Unbecoming, Indeed


One man. Two boys. Twelve kids.

Related Post Roulette

45 Responses

  1. Notm says:

    Did you even read your own article or just see that she was a black female and go for the race and gender angle? It clearly says that there are questions that she continued to film after becoming a cop.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Notm says:

      So what? It is a legal activity that in no one way interferes with her ability to be a police officer.

      Is it better, worse, or identical to turning your back on the Mayor at a memorial service for a slain officer?

      Is it better, worse, or identical to shooting an unarmed child?Report

      • Notm in reply to Kazzy says:

        So what? You said, “prior career.” Thats clearly not what the article says she’s being investigated for. Your attempt to change the subject is very sad. I really expect better.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to Notm says:

          I read several reports which didn’t have agreement on the specifics of the investigations. Want me to fix it? Will that change anything?

          Seriously, dude. You can’t construct an argument so you get pedantic? This is really, really sad. I welcome conservative opinions here because they challenge me to think differently. You challenge me not to treat you like a 4-year-old.Report

  2. Brandon Berg says:

    I was able to guess her race, but only because you wouldn’t have asked the question if she’d been white. Are there any examples of white police officers getting a pass on this? Or, for that matter, male?Report

  3. LeeEsq says:

    @kazzy, I think that there is more to the story that the police officer just being an African-American woman and will have to somewhat side with @notm in this case. Its more than she just performed in a porno, its the she performed with a convicted rapist. She might have known of her co-stars criminal activity and having a close association with a known criminal is probably not a good thing for a cop. This officer isn’t the first police person to get to close to a criminal but she did get caught.

    Another issue is that police need to invoke some sort of authority to do their job. Unfortunately, a cop with violent tendencies who plants evidence invokes the necessary authority better than a cop you saw fuck on camera.Report

    • Damon in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Gotta agree here.

      Seeing some similarities between this post and Dan’s most recent…Report

    • Kazzy in reply to LeeEsq says:


      At the time she admits to performing, the man was not yet a convicted rapist. Which doesn’t mean he hadn’t raped anyone at the time. But to assume she knew of this behavior is, well, a huge assumption.

      Perhaps performing in porn is enough to disqualify someone from the police force. But what stands out to me is that all of the other things mentioned… ya know, killing unarmed kids, body slamming unarmed kids, killing dogs, lying, planting evidence, etc… apparently ISN’T enough to disqualify someone from the police force.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to Kazzy says:

        Just because he wasn’t convicted yet, doesn’t mean he didn’t commit any crimes.Report

      • Kazzy in reply to Kazzy says:

        You said: “…having a close association with a known criminal is probably not a good thing for a cop.”

        If he wasn’t convicted of crimes, it is hard to declare him a “known criminal”. Sure, some folks may have known of his criminal activity, but there isn’t evidence that she did. While I agree that engaging in business relationships with known criminals can be problematic for folks employed by the police department, again there is no evidence that she knew of his crimes OR that she was engaged in business with him while employed by the police department. The latter is among the claims being investigated by the department (i.e., that she continued to participate in pornography while employed) but I don’t see evidence to that fact presented as of yet. And, as I’ve said several times, I hardly see that worthy of firing especially given all of the bad behavior cops currently get away with.

        If anything, this woman seems like a success story. An arguably shady past who extricated herself from it and got herself a good job contributing to the community. And now we want to fire her for that past. Sigh…Report

      • notme in reply to Kazzy says:


        Has anyone tried to argue that those other acts are acceptable for police? Its as if you are creating a strawman so you can have something to rail against.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to notme says:

          How many cops were fired for Tamir Rice’s killing?Report

          • notme in reply to Kazzy says:

            You tell us Kazzy? Is this your best non responsive answer?Report

            • Notm in reply to notme says:

              Kazzy we’re still waiting for an answer. Who here has said in any post that any of the activities you mentioned are acceptable? Surely, the miami pd is allowed to decide what activities are unbecoming?Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Notm says:

                I’m done with you, @notm . You are a troll and nothing more. You can’t make a substantive argument and therefore rely on being pedantic and playing “gotcha” games. The fact remains that zero officers were fired for the killing of an unarmed 12-year-old boy. And one officer risks firing for engaging in pornography. If that doesn’t say that we have a fucked up perception of what behavior is and is not acceptable for police officers, than you have a facile understanding of things and I don’t have the time to explain the world to you. Sorry. Goodbye.

