Female Cop 'fingers' Women in search for weed.

Moebius

Well-Known Member
Female US cop caught on tape giving two women body cavity search during routine traffic stop... and 'using the SAME gloves on both'


  • Angel Dobbs, 38, and niece Ashley Dobbs, 24, were pulled over on State Highway 161 near Irving, Texas
  • Trooper searched car for marijuana before requesting invasive cavity search
  • Older woman claims search by trooper Kellie Helleson irritated an anal cyst she was suffering causing 'severe pain and discomfort'
  • Also suing the Texas Department of Public Safety for failing to act on previous complaints about 'violating' searches


[video=youtube;x0-5wAj25w8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0-5wAj25w8[/video]

Two Texas women are suing after state troopers subjected them to a humiliating and invasive 'roadside body cavity search' that was caught on video.
Female trooper Kellie Helleson is seen in the footage aggressively searching the private parts of Angel Dobbs, 38, and her niece, Ashley Dobbs, 24, in front of passing cars.

The women, who claim the trooper used the same rubber glove for both of them, were initially stopped by Helleson's colleague David Farrell on State Highway 161 near Irving after he saw one of them throw a cigarette butt out the window.

Farrell can be heard in the disturbing video questioning the pair about marijuana though he failed to find any evidence of the drug in the vehicle.

However, he requested the women be searches after allegedly claiming they were 'acting weird.'

The lawsuit states he then tried to 'morph this situation into a DWI investigation,' according to the Dallas Morning News.

Angel Dobbs passed a roadside sobriety test and the women were given warnings for littering.


Angel Dobbs said Helleson irritated an anal cyst she suffers from during the search, causing her 'severe and continuing pain and discomfort.'
The suit said: 'Angel Dobbs was overwhelmed with emotion and a feeling of helplessness and reacted stating that Helleson had just violated her in a most horrific manner.'

The two women are also suing the director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, Steven McCraw, who they claim ignored previous complaints about 'unlawful strip searches, cavity searches and the like.'

The Dobbs' lawyer Scott H. Palmer said the shocking incident, which was filmed on one of the trooper's dash-mounted cameras, was a roadside 'sexual assault.'

He said the Texas Rangers investigated his clients' complaints but failed to take any action against the troopers.

'You can see what's happening clearly,' he told the Dallas Morning News of the video. 'No one's ever seen the likes of this. We can't let them get away with it.'
 

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;7PU0Cdtzk6o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PU0Cdtzk6o[/video]

...nevermind the 'sir' stuff, you'll get the point :)
 

Moebius

Well-Known Member
I wish I could put that cop in a real life SAW movie.

better still, throw her in a prison full of the toughest gangs and see how she likes it. That really makes me mad.
 

Moebius

Well-Known Member
Wow. There is a shift going on in our country it is a Power Shift going on in our country and it is scary.
Like it or not we are already 'owned'. ... Its not just in America but all over the world.

Heres a thought .... What If 'they' 'the fuckers' actually want us to see videos like these. It keeps us in fear, few will step out of line or stick their head above the parapet because if you do you'll end up with a finger up your arse.
 

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
She checked 4 holes with the same finger.

at the end one girl says its been an 'eye opening experience'. LOL World class understatement.

All that for what, maybe one joint?
I would hate to see the search procedure if the cop thought he smelled Coke.

I hope she opens everyones eyes with her case.
 

Moebius

Well-Known Member
All that for what, maybe one joint?
I would hate to see the search procedure if the cop thought he smelled Coke.

I hope she opens everyones eyes with her case.
I agree and get your point but ... smell coke?

edit:
You must mean being smoked. ok.
 

theQuetzalcoatl

Active Member
I'm going to don my flame resistant garment here for a minute and play the devil's advocate.

Having watched the video twice I see several glaring issues with this lawsuit. First, it is not raw unedited footage there are several gaps where either the camera was turned off or the film was edited. There is NO way to prove based on this footage she didn't change her gloves. Second I don't believe she penetrated more than a knuckle deep into any orifice in the lady complainants. The jeans they were wearing and the angle of approach make it even unlikely she got that deep. Third the first woman to be searched is visibly laughing and joking with the officer on camera she can't be that traumatized. I'm sure there are more issues to be discovered these are just some that jumped right out at me.
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
I'm going to don my flame resistant garment here for a minute and play the devil's advocate.

Having watched the video twice I see several glaring issues with this lawsuit. First, it is not raw unedited footage there are several gaps where either the camera was turned off or the film was edited. There is NO way to prove based on this footage she didn't change her gloves. Second I don't believe she penetrated more than a knuckle deep into any orifice in the lady complainants. The jeans they were wearing and the angle of approach make it even unlikely she got that deep. Third the first woman to be searched is visibly laughing and joking with the officer on camera she can't be that traumatized. I'm sure there are more issues to be discovered these are just some that jumped right out at me.
If they were to pull something like that on my wife, I would return the favor on a couple of their family members.


That's just me though...I'm pretty vengeful.
 

Moebius

Well-Known Member
I'm going to don my flame resistant garment here for a minute and play the devil's advocate.

Having watched the video twice I see several glaring issues with this lawsuit. First, it is not raw unedited footage there are several gaps where either the camera was turned off or the film was edited. There is NO way to prove based on this footage she didn't change her gloves. Second I don't believe she penetrated more than a knuckle deep into any orifice in the lady complainants. The jeans they were wearing and the angle of approach make it even unlikely she got that deep. Third the first woman to be searched is visibly laughing and joking with the officer on camera she can't be that traumatized. I'm sure there are more issues to be discovered these are just some that jumped right out at me.
There is a way to prove she didnt change the gloves. Sequestrate the original raw footage and examine it. The cops will have it.

And the justification for such and action could only be, that, roadside probing IS an effective way to find contraband. For it to be 'effective' more than a finger tip would need to be inserted.

Thirdly, its absurd to see the womens 'nervous' laughter AFTER the fact as a justification for being violated. Someone who has been raped, assaulted or robbed may not necessarily start screaming immediately but suffer a delayed reaction. This is well known in psychology.
 

theQuetzalcoatl

Active Member
There is a way to prove she didnt change the gloves. Sequester the original raw footage and examine it. The cops will have it.

And the justification for such and action could only be, that, roadside probing IS an effective way to find contraband. For it to be 'effective' more than a finger tip would need to be inserted.

Thirdly, its absurd to see the womens 'nervous' laughter AFTER the fact as a justification for being violated. Someone who has been raped, assaulted or robbed not necessarily start screaming immediately but suffer a delayed reaction. This is well known in psychology.
On your first point I absolutely agree. Hence my statement "There is NO way to prove based on this footage she didn't change her gloves."

Second point I also agree with. However in regards to their lawsuit penetration will be difficult to prove based on this footage.

Third point if it appeared as nervous laughter I may concede that, however it looks to be full on joking and laughing not a nervous titter.

I'm not in ANY way saying that the LEO's were justified or not. Simply observations on the video "evidence" at hand.
 
Top