Latest Headlines
- ECFR Says McDavid Mobile Home Fire Was Sparked By Trash Fire; Firefighters Respond To Ascend
- Few Showers Today; Rainy Pattern Beginning Friday
- First Responders Put On Christmas Light Show For Children’s Hospital Patients (With Gallery)
- Santa And Mrs. Claus Take Last Minute Trip Through Century, Byrneville
- ‘Shop With A Cop’ Brings Holiday Cheer to Local Children
- Ice Flyers Create Special Moment In ‘My Wish’ Day for Young Boy
- George Stone Students Fabricate Unique Christmas Tree
- House Ethics Releases Scathing Report On Matt Gaetz
- Photos: Christmas Activities At Jim Allen Elementary
- Here’s The Christmas Closure And Trash Schedule You Need To Know
Deputy Not Guilty Of Sexual Assault
July 28, 2011
An Escambia County deputy accused of sexually assaulting a woman has been found not guilty.
Wednesday night, Mike Priest was cleared by a jury of charges that he forced a woman to perform sexual acts in his patrol car.
Priest had just completed a shift as an off-duty security officer at Captain Funs nightclub when he gave the woman a ride home. The victim claimed that Priest threatened to take her to jail for public intoxication if she did not comply with his demands.
Priest has been an Escambia County Sheriff’s Office employee since August, 2006.
Comments
18 Responses to “Deputy Not Guilty Of Sexual Assault”
REGARDING:
if it happens again, that would be the time to raise hell over the system ”
I’m with you and the jury in assuming it never happened in the first place, but if it DID happen and does happen again, just imagine the questioning while on trial:
“Sir, have you ever been charged with rape before?”
“Yes, several times but most times the charges were dropped and the one time it went to trial, I was acquitted.”
(Actually, that is why the defendant wouldn’t testify, so a question like that couldn’t be asked.)
David for non criminal activietes
Well, I think she put herself in a bad place by getting drunk, then not being with anyone to see she got home. Maybe she wanted a bunch of money from him. Maybe in the past, he pissed her off and she thought she could get back at him like that. Without all the info on this, our opinion can only go so far. A jury, who heard everything, says he didn’t do it. I think it should be left alone but if it happens again, that would be the time to raise hell over the system and there would surely be problem to be taken care of.
REGARDING:
“Nothing matters anymore ”
Yes, it matters. The innocent have been falsely accused. Ways to protect them from false accusations are needed.
(Sometimes the guilty are acquitted and how to avoid false acquittals in the future is in order in those cases.)
Either way, people can discuss what they wish to discuss.
David for productive discussion
I am surprised the case was even brought to court. Normally crimes allegedly commited by LEO’s are just swept under the rug whenever possible.
Did y’all not read the article? He was found NOT GUILTY so stop accusing him! Nothing matters anymore because a jury found him NOT GUILTY. End. Of. Story.
REGARDING:
“An off duty cop shouldn’t have a patrol car in his possession for use”
If the purpose of law enforcement is to protect the people, one good way would be for people to see patrol cars up and about. I imagine some would abuse the privilege, but I’m sure many would be more careful about not breaking laws if they saw patrol cars driving around or parked where someone in it might be watching them.
Keeping cameras recording to hard drive and inaccessible to the officers should reduce misuse and false charges both ways.
David for safer streets
The police sign in downtown Pensacola reads ” SEX WITHOUT CONSENT IS RAPE” an intoxicated woman can’t give consent. So my verdict is that the cop raped an intoxicated woman. The officer should never be allowed to pick up intoxicated woman ( he’s a pro right? He knows if she’s intoxicated or not ) As the other poster stated, No officer should be allowed to transport any private citizen in a patrol car w/o notifying dispatch of pick up time and drop destination. The cop in NY just got off for his alleged rape for the same thing. The cop in NY was asked to take her home, not have sex with her. She alleged rape also and the verdict was that the woman wa drunk so she couldn’t remeber everything. LET ME REPEAT! “Sex without consent is rape” I’m quoting the police sighn in downtown Pensacola. Follow the law, not drunk women! Cindy
TO LUKE ANOVI
IT’S KNOW WONDER YOU ARE A FORMER LEO.
FIRST, ANY TIME A DEPUTY WORKS AN OFF DUTY JOB THAT DEPUTY PAYS A FEE PER HOUR FOR THE USE OF THE CAR,UNIFORM AND GAS.
