12 yr old stripped searched twice

[rizz]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...wice-by-police

ok so i was wondering what people thought about this.

here is a 12 yr old who was stripped searched twice by police in the one raid...now personally i know that in a raid the police don't leave you alone so why was there a need for the second search?

and should her age have been considered when they decided to do any strip search?

was once enough?

should she have been searched?

did the police do the right thing?

rizz

[Amberpamber]

Personally i'm appalled that the police force was ignorant to not only do it once but twice? I can understand like a pat down, due to the reasoning they were there, but to go that far...that's just stupid. I seriously hope there's legal action taken against them, that poor girl.

[Maverick.]

It's really sad this girl had to go through that turmoil, but the police do have a job to do. There were drugs stashed in the house, and it is the law for them to do those sorts of things. They need to make sure that nobody is hiding any drugs. You need to do a strip search in order to do so. It's unfortunate they did this to a twelve year old girl, but they have to do their job.

[Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Joker

It's really sad this girl had to go through that turmoil, but the police do have a job to do. There were drugs stashed in the house, and it is the law for them to do those sorts of things. They need to make sure that nobody is hiding any drugs. You need to do a strip search in order to do so. It's unfortunate they did this to a twelve year old girl, but they have to do their job.

I agree with this, they were there looking for drugs and it's possible they could have been hidden on the girl so searching her would be necessary to make sure she wasn't hiding them but it wasn't right for them to do it twice. Isn't once enough? If you didn't find anything then, what are the chances of something appearing the second time around?

[Koharuchan]

I have to agree with Jesse, the police had to do their job. I understand she's only 12, and I understand she was probably scared, but the police were doing their job, and drugs were stashed in the house. As far as the second strip search, the article simply said they did it because of her behavior. If they'd elaborated on that, I'd give my opinion on them doing it twice, but since I don't know the details of why exactly they did it I won't agree or disagree with the second search.

[✖Ice✖]

As long as it was female cops who did the search.

[thebigmole]

Personally I'd be upset with the mother, or whoever put the drugs in the house with the 12 year old in the first place.

[Loving Linux Penguin]

While I understand the points that are being made, I think a STRIP SEARCH on a 12 year old girl is a bit extreme. I honestly think a pat down would suffice, and then have her undress if they find anything. Yes, they need to do their jobs, but does doing their job need to involve traumatizing a 12-year old girl...TWICE? How many 12-year old girls are really going to put drugs in any of their body cavities? Probably not enough to make it worthwhile.

[TheBabyEater]

Tasmania police confirmed two female officers strip-searched the girl at a house in Rokeby, Hobart, on Wednesday morning, saying the second search was triggered by the girl's behaviour.

Inspector Lathey said drugs and cash were found in the house and seized.

While I don't see the reasoning in strip searching a 12 year old twice, it would be interesting to find out what kind of behavior the 12 year old had that warranted the second strip search. If she was acting extremely aggressive, or said something like "I still have drugs on me" then sure, I could understand a second strip search. The article also doesn't state if the first "strip search" was sufficient, or if the officers thought it was. But, it's a 12 year old soo...Twice is just over the line.

Then again, I have seen 12 year olds here in America sell drugs.

I'd be more upset at the mother who is obviously selling drugs with a 12 year old, and raising her daughter to do the same. If anything, I question the credibility of the mother.

[JKmadu619]

I normally defend the police force to the death, but this has actually upset me.

I don't really think it was acceptable to do so twice. Maybe once as a service to the public, but twice seems... excessive.

They should've done a good enough job the first time.

However the article was biased and lacked information. If the officer was of the same gender, then I see less issue with it. If it were done kindly then I don't see an issue with it.

However with words like "dragged" in the article it makes me suspicious. If she were literally dragged then action should be carried out against the officers if she were metaphorically "dragged" then the article should have to face slander charges.

