Sound Politics: Lather, rinse, repeat

October 07, 2005

Lather, rinse, repeat

Some Lynnwood police detectives, in the course of fighting crime or something, discovered some creative new uses for shampoo:

On April 27, an officer entered the shop and paid $60 for and received a full "body shampoo," which included genital and anal touching. The officer returned two other times for massages that also included masturbation — one session with two prostitutes — and again paid for the service.

A second officer also received a massage and was masturbated, according to charging papers.

Lynnwood police Cmdr. Paul Watkins apparently thinks his officers acted in the best interests of city residents:

"We have a very ethical police department," he said. "This does not violate the ethical standards of our department."

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 07, 2005 08:25 PM | Email This

Comments

1. I think we now know what "is" is....

Posted by: alphabet soup on October 7, 2005 09:04 PM

2. They bought shampoo.... what? Everyone needs a little 'hand & shoulders' now and then.

Posted by: Thr33of4 on October 7, 2005 09:15 PM

3. Wow! I'm from Lynnwood! I had no idea we had such...interesting shampoo parlors there.

Posted by: Cliff Smith on October 7, 2005 09:56 PM

4. Sounds a lot like Pete Townsend explaining why his credit card number was found in a busted child porn site because he was doing "research" on child porn. If I am a cop, do I have to kill someone in order to prove someone committed murder for hire? Or can I rely on intent? How was Officer Joe Blow supposed to have detailed this in court?

Posted by: CandrewB on October 7, 2005 10:08 PM

5. Boy! If this is the standard for "very ethical", what does it take to do something so bad that they would actually site you?

Posted by: fred on October 7, 2005 10:10 PM

6. They were...ummmmm...collecting evidence? Yeah! That's it!

Sorry guys...but I just don't think there's a need to go this deep under cover for a prostitution bust! Sheesh!

Posted by: Deborah on October 7, 2005 10:12 PM

7. Wow...do you suppose they were appointed to this investigation, or did they volunteer? Married or single? Honestly, do not want this on my mind when I next meet an officer.

Posted by: dl on October 7, 2005 10:27 PM

8. Despicable!

Posted by: SweetNSassy on October 8, 2005 12:39 AM

9. A liberals dream, Government pays for sex. I can see the excuse, "I had to go back 100 times to collect evidence." Was she wearing a blue dress?

Posted by: New police recruit on October 8, 2005 12:56 AM

10. Once again--GREAT headline.

Posted by: Michele on October 8, 2005 02:03 AM

11. There is a problem with our justice system when the police are allowed to break the law to enforce the law. We obviously need better laws in Washington State.

They should be glad I am not on the jury. If the cops are married, they also deserve to be divorced. If this behavior doesn't violate the ethical standards of the department, then the ethical standards are non-existant.

How can you engage in a behavior and then arrest a co-conspirator for the same action? If Joe Snuffy paid for a body shampoo, would they arrest him or only arrest the female who gave him the shampoo?

Posted by: sgmmac on October 8, 2005 07:08 AM

12. I think I feel a little.......dirty :)

Posted by: Tridentanav on October 8, 2005 10:38 AM

13. "I did NOT have sex...with that woman, Miss Lewinsky...."

Posted by: Misty on October 8, 2005 10:44 AM

14. I would go further, everyone in the Lynwood police department that defends this as not being a violation of ethics should also be let go. If they don't believe this type of thing isn't a violation of ethics then they can no longer be trusted to protect and serve the public.

The officers stepped too far into a dangerous gray area and probably enjoyed it. When you start testing those waters each time it becomes easier and easier. It is this kind of behavior that eventually leads to massive coruption in a police department.

Posted by: Joe on October 8, 2005 11:38 AM

15. Send them down to New Orleans....They would fit in with the department there.

Posted by: Susu on October 8, 2005 12:51 PM

16. I wonder if the Lynnwood undercover "guys" will sqawk about their next assignment. Gay bath houses in Seattle. Do you think they will go back three times?

Posted by: Roscoe on October 8, 2005 05:26 PM

17. Gee, where do I apply for a job with that department?

Posted by: Dave on October 8, 2005 07:51 PM

18. Ya see--we all condemn the public sector for not being excited about nor dedicated to their work. Now, when someone 'thinks outside the box' (albeit a slippery box) he is lambasted. Ah, neva mind...

unrelated thought--my dog was recently shampooed for about $30 including a conditioner. And--he got to use that neat stand-up shampooing harness on a table behind full glass walls. Maybe we got something here? Let's change our undercover op's? Bath AND a show!

oh--forgot--my dog's $30 excluded a flea dip--man--I hope the shampoo in the story had one! Yikes!!!

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 8, 2005 10:22 PM

19.
This might make me an unpopular guy here, but the fact that prostetution is illegal is why it corrupts.

It will never be stopped.

Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on October 8, 2005 11:15 PM

20. Roscoe - now that is funny!!

Asking this police department if they would have these same officers investigate a gay prostitution ring so "thoroughly" is exactly what the defense attorney is going to ask!

Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on October 8, 2005 11:19 PM

21. CandrewB:

Was your use of "Officer Joe Blow" an intentional pun? ;-)

Posted by: Ted Schuerzinger on October 9, 2005 01:50 PM

22. I wonder if they're going to get a stiff penalty.

Posted by: Mike H on October 9, 2005 03:27 PM

23. Hey Ted, quit trying to drag Bill Clinton into this :-)

Posted by: Michele on October 9, 2005 06:48 PM

24. Adding one more example to my list of "your tax dollars at work" stories.

Yeah, lets let the same bozos do an in-depth (no pun) and repeated investigation of Seattle's gay bathhouses.

Thas' the ticket.

Posted by: The Geezer on October 9, 2005 08:01 PM

25. That's outrageous.

$60.00 for a handjob?

%*$%*!& oil companies.

Posted by: Publius on October 9, 2005 09:33 PM

26. I'm astounded that the city of Lynnwood would put their officers in harms way like this. Did they not think of the potential health consequences? When the police officers wind up going blind or growing hair on their palms guess who's going to get stuck holding their bags? The taxpayers.

Posted by: Reporterward on October 10, 2005 12:37 PM

27. This is an ethical record of which any bank would be proud.

Damn, wrong county.

Posted by: SnoCo Voter on October 10, 2005 01:41 PM

28. It's Karl Rove's fault for sending those poor innocent detectives out there, again and again and again, like lambs to the slaughter. It's George Bush's fault for not signing an executive order legalizing prostitution. It's Halliburton's fault for monopolizing the government supply and logistics business.

It couldn't possibly be the Lynnwood PD's fault for fostering an environment of corruption and malfeasance...

Posted by: ERNurse on October 10, 2005 03:44 PM

29. For a sting operation, they usually mark the bills for evidence. Pleeeeeese tell us what the marks were so we can avoid those bills when they get back out in circulation.
Also, in the "sick pun" award, the officers haven't been named yet. They haven't had their cover blown.

Posted by: PC on October 10, 2005 06:07 PM

30. any decent local news writer now has 2 years worth of material for articles or his own stand-up comedy in a smoky Lynnwood lounge:

"dont drop the soap!" or "hey--at least there were no "bubbles" in the bathtub!" hmmm--rub-a-dub--but where were the butcher, baker and candlestick maker? oh, sorry--it's not Seattle; did they steal the towels like a hotel? how many "Mr Smith's" are in the appointment book?

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on October 10, 2005 09:34 PM