If the hat doesn’t fit, you must acquit.
A cop says he got the shaft when he was booted from the NYPD for exposing himself to a female prisoner in a holding cell, because the penis she described couldn’t have been his.
The woman told cops and testified at an administrative NYPD hearing that “she unequivocally and clearly saw petitioner’s penis and that it was uncircumcised.”
Owen Hopper says he definitely is circumcised, but the NYPD hearing officer ignored his smoking gun evidence and found him guilty anyway.
Hopper “submitted uncontested medical evidence and proof that his penis was circumcised and had been so since petitioner’s childhood,” his court papers complain.
He was canned this past September, and is now suing to get his job back.
The alleged exposure incident happened sometime in 2010, when the unidentified woman was in a police precinct holding cell. She said Hopper “exposed his penis to her and made vulgar and profane comments.”
His filing says she was “not credible” and made “various inconsistent statements” about the alleged incident, but “the key piece of evidence and testimony” had to do with “whether the petitioner’s penis was circumcised or uncircumcised.”
The hearing officer “in his finding and determination unjustly concludes that an erect circumcised penis and erect uncircumcised penis will appear the same and could have had the complainant confused,” the suit gripes, even though “there was no expert of factual evidence or testimony submitted” about the differences between the two kinds of penises.
Hopper, 31, declined comment through his lawyer, Patrick O’Keke.
The NYPD declined comment on the case. A spokeswoman for the city law Department said, “We are awaiting the formal legal papers and will review them upon receipt.”