement. Driven more by the number of complains. Then a over all seeking out crime, patrol tends to more just drive around waiting for a call. Not being a force of investigators searching the allies and streets. But in their defense, often the number of calls and handling the volume leave little time to doing anything else. But to hand the calls and do the associated paperwork. The formation of the “SCAT” teams was an attempt to have a group of officers that did nothing but look for crime in area. Only on the most serious crime will they respond to calls.

I understand your position. I also know, as you do, that LEO’s have discretion on when to arrest and submit a case for prosecution, with only two statutory exceptions in Kansas: domestic battery and DUI – in both of those cases, if there is PC, an arrest must be made. In all other cases, officers (perhaps through the chain of command) have discretion as to how to proceed.

Many’s the time I’ve looked at a case and wondered “why am I getting this piece of crap case?” The officer (or his superior) was simply doing the classic CYA and kicking discretion upstairs.

The streetwalkers on the website reveal that the Wichita PD has been gathering the low-hanging fruit. Show up at the bar of an upper-class hotel with five or six crisp hundred-dollar bills and chances are pretty good you can get a party with a better-looking, better-smelling stranger. But those people are harder to arrest.

Charge a desperate junkie with “mapping violoations,” however, and a cop’s collar rate skyrockets. But to what benefit to society?

So many vice crimes seem to be contrivances of politicians. If, for example, every law against possession and private use of marijuana were revoked, do you really think bank presidents, preachers, surgeons, and soccer mom’s would run out and start smoking reefer? I think not. I kinda think the people who smoke pot are smoking pot and the law’s not preventing much of anything. The law merely criminalizes a recreational activity and, by doing so, introduces people into the criminal subculture.

Okay, so I’m a pig. I’ve paid $300 for a Valentine’s Day dinner where I expected, and got, sex at the end of the evening. How is it all that different if I fix a ham sandwich and pay her the money and eliminate the middle-man? I’ve never done that, but I’m not sure I understand the difference.

For every undercover cop struttin’ her stuff on South Broadway, there’s one fewer cop cruising your neighborhood look for burglers and rapists and the next BTK. How many people did Dennis Rader kill while the WPD was busting hookers where the busting was good?

The WPD has proven itself to be highly competent in capturing and prosecuting a guy who has $2.10 worth of hotdogs. They’re obviously capable of nabbing ugly women for “mapping violations.”

But just exactly how does this make my life better?

Thank you for that insightful post into why and how law enforcement officers enforce the law. It helps me, and I’m sure others, understand the predicament beat cops sometimes find themselves in when faced with difficult enforcement choices.

That said…

I know that patrol captains and lieutenants brief their officers on what the enforcement emphasis is going to be. This is true whether it’s a stretch of highway known for speeding, an apartment complex known for drug dealing, or a stretch of Broadway where prostitution is rampant. Captains also tell their officers things like “don’t spend time on this type of offender.” It’s all a matter of prioritization.

What I find most disturbing about WPD’s emphasis on enforcement of 5.68.200 is that, well, they’re emphasizing it. I’m reasonably certain that Chief Williams and his staff understand that this ordinance is unconstitutional. It bothers me to no end that they believe it should be emphasized for enforcement anyhow.

But a point of order, as a former L. E. O. I will say that under the system it is not the place of law enforcement to decide which laws to be enforced. They are sworn to enforce all laws local, state and federal. If a law is unjust or outdated it is up to the legislation and the courts to decide the issue. Granted, that not all are enforced either by ignorance or willfully dismissed. Such as if you are charged with having a dirty license plate it is a sure bet that it is because you acted a fool to the officer. To be true though a officer is not in the position to decide that such a law is outdated or unjust. There were a number of time I arrested someone not because I felt that they were wrong or morally guilty. It was because I was sworn to enforce the law. But at trial I would make a point to state to the judge that I felt the defendant was not wrong or consciously guilty. In some case I then would suffer a “butt chewing” from the judge that lead into the question as to why I was wasting the courts time? I would then point out that my job was not to decide the right or wrong of the law. That was the courts job to decide and that can only be done if the case is brought before the court. They generally agreed and the defendant was found not guilty.

It is the duty of the courts to temper the law with justice not the beat cop’s.

I don’t know what could be done to stop it. It is degrading to most women, but can that be said that all women feel that way? Like drugs, government will spend copious amounts of money to control it, but to little avail. Like drugs as well, there is a dark side to it, so maybe government needs to address that.

Prostitution really is a strange bird. How do you stop it? you really can’t. But that still doesn’t make it right.

Your email address has “1946″ in it. I assume that’s the year you were born, right? That would make you 61 this year. The girls pictured that you just named are probably still in their teens.

You are exactly the kind of person Mark McCormick was writing about in his column today.

Creep.

She and Nifong – especially Nifong – should be prosecuted.

Disgusting.

Posted by: GSheridan | April 11, 2007 at 03:21 PM

I’m glad you said it GS, ’cause that is what has me hot under the collar for the most part!!!

I’ve not heard of anyone EVER being arrested in Wichita for simple sodomy, except maybe for doing it in public. Some folks get caught going at it in the parks now and then. Public sex of any type is still a no-no and not protected by the Lawrence decision. But the web page does say that anyone charged with sodomy would show up in the web listings. Doesn’t say that they’d get detailed enough to know if they were with another consenting adult, or their pet pony.

Yeah, they ought to take 5.68.200 (a) off of the books and sub in a beastiality staute. Just to have fun comparing the sodomy and the sodomy-for-hire statutes, I note that while it’s illegal simple sodomy to have sex with animals, there’s no penalty for hiring out the animal, as the sodomy-for-hire staute does not mention animals. Pony pimps are safe.

Also, sodomy-for-hire is non-discriminatory as to gay or straight or marital relationship. Careful what playful deals you make with your partner…they might turn you into crimestoppers!

I don’t approve of that, either, but no one is trying to make the athletes quit spreading it around.

Promiscuity, whether free, or for hire, causes a lot of problems in society – but to target these poor women who walk the streets and those who frequent them is just ‘feel good’ measure.

The businessmen that pay high-class escorts – to ‘accompany them’ are no different. It just happens in a higher rung of society – and law enforcement turns its head.

I think Norman Williams should be fired. Not because of this – but because I think he is incompetent.

The sad thing is – even though the players have been vindicated – and all charges dropped – they are out tens, if not hundreds of thousands, of dollars. They can’t recover from the stripper/whore that lied about them – she has no money.

These boys will never be the same. Their families have been through hell.

The woman who fabricated the story should spend at least a decade in prison for what she did. Not only did her accusations cause financial and emotional damage to the boys and their families – but she has damaged the integrity of EVERY real victim of rape.

Disgusting.