This was RAPE!

[gumboot]

This is a very common technique used by criminals, that is why if an unmarked vehicle pulls you over in a bad neighborhodd many police advise you to drive to a well lit safer place where there are many witnesses, often people will impersonate a police officer to pull you over, and then take your car or wallet when you get out of the car.

How does that work?

Okay, here, if a police car (unmarked or otherwise) pulls you over, the following occurs:

1) They sound a really loud and entirely unique horn
2) They flash their lights... this is in two parts:
a) either roof-mounted lights (marked car) or radiator grill mounted lights (unmarked)
b) the headlights alternate left-right

Now, I've never heard of anyone managing to fake these three things at once. (And police officers in unmarked cars still wear uniform anyway...)

Is it safe to assume things are done VERY differently in the US?

-Andrew

 

[gumboot]

I don't see how your conclusion follows from the rest of the post. The situation may have been slightly different here than in the Milgram experiment, but the basic finding of that experiment, that people are willing to put aside their moral inhibitions when instructed to do so by a person in a position of authority, seems well borne out by these occurrences. One might even suspect that the caller was familiar with the Milgram experiment.

Because a key finding of the Milgram Experiment (and others that replicated it) was that proximity to the "victim" and proximity to the "authority" greatly affected the outcome.

When the "operator" was removed from the "victim" (via a piece of machinery that controlled the current and via a glass wall) and the "operator" was very close to the "authority" (the authority was in the same room) most complied.

However if the proximity to the "victim" was increased (such as when the operator had to physically place the victim on the electrical pads) or if the proximity to the "authority" decreased (such as if the authority was on the phone) the compliance dropped DRAMATICALLY.

Although not in Milgram's experiment, in other replications of it NO ONE complied.

In the case of this real world scenario we have a third scenario - the proximity to the victim is increased AND the proximity to the authority is decreased AT THE SAME TIME.

By the findings of Milgram (and more so by the findings of other replicated experiments) only a tiny tiny fraction of people would comply in such a scenario.

Therefore the NORM would be for someone to NOT comply.

-Andrew

ETA. The same findings are supported by research into resistance to killing exhibted by soldier during war. Removing the shooter emotionally from the victim (either through distance or the imposition of technology) drastically increased the liklihood of the shooting firing. At the same time increasing the proximity of authority (such as a commanding officer) also drastically increased the liklihood of the shooter firing.

Here's the scales:


FURTHER REMOVED FROM VICTIM---------------------------------------------CLOSER TO VICTIM
MORE LIKELY TO COMPLY-----------------------------------------------------LESS LIKELY TO COMPLY


CLOSER TO AUTHORITY----------------------------------------------------FURTHER REMOVED FROM AUTHORITY
MORE LIKELY TO COMPLY-----------------------------------------------------LESS LIKELY TO COMPLY


On both sets of scales, this scenario was towards the right-hand end of the scale.

 

[Kerberos]

I disagree. This girl was clearly a complete weak-willed moron, sorry. I am not saying she deserved what happened to her - it was sickening, and the perpetrators are the first to be blamed, not the victim, which she is. Being an idiot does not justify making one a rape victim, but I agree with Art Vandelay on this. No intelligent person would let this go that far. Sure, she might have been tiny and a bit too shy to argue with her superiors, but for crying out loud... you'd think a bright, intelligent young woman would simply tell Summers, "Look, don't you think a real cop would NOT ask you to strip search me on the phone, and this makes no sense whatsoever? THINK ABOUT THIS FOR A MINUTE."
But no, she probably just wimpered because she's a naive idiot. Poor girl, I do feel for her, really... but I disagree that she was bright.

People frequently doesn't think well in high stress situetions. That doesn't mean they're neccessarily stupid. I'd say this qualifies as a high stress situation.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I am appaled at some of the things which have been said in this thread. Why are so many of us so willing to condemn people for being obedient to a convincing authority? From the first day we enter school, we're conditioned to accept authority. This con man was very clever, very persistent, and exremely manipulative.

Master of deception

Caller described as 'a freak who plays God'
The caller was unusually persuasive, according to workers across the country who talked with him.

He had mastered the police officer's calm but authoritative demeanor. He sprinkled law-enforcement jargon into every conversation. And he did his homework.

He researched the names of regional managers and local police officers in advance, and mentioned them by name to bolster his credibility. He called some restaurants in advance, somehow getting names and descriptions of victims so he could accurately describe them later.

Summers said "Officer Scott" in Mount Washington knew the color of Ogborn's hair, as well as her height and weight -- about 90 pounds. He even described the tie she was wearing.

Around the country, many detectives initially assumed the caller had to be watching the stores from across the street with binoculars. But later officials would say he simply was a master of deception and manipulation.

For example, when the 17-year-old victim at the Fargo Burger King started crying, the caller told her to "be a good actress" and "pretend like it doesn't bother you" so the manager wouldn't "feel so bad" about what he was having to do.

Allan Mathis, the manager of a Hardee's in Rapid City, S.D, who strip-searched an employee in June 2003, said in an interview: "I didn't want to be doing it. But it was like he was watching me." Mathis spent 40 days in jail before he was acquitted on rape and kidnapping charges.