                I’d appreciate if you didn’t comment on my posts anymore. Obviously, you are free to, but know that your comments will be ignored just as Kim’s are because you bring absolutely nothing to the conversation. It is a shame, really, because the conservative opinion you pretend to represent would be so valuable here but instead we are left with a mindless troll like yourself. Sigh. Good day…Report

      • Kim in reply to Kazzy says:

        Performing pornographic acts with police dogs ought to be not allowed.Report

    • Autolukos in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Being a known criminal doesn’t seem to be that much of an obstacle to remaining a cop, which makes it hard to see why mere association should be considered such a problem.Report

    • Lurker in reply to LeeEsq says:

      She might have known of her co-stars criminal activity and having a close association with a known criminal is probably not a good thing for a cop.

      So cops are supposed to check everyone they interact with outside of work to make sure they don’t associate “which could be defined very broadly, I suspect” with convicted criminals? Do criminals who have served their time count? Does Mike Tyson count? Martha Stewart (or is it only violent criminals)?

      Of course, the story (as written, I can’t open the video) suggests the guy wasn’t convicted (or even accused, apparently) when she mad the porno with him. So apparently cops aren’t supposed to “associate” with anyone who may “pretty broad” have committed a crime (is it just violent crimes)?

      If this was a white person it would get treated differently.

      I get that IA (or whoever) might do a brief investigation to check if she may have been involved in wrong doing while a cop that should keep her from being a cop. But that could be a quiet investigation. No press should’ve been involved. The story presents no justification for her not being a cop.Report

    • Kim in reply to LeeEsq says:

      “having a close association with a known criminal is probably not a good thing for a cop”
      … because cops never have informants, and never do actual research on vice by hiring a whore.
      (Okay, maybe cops don’t do the latter, but if so, it’s because of lack of intelligence. Whores know a lot more than most people think about psychology).Report

  4. Kolohe says:

    Carol Shaya Castro is not African American.Report

  5. I still find it troubling that killing = okay, fucking on camera = not okay.

    I’m going to pile on with some of the others here, but only a little bit.

    First (with others here), I do think it’s relevant if she did indeed do it while a cop. Second, is it really the case that people who support her firing are indeed saying that killing is okay (by which I think you mean “unjustified killing”)? Maybe they are, at least by implication. I haven’t paid enough attention to recent news to know if the MIami PD has proved itself particularly bad when it comes to unjustified killings. [/piling on]

    On the first issue, whether she should be disciplined (assuming she continued doing it while a cop), the issue should be what advanced notice she had that it’s wrong. The article says, “While there is no direct rule forbidding Miami cops from working in the porn industry, it could be considered conduct unbecoming of an officer.” Does that mean that despite the lack of a “direct rule,” it was generally understood that performing in this particular (legal) activity would be unbecoming, or is this just a post-hoc thing to make an example of the cop? Also relevant is what type of discipline the cop faces. If we’re talking about written warning it’s a different issue from if we’re talking about a firing.

    On the second issue, a better question, I think, is why the MIami PD–and perhaps PD’s in general–have an incentive to be more tough on this sort of thing than on unjustified killings (assuming they are, which they might be). I’m not sure what the answer is, but it probably has something to do with culture (including prudishness), with the why’s and wherefore’s of what should count as “becoming,” with the department’s priorities, with what’s easy to prove, etc. Sometimes lesser wrongs are easier to combat than greater wrongs are. (See how, at least according to anecdotes I’ve heard, cops find it easier to arrest low-level drug users/dealers than expend the effort to go after the organized criminals that oversee the trade.)Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Gabriel Conroy says:


      My understanding is they are trying to fire her. And I struggle to understand a definition of “conduct becoming of an officer” that includes the many things that police do every day that is so deeply troubling to those of us with a conscience but which does NOT include fucking on camera. I literally can’t wrap my head around that concept. And while it possible that the Miami PD itself is unique in that they root out any and all bad behavior and have a pristine department, color me skeptical.

