A recent “Seattle Times” article reports that Edmonds, WA police officer David Lavely, “forced [a] woman into sex” on a night in May 2012 in the Burlington Coat Factory parking lot in Edmonds whiles she was in his arrest custody. No where, in any of the articles, is the word, “rape.” “Forced sex” is the definition of “rape.” When someone is not consenting to sex and it happens anyway, a rape has occurred. Lavely is still on “administrative leave” at the Edmonds Police Department. This means he is still being paid with tax payer dollars.
Here is an article from June 7, 2012 describing what happened, stating innocuously that the two “had sexual intercourse.” Making it “seem” consensual. http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Edmonds-police-officer-arrested-after-allegation-of-sex-on-duty-157878615.html
Since then, an investigation by the Everett Police Department occurred and Lavely has been charged with “Custodial Sexual Misconduct.” The Seattle Times, on November 1, 2012 (and modified online November 2, 2012) uses stronger language to describe what happened and reports that the police officer “forced the woman into sex.” But, the Edmonds Beacon article still claims that the officer “had sex with a 28-year-old woman who was in his temporary custody.” While neither article mentions the woman’s side of the story. Both articles are linked here:
(And, if you can’t read the full Edmonds Beacon article in a couple days from this post, its because they require you to have a paid subscription to the paper to see archived articles.)
But back to my main point, why is this officer not being charged with rape? And what the heck is “custodial sexual misconduct?” That sounds like a slap on the wrist. And, both the recent articles report that the Edmonds police department is reviewing the criminal investigation of David Lavely to “determine what, if any, disciplinary actions the City of Edmonds may take.” (Emphasis added.) Are you kidding me? There is a chance this guy might get to keep his badge?
Where is the voice of the woman? She is only mentioned indirectly: “The woman reported the incident to law enforcement a few days later.” It’s fine if the victim does not want her name in the paper, but if this is case, the reporter usually mentions that “the victim does not want to speak to the press,” or that “the victim would not respond to calls,” or the lawyer representing the plaintiff makes a statement on her behalf. But, no. There has been no mention of any attempt to talk to this unknown woman, or to contact her, or to get a statement from the lawyer that was likely issued to her by the county of Snohomish.
I have reached out to a council member in Edmonds to learn more and find out where we are in the process of this case and when Edmonds PD will make their decision as to the future employment of Officer David Lavely.