- Justin

[Loving Linux Penguin]

^Slander charges? Seriously? Using a METAPHOR or EMBELLISHING something a little doesn't mean you're lying. While I agree that said action doesn't belong in a piece of news, which SHOULD be unbiased, slander charges would be pretty ridiculous.

[thebigmole]

Originally Posted by Loving Linux Penguin

^Slander charges? Seriously? Using a METAPHOR or EMBELLISHING something a little doesn't mean you're lying. While I agree that said action doesn't belong in a piece of news, which SHOULD be unbiased, slander charges would be pretty ridiculous.

Actually slander charges would be pretty ridiculous because it's libel not slander


It is odd that the article is lacking so much information, it's really hard to form a opinion on the matter.

[JKmadu619]

Loving Linux Penguin: You just completely destroyed my self confidence and violently murdered my self esteem.


That was a gross exaggeration I just made. It's the same with the disgusting writing of that article. Re-reading the article slander may not be the best option but some form of legal action should be taken against this for grossly running down the officers.

- Justin

[Tyr.]

This is not newsworthy.

Until a proper report is published explaining the actions of the officers involved, it is all pure speculation on the part of the newspaper.

Nothing is ever so simple as they (The media) make it seem, nor do we have all the information available to us. This young girl was strip searched twice - and it is highly likely that is was for a good reason. It is not up to us to second-guess that decision in hindsight with limited intel.

- Yogi

[rizz]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-2...06?section=tas

http://www.themercury.com.au/article...days-news.html

http://www.examiner.com.au/news/loca...h/2436130.aspx

some people where saying they needed more info so i googled some more articles

[Koharuchan]

Although one article did give a bit more information, they all have one thing in common: they still don't tell us what exactly made them strip her TWICE. Yes, they indicate it was because of her behavior, but WHAT behavior necessitated a second search? If the articles told us what she was doing that made them feel the need to search her again, I would give more input. The only reason I don't agree OR disagree with the second search is simply because we don't have an answer to that question.

[Loving Linux Penguin]

Justin: disrupting your self esteem was not at all my intention, and I sincerely apologize.

My point is, I think that unless you can seriously PROVE that this is full of lies (and not just an embellished truth or exaggeration of fact), I don't think legal action is necessary or warranted. Even if you CAN prove that, is it really worth the bother?

[Dez]

I understand doing a strip search ONCE, but TWICE is a little ridiculous. O.o There was no need to do it a second time.

[Tyr.]

Originally Posted by Dez

There was no need to do it a second time.

Why not, exactly?

[JKmadu619]

Originally Posted by Loving Linux Penguin

Justin: disrupting your self esteem was not at all my intention, and I sincerely apologize.

My point is, I think that unless you can seriously PROVE that this is full of lies (and not just an embellished truth or exaggeration of fact), I don't think legal action is necessary or warranted. Even if you CAN prove that, is it really worth the bother?

...

You do realize the first line of my pos was a joke, right?

- Justin

[Loving Linux Penguin]

^uhh...apparently I hadn't

[rizz]

OK so everyone knows...i live in Australia and my house when i was a kids was raided twice (we didn't have drugs or anything like that) and in a raid you are never left alone at all...no matter your age.

I'm just mentioning it in case it might help

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

It is traumatic the girl had to be strip searched in the first place, however, the article by Michelle Paine (themercury) clearly indicated the girl's behaviour prompted a second search. I understand the police will withhold sensitive information from the public but I don't consider withholding information of her behaviour as sensitive material that cannot be described. I support the first strip search because if only a pat-down is performed on the girl, it creates uncertainty as to whether the parents gave the girl something to hide or whether the girl intentionally took something to hide. If either occurred because a strip-search was not conducted, there would be comments that the police was ignorant, not doing their job, age bias, etc... . Funny how several comments of the strip-searchers also described the police was ignorant, clearly there are differing ideas of ignorance.

[rizz]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...ied-tas-police

the police side of things

[Boobies]

Bugger, the police were doing their jobs, who would have though it?