Shrinking JPD Springs a Sex-Toy Sting

I see that they can seize dildos, but not guns off of a man who is threatening a minor child. They really got it together. This seems to be what FM does to take the focus off his mess ups, so we will quit talking about the bodyguards.

#96446 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

Boy, Melton and his supporters sure have a stick up their butt over these ‘sex toys’ and those who sell them. Do you think the confiscated materials go straight to Chief Anderson for inspection or do a few good men get a hold of’em?

#96447 | Author: pikersam | Date: Oct 24 2007

Yep, it’s about all the symbol you need for how mucked up the Melton administration really is. Nuff said.

#96448 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

Oh, we’re not going to stop talking about the damn bodyguards. Or any of his other cronyism!

#96449 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

Can someone tell me exactly what is wrong with purchasing sex toys? Frank, just because someone saw you in a sex store a few years ago buying a butt plug you shouldn’t play like a bully and make a city ordinance against the sell of these items. I also wanted to clarify something for the bloggers that just can’t seem to understand why JPD didn’t take the guns from the suspect who killed his ex-girlfriend. Guns are not illegal to have. If a crime has not been committed then officers can not just take weapons away from people. Remember, a misdemeanor offense has to be witnessed by a police officer before an arrest can be made. I can promise you that no one out there that day at that house wanted to go downtown and sign charges against that moron. So if police didn’t see it and other people aren’t willing to do something about it then nothing can be done. Also remember this. I can take a boat load of guns and drop them off in the middle of Farish Street. If no one picks them up and pulls the trigger then they will not fire.

#96450 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

Well said, Malt. Truth, the man was brandishing a firearm, which is certainly illegal. It seems obvious that the police had a judgment call to make and they called it the wrong way. You are right that it is people rather than weapons who commit crimes, but no one has any business, ever, pointing a handgun at another person unless they intend to take that person’s life. I learned that from the NRA, by the way. Otherwise, I assume that unnamed men were having sex in the shop. I assume that they were brandishing marital aids. That they threatened the officers with a pink plastic menace. I am sure that once all the facts come out, we’ll realize that the police are implementing a sort of domino theory of crime fighting. If people are allowed to buy marital aids with impunity, they’re almost certain to buy crack cocaine, to make the most of the experience. Then it’s kidnapping and a joyride, with guns blazing. This may look like an idiotic waste of resources, but there’s a method to madness.

#96451 | Author: Brian C Johnson | Date: Oct 24 2007

You are correct Brian. Pointing a firearm at people is against the law however you have to understand that no one was pointing a gun at anyone when the police officers arrived on scene. Also pointing a gun at someone is a misdemeanor offense. Shooting a weapon in Jackson is also a misdemeanor offense. If the police did not witness these events then they cannot legally make an arrest or take property. The people that witnessed this maniac do these things had an oportunity to sign charges against him. However they refused to do so. Since the witnesses did not want to take the time to sign charges against this person then the police could not do anything. Citizens have to remember that police have rules to follow. I know it doesn’t seem that way with Cowboy Frank in office but the good officers know what you legally can and can not do.

#96452 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

Hey truth I would like to clarify your statement of “Remember, a misdemeanor offense has to be witnessed by a police officer before an arrest can be made.” you can also be charged with a misdemeanor if you have two individuals who are willing to swear to the facts, and they individuals can be minors.

#96453 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

You are somewhat right malt. Minors can not sign charges against anyone. If a minor is a victim of a misdemeanor crime then the parents or legal gaurdian have to sign the charges.

#96454 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

Good point, malt. Clearly, the officers had grounds for a misdemeanor arrest. And as a high-up law-enforcement official told me, the police officers had the responsibility to defuse that situation so someone would not get killed. They could have taken the guns and arrested the guy overnight to at least get him out of volatile situation. The city is likely to pay dearly for that oversight.

#96455 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

Truth, is that what happened with the 11 year old boy in the Shavers case, his parents did not want to sign the charges?

#96456 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

Hey I wonder if the fines collected on this will go to the bodyguards salary.

#96457 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

The eleven year olds parents were given the opportunity to sign charges but they advised police that they did not want a report. They told police that they just wanted the suspect to go to jail. Well, it doesn’t work that way. In order for an arrest a complaint has to be made. If police could just arrest anyone just because they thought they might have broken the law then we would all be in trouble.

#96458 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

Thank you Truth for clarifing that, I am now better able to understand what happened that night.

#96459 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

OK, there’s a lot of stuff flying around here. The kid wasn’t 11 years old. And his parents didn’t have to file a complaint for something to happen; plenty of people were there to witness what happened. Folks, don’t believe the hype on this one. It’s ludicrous to say that a complaint has to be filed every time police enter a potentially deadly situation. That is putting the burden on the victims and/or potential victims. That’s an excuse.

#96460 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

I agree with you ladd, I remember when one of my daughter’s friends was attached after school. She was 16 and had me drive her to the police station where she and she alone file the complaint and the other party was arrested. But this was not in Jackson so was not sure.