The caller wasn't always successful; phone records show he sometimes called as many as 10 stores before finding one where managers would take his bait.

If you've never found yourself doing bizzare things you'd never have done otherwise simply because you were told, you've never had to work for a living. Do you think these victims, and how dare anyone blame them, did try to reason their way out of these situations, but the con man was very good.

At one point, Summers said later in a court deposition, she asked herself why it was taking so long for police to show up -- the Mount Washington department was less than a mile away.

But "when I asked him questions about why," she said, "he always had an answer."

"I was scared because they were a higher authority to me," she said. "I was scared for my own safety because I thought I was in trouble with the law."

Most of the stores he called managed to see through it, but he managed to find someone to answer the phone whom he could convince. He managed to find well meaning, dutiful people who just want to do the right thing, and are prepared to be told what that right thing is. Once one person is convinced, it's easier to fool the rest. If your manager said he has the cops on the phone, and all your coworkers blieve it, what are you going to do? This is a workplace, if you try to confirm the cop's identity independantly, you would be reprimanded, or fired. Workplaces, especialy McDonald's.

The data from numerous experiments show that people will submit to authority and do the most terrible things, often even if they are aware it's wrong.

 

[gumboot]

Do you think these victims, and how dare anyone blame them, did try to reason their way out of these situations, but the con man was very good.

I'm sorry, but Nazi Death-camp guards tried this argument, and it failed for them.

People are responsible for their own actions. Period. There is not excusing what they did to that poor girl. They must be accountable for what they chose to do.

Otherwise things like this will never cease.

Let me reitterate, because this is something people in modern society REALLY don't get.

You are responsible for your own actions.

-Andrew

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

If you've never found yourself doing bizzare things you'd never have done otherwise simply because you were told, you've never had to work for a living. Do you think these victims, and how dare anyone blame them, did try to reason their way out of these situations, but the con man was very good.

I've had to work for a living for years and do not recognise your description of the working environment.

I also hope you are not describing Summers as a victim, although it appears from your quote that you are.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I'm sorry, but Nazi Death-camp guards tried this argument, and it failed for them.

Excuse me, it was the commanders, decision makers and authorities who tried this defense and failed. It fully applied to the lowest level menials who did their jobs, as they were not prosecuted.

 

[ponderingturtle]

How does that work?

Okay, here, if a police car (unmarked or otherwise) pulls you over, the following occurs:

1) They sound a really loud and entirely unique horn
2) They flash their lights... this is in two parts:
a) either roof-mounted lights (marked car) or radiator grill mounted lights (unmarked)
b) the headlights alternate left-right

Now, I've never heard of anyone managing to fake these three things at once. (And police officers in unmarked cars still wear uniform anyway...)

Is it safe to assume things are done VERY differently in the US?

-Andrew

Generaly unmarked cars can not pull people over and roof mounted lights are easy to get. All you need is to go to the right safety sights, and mabey say order them to a different state and you are legal. For example I could put a full blue lightbar on my car as a member of a volentier fire organization. In nearby states blue lightbars mean police, while they can put red on their vehicals which is official emergency vehical here.

You can get all that stuff legaly through the right catalogs, it is just illegal to use it.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Excuse me, it was the commanders, decision makers and authorities who tried this defense and failed. It fully applied to the lowest level menials who did their jobs, as they were not prosecuted.

Do you not think that the reason "menials" were not prosecuted had more to with the need to rebuild Germany after the war rather than because they were not responsible for their actions? And there is a massive difference between not disobeying an order given by a regime that would kill you in an instant and obeying an anonymous voice over the telephone.

Do you think the people involved in the day to day workings of death camps processing millions of people to their deaths are victims?

You should also be aware that following the Nuremberg trials the Nuremberg Principle has been incorporated into many nations legal and military systems - i.e. you are not required to carry out unlawful orders and if you do so you cannot rely on a defence of obeying orders.

 

[Ipecac]

I might buy the "convincing con man" argument up so far as the female manager doing the initial strip search. If that's all that happened, I could conceive that the manager could be let off the hook.

But once she brought in her fiance (who wasn't even employed by McDonalds) and left him alone with the girl, that's where she definitely crossed the line. And the fiance has no excuse. Why would a cop ever tell him to slap the girl's butt or have her perform oral sex on him? At that point, I think he must have been getting a thrill out of the whole thing.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Do you not think that the reason "menials" were not prosecuted had more to with the need to rebuild Germany after the war rather than because they were not responsible for their actions? And there is a massive difference between not disobeying an order given by a regime that would kill you in an instant and obeying an anonymous voice over the telephone.

Do you think the people involved in the day to day workings of death camps processing millions of people to their deaths are victims?

Are you capable of aknowledging that good people can be manipulated by authorites into doing terrible things? Your question formed the basis of the Milgram experiment.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Are you capable of aknowledging that good people can be manipulated by authorites into doing terrible things? Your question formed the basis of the Milgram experiment.

Yes.

I also think that they remain responsible for their actions.

