Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  lawsuits

NYPD’s ‘Jock Itch’ Cop Costs City $300K In Sexual Harassment Case

How much did NYPD officer Lt. Kieran Crowe’s alleged jock itch cost the city? $300,000.

The gay cop stood accused, by two male sergeants, of fondling his nether regions in front of them and creating a hostile work environment. Crowe, who left his job in 2008, blamed his jock itch. (He had a doctor testify of his decade-long condition.) And while he isn’t paying up, New York City will write checks to Sgt. Dominic Coppola ($175,000) and Sgt. Sean Gallagher ($125,000) for Crowe’s actions, which included “simulated masturbating and wiggled his tongue at [subordinates] in a sexually suggestive manner.”

By:           Ryan Tedder
On:           Jul 13, 2010
Tagged: , , , , , ,

  • 16 Comments
    • My Gay Rant
      My Gay Rant

      it should be:

      which included “simulated masturbating and wiggl[ing] his tongue at [subordinates] in a sexually suggestive manner.”

      We learned that in high school… make sure a quote flows in a sentence with proper grammar. Gawd, you are only working with a 100 word article, at least try a little harder!

      Jul 13, 2010 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      What kind of horrific jock itch did this guy have that he couldn’t use the same spray on anti-fungal that every high school and college athlete uses for a nearly instant cure. Either this guy is full of B.S. or he has some horrific imported Martian fungus down there.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 4:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • slobone
      slobone

      Oh gimme a fuckin break, everybody knows that just about all of the tongue wiggling, fake masturbating and suggestively gay remarks that go on in station houses, locker rooms and military barracks is perpetrated by straight guys and aimed at other straight guys. So when a gay guy joins in the fun it’s suddenly sexual harassment? Apparently they can dish it out but they can’t take it…

      Jul 13, 2010 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • christopher di spirito
      christopher di spirito

      Why were the “straight cops” looking at the gay cop’s junk in the first place?

      Jul 13, 2010 at 4:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus
      Brutus

      @slobone: Would it be ok for a male officer to do that to a female officer?

      Jul 13, 2010 at 5:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thom
      Thom

      So they get over 100 grand each for something if done by a straight guy would just get laughs? bullshit. fucking bullshit

      Jul 13, 2010 at 6:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus
      Brutus

      Anyone care to answer my question rather than simply giving it thumbs-down? I just completed a large research project on whether courts give more leeway to “blue collar” environments in assessing hostile work environment claims. Some do, some don’t, are there are good arguments on both sides. I’m curious how slobone would approach this scenario from a different starting point. But apparently, simply asking someone for their opinion on Queerty earns unanimous thumbs-down.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 6:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
      PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS

      Classic case of Gay crotch grab panic syndrome……GMAFB!!! ……

      I can’t decide who is more reprehensive…..The lawyers who brought this case or the jurors who decided in favor of the plantiffs……….

      Jul 13, 2010 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • suprman
      suprman

      @My Gay Rant: Actually, the grammer of the quote is correct, if awkward.

      which included: “Simulated masturbating and wiggled his tongue at [subordinates] in a sexually suggestive manner.”

      Simulated and wiggled are the verbs – both in the past tense, masturbating is like the past perfect I believe (a little rusty on that one).

      In any case, it was a direct quote (probably from a police report) so even if it was incorrect, it would have be followed by [sic].

      Jul 13, 2010 at 7:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • slobone
      slobone

      @Brutus, fair enough. The answer is the two situations aren’t parallel at all. When men aggressively display sexual behavior to women, it’s very threatening to them for obvious reasons. And workplaces like police stations are still overwhelmingly the domain of straight men. It’s the women and gay men who are justified in feeling threatened by this kind of behavior. I’m not going to worry that a couple of straight cops got their feelings hurt, considering what gay men have had to put with since forever.

      As for the blue collar environment you mention, I’ve worked in some rough workplaces, and I can tell you that pretend-gay clowning goes on literally nonstop, including stuff a lot worse than anything described in the article. I’ve seen straight guys grope another guy’s balls, poke him in the asshole region with the end of a hose, pull down his pants, etc etc. All meant as a “joke”. It was the straight men who created this atmosphere, not the gay men and women, so they need to stop trying to blame it on us…

      Jul 13, 2010 at 10:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      #10 I have a Gay friend who is very straight acting and he worked at a large vegetable market around here. He’s quite tall and good looking and they were always pulling his pants down in the walk in cooler “as a joke.”

      Let’s say for fun, this Gay cop over did it. Just don’t look! I’m sure he didn’t back them into a corner and “force” them to look! And, as if cops don’t have much more hideous things to deal with probably on a weekly if not daily basis.

      Sounds like BS or money hunger to me too.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 10:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Grammar Patrol
      Grammar Patrol

      @suprman:
      I guess the preface of “actions” in the preceding sentence makes “My Gay Rant” correct, as it implies that nouns/gerunds will follow (His actions included wiggling (gerund) his tongue and blah blah blah)… compare that to (His actions included wiggle his tongue and simulate)…. grammar fail!

      Jul 14, 2010 at 12:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus
      Brutus

      @slobone: Thanks, but I didn’t ask if the situations are parallel.

      But in fact, they are, from one perspective. Both can be seen as precipitated by sexual desire, which is covered under Title VII. In fact, some courts require a man pressing sexual harassment charges against another man to prove that the alleged harasser is homosexual.

      I’m well aware that gay-clowning goes on. I’ve worked in my share of rough places. But this is exactly the question — this has become the environment of that particular workplace because historically it’s been only straight men working there. If someone who is not a straight white man starts working there, should they be required to “suck it up” and deal with the preexisting environment? Or does the environment need to change to accommodate the changed circumstances? I should note that clowning is clowning, and courts don’t treat every incident of horseplay as harassment.

      But the law needs to be neutral and apply to everyone equally, so the fact that “gays have had to put up with” stuff for a long time has no bearing on whether these guys were harassed.

      Jul 14, 2010 at 11:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      Brutus are you just here to argue? Another part of the harassment equation is the perception of the power level of the group in question. Women are generally understood to have less power, both in the physical realm and the social realm (not all women of course, but most women are weaker physically and most bosses are still male).

      Isn’t the legal term “suspect class”? Gays fit there too. So while I understand where your going with “it doesn’t matter if Gays have put up with ____ forever”, Yeah it kinda does matter.

      I will agree the environment may need to change to accomodate changing circumstances, but that comment is out of place here. The world is still primarily straight (and male – in the case of the police dept.)

      My comment is still valid that while it may be annoying that a Gay cop scratched himself or whatever, they could have ignored it and I think these male cops are just gunning for money.

      Jul 14, 2010 at 11:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • suprman
      suprman

      @Grammar Patrol: you are correct sir

      the only reason i can see for the discordance of the tenses would be that the word actions was from queerty’s article and the verbs “simulated … and wiggled” came from the quote. They should have either included the complete quote so that the agreement was correct or paraphrased the entire thing.

      ah, gerunds, i always forget the gerunds. ;-)

      Jul 14, 2010 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF?
      WTF?

      @Brutus: “straight white men”? Why’d this have to now be about race? It seems to me, Brutus that (without taking sides in your argument) that you might have some prejudices running around in your head.

      Jul 15, 2010 at 12:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.