      Regarding your second point, I actually think it is telling how people’s ‘moral scold’ sides come out on particular issues. Both here and elsewhere. I can’t accept that the PD is concerning itself with smaller problems rather than big ones. This isn’t some private company. This is the fucking police department. They don’t get to pick and choose which behaviors they root out. They are charged with protecting and serving the citizens and are granted a monopoly on force in order to perform that duty. They don’t get to let major issues like unjustified killings, abuse, and harassment skate by because they are ‘hard’ to deal with. I’m sorry but that is simply unacceptable. Let’s get the number of unjustified killings down to zero and then worry about who’s fucking who where and when. If cops only go for low hanging fruit, they are bad cops. If that is department policy — either internally or externally — that is bad policy and we should condemn it. Imagine if schools deigned only to teach smart, well behaved kids? Or if public defenders only took easy won cases? Or if fire fighters only put out fires that they could fight from the exterior of a building? Would we find any of that acceptable? Hell fucking no we wouldn’t.Report

      • Gabriel Conroy in reply to Kazzy says:

        If cops only go for low hanging fruit, they are bad cops. If that is department policy — either internally or externally — that is bad policy and we should condemn it.

        When I mention incentives, I mean that it would be better to figure out a way so that PD’s focus more on the real problems and not on people doing pornos (and I admit that if they’re trying to fire her, that’s probably wrong). It is an outrage (if it’s true, and I suspect it is) that PD’s tend to focus on such things while not focusing on brutality and summary murders from officers. How are we going to change it? I’m not sure of the answer.

        But I do want to state that I think I mostly agree with you.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to Kazzy says:

        Kazzy, police officers generally need to inspire a certain amount of respect and/or fear in order to do their job properly. Since police officers are supposed to enforce the law, it helps that people know not to mess with them for some reason or another. A police officer that was potentially masturbation fodder is probably going to have a difficult time inspiring the necessary respect or fear. A police officer who committed acts of violence or trickery could inspire the necessary respect or fear because people would be wary of the officer.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to LeeEsq says:


          What if she was a stripper? Or just had huge breasts and looked hot in a uniform? That is bullshit slut shaming.Report

        • Kim in reply to LeeEsq says:

          I got news for you pal. Any woman over the age of 14 and under 40 is potential masturbatory fodder, at least if you ask a 14 year old boy. And who do you think is defiant with cops, anyhow?

          Cops may not be one of the 7 flavors of hentai, but I assure you that they do show up in enough different pornographic media that it’s not a stretch for people to think of “hot cops” (hell there was even one in Dr. Who).Report

      • dragonfrog in reply to Kazzy says:

        Kazzy: And I struggle to understand a definition of “conduct becoming of an officer” that includes the many things that police do every day that is so deeply troubling to those of us with a conscience but which does NOT include fucking on camera.

        Easy: preserving the existing power structure.

        That power structure includes white supremacist racism, so shooting unarmed minority folks is becoming.

        That power structure includes sexism and slut shaming, so illegal detentions and worse of prostitutes is becoming, but fucking on camera clearly is not.

        That power structure includes a degree of oligarchy, so showing up at a peaceful Occupy-esque demonstration and immediately turning it into a riot with teargas and water cannons is becoming, but actually showing up in uniform to serve a fraud warrant against a CEO such that they might be embarassed by newspaper photos of themselves in handcuffs is unbecoming.

        I’m not saying that is actually the job of the police, or that it ought to be – but I am saying that it wasn’t hard to come up with that definition.Report

    • Kim in reply to Gabriel Conroy says:

      Why is it relevant that she did it while she was a cop?
      It’s not like she recruited the police dog…

      Is it the potential for blackmail? (I’d argue schoolteachers are way more of an issue there…)Report