Now, as I have answered your question, any chance of you returning the favour?

Do you think the people involved in the day to day workings of death camps processing millions of people to their deaths are victims?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Are you capable of aknowledging that good people can be manipulated by authorites into doing terrible things? Your question formed the basis of the Milgram experiment.

Should we bring the stanford prison experiement out or not? It could be taken to show then when normal people get the precieved aproval of authority, they can do things that would normaly discust them.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

I might buy the "convincing con man" argument up so far as the female manager doing the initial strip search. If that's all that happened, I could conceive that the manager could be let off the hook.

But once she brought in her fiance (who wasn't even employed by McDonalds) and left him alone with the girl, that's where she definitely crossed the line. And the fiance has no excuse. Why would a cop ever tell him to slap the girl's butt or have her perform oral sex on him? At that point, I think he must have been getting a thrill out of the whole thing.

From the original article:

"Identifying himself as a police officer, the caller issued an ultimatum: Ogborn could be searched at the store or be arrested, taken to jail and searched there.

"I was bawling my eyes out and literally begging them to take me to the police station because I didn't do anything wrong," Ogborn said later in a deposition."

Sounds to me like Summers CHOSE to carry out the strip search herself - she had an alternative and didn't take it.

Does anyone really believe it did not occur to her that carrying out such a search was wrong? Given that there are at least THREE occasions when she invites males to participate (Bradley, Nix and Simms)?

 

[BPSCG]

Patterson is slime. He's garbage. He's the reason there are lawyer jokes. Period. What kind of filth blames the victim in something like this? Please, someone shoot this clown. AN EIGHTEEN YEAR OLD GIRL IS NOT GOING TO WALK OUT OF AN OFFICE WITHOUT HER CLOTHING ON!

Okay, I haven't read all the way to the end of this thread, so someone slap me if you've heard this one before:

Ninety-eight percent of lawyers give the rest of them a bad name.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Yes.

I also think that they remain responsible for their actions.

Now, as I have answered your question, any chance of you returning the favour?

Do you think the people involved in the day to day workings of death camps processing millions of people to their deaths are victims?

Some of them doubtless wanted to kill millions of people. Some of them wanted to follow orders and did't consider morality. Some of them were manipulated by a charismatic leader. They were all victimizers, but many were also victims of the system. It's not quite a black and white issue. Are all the Vietnam Veterans complicit in the firebombing of innocent villages? I'd say no.

 

[gumboot]

You can get all that stuff legaly through the right catalogs, it is just illegal to use it.

I guess things are different here...

Here blue = police and red = emergency services (police, fire, ambulance - our police have red and blue).

It is 100% illegal for anyone else to use any of these, and there's nowhere you can get them.

I guess that's the advantage though of being a single state with only 4 million people, on an island.

-Andrew

 

[drkitten]

It is 100% illegal for anyone else to use any of these, and there's nowhere you can get them.

So, customs agents will go searching through a person's luggage for blue light bulbs?

I can't really imagine that there's nowhere you can get them. Surely there are electronics shops and theatrical supply companies on your island.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Some of them doubtless wanted to kill millions of people. Some of them wanted to follow orders and did't consider morality. Some of them were manipulated by a charismatic leader. They were all victimizers, but many were also victims of the system. It's not quite a black and white issue. Are all the Vietnam Veterans complicit in the firebombing of innocent villages? I'd say no.

Not quite the correct question though is it? We are talking here about people who took actions that they knew (or should have known) were illegal. I am not suggesting that other employees who were not involved in the incident are complicit in it, only those who participated.

So to rephrase - are the Vietnam Veterans who undertook illegal firebombing of innocent villages victims? I say no, they are criminals.

 

[gumboot]

Excuse me, it was the commanders, decision makers and authorities who tried this defense and failed. It fully applied to the lowest level menials who did their jobs, as they were not prosecuted.

Records say otherwise:

Renewed attention and interest in the camp came about following the Düsseldorf War Crimes Trials, or the Majdanek Trial, which began in 1976. Among the most notorious of those placed on trial was a guard supervisor at Ravensbrück, Hermine Braunsteiner...

...In 1981, the then 61-year-old woman was sentenced to life imprisonment for numerous child murders and other brutal crimes. Other guards were tried at the Auschwitz Trial, Belsen Trial, Ravensbrück Trials or in individual trials.

And here:

The overwhelming majority of post-1945 war crimes trials involved lower-level officials and officers. They included concentration camp guards and commandants, police officers, members of the Einsatzgruppen, and doctors who participated in medical experiments. These war criminals were tried by military courts in the British, American, French, and Soviet zones of occupied Germany and Austria, and also in Italy.

Many of the lower-level people tried in West Germany were given lighter sentences because the "following orders" defense was seen as mitigating circumstances, but it did not excuse their guilt for committing the crimes - they were still found guilty.

As an example, Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Hoess was sentenced to death. A camp commandant is only a few rungs above a regular camp guard, on the overall hierachy. Certainly he was simply "following orders". That didn't excuse him for being a cold-blooded genocidal murderer.

-Andrew