Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Judge does not drop charges in Palm Springs entrapment case

Timothy Kincaid

February 2nd, 2011

From the Desert Sun:

Judge David B. Downing said that, prior to the hearings, he had been inclined to dismiss the charges, but the testimony of two Palm Springs police officials — outgoing Chief David Dominguez and Sgt. Bryan Anderson — changed his mind.

Palm Springs police showed no discriminatory intent, Downing said.

I guess it was coincidence that they made no attempts to entrap sting heterosexuals.



February 2nd, 2011 | LINK

Sounds like audge that is getting his pockets lined . I gues if you have enough power you can entrap(sting ) whom ever and get away with it if you have a crooked dept. to back you up.

February 2nd, 2011 | LINK

It’s Riverside County, the capital of Outer Redneckia and outside of some very small areas, a very dangerous place to be gay.

Lindoro Almaviva
February 2nd, 2011 | LINK

I wonder what the appellate court will say about this.

February 2nd, 2011 | LINK

Uh, were there heterosexuals in the bushes?

What exactly do you want from this, Tim? Was this a sting? Quite possibly. Are stings illegal? I truly do not know what’s on the books in Palm Springs.

The police are employed by a Town Manager who is gay. Who is himself hired by a council of five people, three of whom are gay. The slurs about Riverside County don’t apply here.

Should these elected officials and their managers practice discrimination against residents in the area who don’t like the public sex and constantly complain about it, simply because they’re gay and so are the likely participants in the illegal act? If it’s been attempted to stanch the behavior in the past with no luck, what’s the next step?

Surely nobody likes to be caught in a sting, but there is no there there. And Tim, your lack of objectivity is pretty clear here, and disappointing.

Mihangel apYrs
February 3rd, 2011 | LINK

Dominguez’s opinion of gay people (or at least those he trapped) was fairly clear. Can we assume that this didn’t sway his decision to undertake the exercise while overlooking activities by straights? It is also possible that the sgt’s views are equally jaundiced.

Their opinion shouldn’t really have too much weight, what has teh DA said? Has the operation been put into context of specific tagetting?

I don’t know, but I am uneasy when the policeman advises the judge whether or not to proceed; if nothing else there is a vested interest in one’s actions being validated…

February 3rd, 2011 | LINK

Dominguez’s opinion of gay people (or at least those he trapped) was fairly clear.

Is it? Or is it only clear from his remarks that he finds gay sex to be distasteful, at least when done in public settings?

Can we assume that this didn’t sway his decision to undertake the exercise while overlooking activities by straights?

Is the Riverside PD receiving numerous complaints of straights engaging in public sex? I’m not aware of this happening in Riverside, besides the odd couple now and then.

February 3rd, 2011 | LINK


I may be mistaken, but I seem to remember that there have been NO, meaning Absolutely Zero, records submitted wherein citizens have actually made formal complaints. No records.

Do YOU want Police coming at you because of anonymous or unproven “complaints”? Certainly not.

If there had been valid complaints, then there should have been records of such provided to the court.

It’s bogus, and the Chief should have a taste of his own medicine.

Priya Lynn
February 3rd, 2011 | LINK

John, there weren’t numerous complaints of gays having public sex. In fact there were far more complaints of sex crimes involving heterosexuals than there were gays.

February 3rd, 2011 | LINK

Priya: Than if the Riverside PD wasn’t acting on complaints, this would be legitimate to raise in court. Actually I had forgotten that decoys were used to entrap folks instead of arresting folks engaged in public sex acts. When you add that registry as a sex offender for life is included for these misdemeanor charges, something I don’t even necessarily agree with if they were even having public sex, and yeah there’s enough here to fight the charges in court.

This articleses a couple of items:

Even if the decoys were coy, another policeman, Sgt. Matt Beard, testified he simulated a sex act by himself behind a pool filter while providing undercover security for the decoys.

Beard said he wasn’t instructed to do that, but he aimed to mimic “what was going on around me” and “dispel any suspicion that I was an undercover officer.”

This adds to the claims of entrapment IMO.

Beard and other Palm Springs officers said Tuesday they’ve encountered both straight and gay couples having sex in cars in public but never made arrests.

Their own testimony gives grounds for finding that the police has engaged in selective enforcement. Rather stupid actually because I don’t have a problem if they arrested BOTH straights AND gays who are CAUGHT in the ACT of having sex in public.

February 6th, 2011 | LINK

“Palm Springs police showed no discriminatory intent, Downing said.”

Well, until the Palm Springs Police Department places female officers in out of way the places, has them expose their breasts and rub their twats at passing men, I’m going to have to assume some discriminatory intent on the part of the police.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.