He was just giving them free prostate exams.MAGA coli/ bootlickers for cops would love this treatment on the coli
VA cop is pulling men over & performing illegal anal cavity searches
- Thread starter 13473
- Start date
ExodusNirvana
Change is inevitable...
Virginia is for lovers....but lovers of WHAT exactly 
Fiji Water
Every moment is an opportunity
I haven't seen the video but I've been in a similar situation. They basically just keep escalated after the initial pat down.I know I’m wrong, but that opening statement is hilarious!I. Like what does he say, bend over and spread your cheeks and you just oblige?
I was stopped for suspected theft of a 4ft bong and dude put his hand in my pants. I just calmly asked dude why he was lifting my balls and if it was possible to hide something so large there. He had no words.
SheWantTheD
Veteran
Absolutely disgusting
Ethnic Vagina Finder
The Great Paper Chaser
Only $500,000 
Need to add at least another zero. That’s a civil rights violation, sexual assault, rape, and terrorism.
Need to add at least another zero. That’s a civil rights violation, sexual assault, rape, and terrorism.
Fill Collins
Able to get note from doctor
Patrol the hershey highway, pigbrehs 
Damn. In harlem they usually just write us a citation and KIM...LYNCHBURG, Va. (WSET) — A Lynchburg police officer violated a man during a traffic stop by conducting an anal cavity search in which the officer used his hand to search the man’s buttocks on the side of the road, according to a recently filed lawsuit.
The Lynchburg Police Dept. says that officer is still working for them and not on leave, despite the lawsuit claiming the search broke police protocol and Virginia law and was an abuse of power that amounted to sexual assault.
A person caught the July 2020 traffic stop on Facebook Live. In the video, given to ABC13 by the plaintiff’s attorney, it appears the officer puts his hand down the man’s pants while the man is in handcuffs. In the video, you hear a person behind the camera saying “they searched him, didn’t find [expletive]. They violated him. Put his fingers up his butt and didn’t find [expletive].”
"His gloves are on. He puts his hand down the front of my pants, reaches in between my crotch and my testicles and all of that,” the plaintiff said in an interview. “He goes in the back of my pants and puts his hand in my rectum and swipes in like an upward motion I felt, like, a sharp pain.”
Another man, who has not filed a lawsuit, said the same officer searched him by putting his hand down his pants and performing an anal cavity search on the side of the road. According to online court records, that same officer did stop the man on the date in question in 2020.
"He initially searched me one time. He unbuckled my belt, rubbed my thighs down and then came back up my buttocks area,” he said in an interview. “It made me uncomfortable. I never thought you could do that to people.”
ABC13 is not naming the plaintiff or the second accuser because they are making allegations of sexual assault. ABC13 is also not naming the officer because he has not been charged with a crime.
“It's very degrading for a man to come out and say ‘another man put his finger in my rectum,’ as a grown man,” the plaintiff said.
Both men say they were pulled over for traffic violations. Online court records show they were later charged with such offenses. For instance, the first accuser, who is suing the officer, was found guilty of two misdemeanors: reckless driving and driving under a suspended license. Neither of the men were charged with any drug offenses in relation to these incidents because they say they didn’t have drugs on them.
To learn more about the police side of these stops, ABC13 requested the incident reports through the Freedom of Information Act.
In a written response regarding the plaintiff’s incident report, the department said, “there is no incident report related to the traffic stop of [redacted] on July 21, 2020 around the 1500 block of 6th Street.”
As for the second accuser, the department would not release them, writing “These records are considered administrative investigative records exempted from disclosure.”
ABC13 also requested all complaints made from the public to the Lynchburg Police Dept. The department also denied releasing those, again citing administrative investigative records.
After multiple requests for a response or interview regarding these allegations, the department’s public information officer said in an email, “As mentioned previously, we will not be providing any additional information on this investigation or any pending litigation.”
She also said the officer is under investigation but did not say when their investigation started or when it will be done. The incident alleged in the lawsuit happened in 2020, and the lawsuit was filed in 2021.
The lawsuit claims the officer violated Lynchburg Police Dept. policy and Virginia law.
LPD’s policy on body cavity searches says a search of any body cavity – other than the mouth – requires a search warrant, and if necessary, a court order directing a medical facility to conduct the search, “either by or under the supervision of medically trained personnel.” Virginia law mirrors that policy.
LPD’s policy also says, “the appropriate supervisor will accompany the officer to the medical facility to assist in the service of the search warrant and court order,” and that the suspect must give consent.
"My client was saying that he was being violated, begging him to stop. The officer continued. He found nothing,” Cam Warren, the attorney representing the plaintiff, said in an interview.
In response to Warren’s lawsuit, the officer’s attorney filed a legal response. In it, the officer only admits to pulling the man over for reckless driving and suspected eluding and asking the man to get out of the car.
The document says the officer, “acted lawfully and with legal justifications at all times.”
“If the average citizen did that, they would be charged with sexual assault,” said Brad Garrett, a former FBI agent and ABC News contributor.
Garrett has 35 years of experience in federal law enforcement. He watched the Facebook Live video of the incident.
“It certainly appeared to me that he (the officer) violated this person's rights.”
Garrett said law enforcement should always have a search warrant for a cavity search. If they don’t have a search warrant, a body cavity search should only happen under exigent circumstances – meaning if the person is hiding something that could harm the officer or the person being confronted.
"I just don't see any excuse for this to have ever occurred,” Garrett said.
Warren reiterated that he and his firm have the “absolute, utmost respect for law enforcement.”
“My hope is that we continue to have great law enforcement, which we do here in Lynchburg. We have excellent police officers,” Warren said. “Our allegation is that this is not excellence. This is not the standard that the Lynchburg Police Department’s reputation should be, and not what their reputation is.”
In the lawsuit, Warren and his client are asking for a total of $500,000 in compensatory and punitive damages for sexual assault and battery with interest from the date of the incident. They are also demanding a jury trial.
"People need to know their rights, and I think the public needs to be aware of what's happening,” Warren said.
Both men said they want to see changes after this.
“I just want [the officer] to be held accountable for his actions,” the second accuser said. “I don’t think you should treat people like that.
“This stuff isn’t happening everywhere – only in urban communities” the plaintiff said. “I was clean. I was violated. They traumatized me.”
at least one has a lawyer. he's suing and trying to get charges brought up on the cop
In the lawsuit, Warren and his client are asking for a total of $500,000 in compensatory and punitive damages for sexual assault and battery with interest from the date of the incident. They are also demanding a jury trial.
VA, I’m surprised it was not a State Trooper. People think the Pennsylvania State Troppers are nazi’s. VA takes the crown