#96461 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

I also just noticed how off-thread this gone. Please go here to discuss the Shavers murder further. This thread is about the sex-toy sting. Thanks.

#96462 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

I guess you just don’t understand the what “misdemeanor” means. If an officer does not see a “misdemeanor” take place then that officer can not make an arrest. Your are right if a person witnesses the event then he or she can be a witness or a complainant. If the suspect performed an act which a person deems unlawful towards them then that person can be a complainant and they can sign charges against that suspect. If someone witnesses an event that did not involve them then they are considered a witness and they can not file charges as a witness. I didn’t write the law so don’t shoot the messanger.

#96463 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

So was the sex toy sting by Vice and Narcotics units a “misdemeanor” or a felony.

#96464 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

It was a misdemeanor. The officers witnessed it through undercover buys as well as by finding items in the sex store while they were conducting a search warrant.

#96465 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

Well we see that our finest are certainly busy, and that these criminals selling dildos are taking up jail space lol.

#96466 | Author: GLewis | Date: Oct 24 2007

I know it seems dumb to hear that a sex store was raided and dildos were seized but you have to remember that it is against the law. Even though it is a dumb law it is a law. It is the duty of Vice detectives to conduct these type of raids as it is for a robbery detective to work robbery cases and homicide detectives to work homicides. Every division works on its assigned task so I know it is dumb to hear about this kind of arrest but Vice was only doing what they are suppose to be doing.

#96467 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 24 2007

I’m not shooting the messinger; I’m just saying he’s wrong about that night. The police had the authority to arrest him that night based on the circumstances of what happened. His parents did not have to sign a complaint. I know this, and I have no need to argue with you about it. And please, any more comments about this go under the other story. They’ll be deleted here.

#96468 | Author: DonnaLadd | Date: Oct 24 2007

Couple of questions: How many other cities in Mississippi have conducted this many raids since the law was passed? And, how many officers are assigned to the Vice Squad?

#96469 | Author: malt | Date: Oct 24 2007

Well, I for one am happy that the JPD is protecting me, as a man, from this competition. I mean honestly… How does a man compete with something that’s not moody, always ready, never talks back, and lives in a drawer? I just pray this law is never repealed. Hell, I’ll lead the way to pass a Constitutional amendment that bans ALL toys. LOL!

#96470 | Author: LawClerk | Date: Oct 24 2007

Boy, Melton and his supporters sure have a stick up their butt over these ‘sex toys’ and those who sell them. I need some bleach to clean that mental picture out of my mind.

#96471 | Author: golden eagle | Date: Oct 24 2007

Not being from Mississippi, I am still trying to figure out the system. Today about 2:30 I was driving west on Northside Dr. It was raining and visibility was pretty fair. Coming toward me, traveling east, was a School Bus stopping with their lights on. A car blew by them, not even slowing down. I was stopping about 100 ft. feet from the bus when I saw blue lights behind me. My assumption was that the police officer was going to stop the car that had passed the school bus. I was wrong, he wanted me to keep on going. I stopped till the bus had turned off their stop lights. The police officer kept turning the blue lights on and off until I started again. I pulled over and let him by. I stopped at the precinct and tried to talk to the Sargent. His response to me was “whats your complaint”. That a command person can’t see the problem, is a big problem. I think that sums up why this police department is so pathetic. I feel for the officers that are trying to make a difference

#96472 | Author: Slider | Date: Oct 25 2007

Slider, I’m so sorry you had a bad episode with Pct. 4. This afternoon at 5:30 at Redeemer Church on Northside Drive (across and down from Boyd Elementary) is a Reception for the new Commander at Pct. 4. It is a gathering of “COPs” which is an anacronym for Community Oriented Policing. Please come. Now, Pike, you have planted in my mind a visual of wooden dildos. If you were to take a stick and carve it into a representation of a penis, is it then a work of art or a sex toy? What about ceramic ones? And the list goes on! I could have sworn that some cataloges which are mailed into Mississippi have “sex toys”. They are labled as therapeutic or for sore muscles, I believe. What’s the difference?

#96473 | Author: ChrisCavanaugh | Date: Oct 25 2007

so, JPD can arrest people for selling sex toys, but not have a single reported arrest of anyone selling these narcotics that king frank is supposed to be so passionate about getting rid of? nice work. i wonder if they’re gonna auction off these confiscated items to help pay for bodyguards’ raises…

#96474 | Author: eyerah | Date: Oct 25 2007

The president of the Jackson Police Officers Association along with other members of the JPOA will be at the COPs meeting tonight. If you have any questions or would like to know how the JPOA is taking a stand for what is right for all officers and not just a select few then feel free to stop by and ask.

#96475 | Author: The truth | Date: Oct 25 2007

Why is JPD running business out of Jackson? Havent’ we Jacksonians suffered enough. Let us have our toys!

#96476 | Author: dd39203 | Date: Oct 26 2007

I agree – its not like they cause any harm. I’ve never heard of anyone being robbed or killed over a dildo. Maybe as a “stick up” but that doesn’t count, does it?

#96477 | Author: Simpleton | Date: Oct 26 2007