Chicago cop sued for asking woman on a date

I know that for me, as an employee of the state (as I assume a cop would be), it would be illegal for me to use the information I run across every day on people in any way other than the normal function of my job. Period.

 

The cop was dumb (and a little creepy), he should be reprimanded (maybe even fired), he should have covered his tracks better, if he wanted to do this. But, I don't see grounds for a lawsuit.

But, if he wrote her a ticket, and had her driver's license to do so, did he even need to access the DMV database? Her license would have had her address, right. And, he know the car. How hard would it be to find the car near her house?

Again, creepy, and not advisable, but why would he need to access the DMV database.

 

Which is using the information he comes across in his daily work in a way that extends outside of his normal job duties.

I am not a cop and even I had to sign my life away saying I wouldn't do anything like this and that I would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, blah, blah, blah.

It is wrong on so many levels that he used the information this way.

 

Oh, I agree. And, I still think it would be wrong.

And, to be honest, I didn't even read the linked article. I'm just wondering why (or if) he actually pulled up her records in the DMV database.

 

No matter how he obtained her information, the fact that he used it is the problem.

 

And here's where these things break down into the silly realm. In the course of our working lives, we come across many, many people. If we have "met" someone through the course of our work, are we to permanently write off that someone simply because we met through one or the other's work? I don't think so.

Please note that I am not saying that it's fine and dandy that he availed himself of DMV records/systems to track her down. I'm simply saying that the fact that he met her through his work shouldn't necessarily mean that he has to say, "Wow, wish I'd met her at a bar!"

 

It ain't stalkin' if you're just out walkin.'

 

Bitch had it comin'.

 

What is "authorized," then? I mean, reporters look up DMV information. So do potential employers. I've never tried as a private citizen, but what's the law, exactly?

The story doesn't specify "DMV database," either. It said records. I'm not entirely sure what that means. I know I've been bored as hell before and Lexis Nexis'd many people I had no business looking up.

I don't think the cop used good judgment, but I don't think it's any more "creepy" than other things I've heard of, and I think the woman is got far, far over the top in filing a lawsuit.

Yes, IF he stalks her (which I don't think this is - at all), IF he continues to pull her over, etc. But there's no indication of that.

Rip up the letter, lady, and forget about it. And perhaps you should re-think speeding.

 

It is unauthorized because he used information that he has access to while doing his job in a fashion that has nothing to do with his job. This is not a private sector job. You cannot do that and get away with it.

 

I do happen to think that a lawsuit might be a bit of an overreaction. But who knows what history this woman has? Maybe she had an ex-boyfriend who used to stalk her, so she's sensitized to stuff like this.

Or maybe she's just aiming to make a few quick bucks in a settlement.

 

My thought was that she's probably trying to shame or force their hand when it comes to disciplining the guy. If she just files a complaint, maybe he gets a slap on the wrist and then he's back out there on the beat, or it just goes into some file and nothing happens to him. Also, along those lines, maybe she's thinking that he's pulled this with some other women, and her coming forward will bring them out of the woodwork.