SECOND,AN LEO CAN’T JUST LEAVE A DRUNK PERSON,THEY EITHER CALL A CAB BUT IF THE PERSON HAS NO MONEY THEY THEN TRY AND CALL A FRIEND IF THAT DON’T WORK THEY WILL GIVE THEM A RIDE TO SOMEWHERE SAFE.IF THEY SHOULD JUST LEAVE THEM THERE AND SOMETHING WAS TO HAPPEN TO THEM THE DEPUTY WOULD NOW BE AT FAULT AND THE DRUNK OR THE DRUNKS FAMILY MEMBERS WOULD SUE BECAUSE THE DRUNK WAS NOT IN THEIR RIGHT MIND.
THIRD,YOUR A FORMER LEO AND YOU JUST HAPPEN TO BE AT A GAS STATION WATCHING A FEMALE STARE DOWN A COP AND WHEN YOU ASKED WHAT SHE WAS DOING SHE SAID THAT COP RAPED ME.DID YOU RENDER AID DID YOU OFFER TO CALL THE POLICE OR S.O. FOR HER?SOUNDS TO ME LIKE YOU ARE FULL OF IT AND EXPLAINS WHY YOU ARE A FORMER LEO.
THE COP IN THE ABOVE ARTICLE DID NOT DENY THE SEX ACT,JUST DENIED THAT THE VICTIM WAS FORCED TO PERFORM,NEVER THE LESS THE ACT DID OCCUR IN UNIFORM AND INSIDE A MARKED PATROL CAR SO HE SHOULD BE FIRED FOR CONDUCT UNBECOMING.
An off duty cop shouldn’t have a patrol car in his possesion for use to go to and from private jobs. The taxpayer is now paying for officers to drive around off duty and charge the fuel and wear and tear on the vehicle to the public? If he does use a patrol car for private use and he picks up any human, he needs to call in and inform the dispatch of pick-up time and place of destination. It will slow down the police rape cases in your area. Cops should not be giving rides to intoxciated women when off duty in a patrol car. I don’t think the woman made up the story? Motive? The officers refusal of a polygraph would explain it all. I pulled in to a gas station the other day and a women was staring doen a cop and I asked why she was doing that and she told me that he had raped her! It seems to be getting quite common in Pensacola. Luke, former law enforcement /narcotics
hummmmm……
I agree JIM W but at the same time I wouldn’t want to be raped and then
called a liar by the courts either……
Justice has been known to not really be there, especially in these kinds
of cases.
I really haven’t understood why it always takes outside forces to bust
anyone here (FBI to often) , so I have a major problem with the good ole boy attitude here by LEO’S and to many others. To many of
our LEO’S hear no evil and see no evil and crime just prevails, and
WE are it’s victims.
I do hope justice was just this time and this LEO is not just another
bully with a badge.
It’s over get over it people. There obviously was not enough for conviction. Some times people say and do things that are not true especially if they are drunk or under the influence of something. I for one do not want to see anyone go to jail and have their lives turned up side down if they are not guilty.
REGARDING:
”where there is smoke , there isn’t always a fire”.
Actually, a fire is also a sign of incomplete combustion. The light we see is given off by unburned particles heated to incandescence by the incomplete combustion. Sometimes the unburned particles aren’t heated to the point of visible glow, even though they DO glow in the infra red.
That raises the question of whether or not it would be considered a fire if we could see infra red. Just food for thought.
To consider the alternative of complete combustion, look at a Bunsen burner. When it is adjusted properly, there is no visible fire, simply heat.
So it’s possible something is burning but not to the point of a visible flame, as you point out. It’s also possible something is completely burning yet not producing a visible flame.
Consider partial definition of smoke:
1. cloud of tiny particles: a mass of tiny particles in the air that rises up from something burning
2. vapor resembling smoke: something that resembles smoke, usually consisting of minute particles suspended in a gas (from Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)
Number 2 is also worth thinking on.
Sometimes something looks like smoke but really isn’t.
Sometimes it looks like something is going on but it really isn’t.
David contemplating chemistry, photonics
and physics of combustion
sadly, as we have all found out from the recent anthony trial…you can be guilty, but…its the prosecutions J-O-B to prove (to the jury) beyond a “reasonable” doubt that the specific crime occured- obviously, the jury was not conviced….i dont see how some can blame the LEO/sheriffs dept. whatsoever.
Of course he isn’t guilty he works for the Escambia Sherifs Dept. at Pensacola Beach more less. Some of these deputies don’t have any business being in this profession. They have no clue how to handle themselves bull crape. Like they don’t go and spend the day at the beach and drink and party. Hello
Smoke is actually a sign of incomplete combustion. A correct statement would be ” where there is smoke , there isn’t always a fire”.
You just can’t get a conviction these days. I don’t have a high opinion of LEOs for a good reason. And this just sounds exactly like one of those things they do.
Lots of drunken women get rides home without incident.
Where there is smoke, there is fire.
SHOCKER! ::Rolls eyes::
He does like to push his weight around when you see him at the beach but if he was falsely accused glad he got off never wish that on nobody.