Quote:

Police academy kicks out former prostitute By Katherine Danks February 17, 2008 01:00am A SYDNEY woman has been expelled from the NSW Police College after failing to tell officers she was formerly a prostitute. The young woman was two weeks into the course when she was told to pack her bags and was escorted off the campus on or around February 4. It is understood the woman once worked in a Sydney brothel, but it is not known how officers at the Goulburn-based facility found out about her alleged past. It is not illegal for a former sex worker to be accepted into the college, but applicants have to be regarded as professionally suitable for police work. They are asked to give officers their employment history and say whether they have ever been spoken to, or investigated by, police and if they have any conflicts of interest. Police trainees who did not want to be named told The Sunday Telegraph a woman had recently been expelled from the college. It is understood she was given a short time to pack her bags and was escorted from the site. This follows the case of Kim Hollingsworth, who was sacked for failing to reveal her past as a prostitute and stripper when she applied to join the college in 1995. It was only after Ms Hollingsworth reported a detective who had asked for help in setting up a brothel that she formally revealed her previous occupation as a prostitute. Last year, she lost a decade-long legal battle to be reinstated as a trainee when the NSW Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed her challenge. NSW Police said it expected high standards for students enrolling in the course and all candidates were screened and criminal checks conducted. It said one student recently expelled had been two weeks into the course. "All students are required to disclose any professional suitability issues that would render them ineligible to become probationary constables once their studies are completed," the NSW Police statement read. "Non-disclosure of such issues is a serious breach of trust."

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23225588-2,00.html



Is this window-dressing? Do you think, maybe, this young lady would have insights into prostitution that others would not? If she had revealed her past occupation from the start, she would have been kicked out anyway? Who dug this up? Brothels keep a record of who they employ? Who got this "inside information"? Payback? Sack her from the academy, then release details to the media to maintain the pure image of the unsoiled cop. Do you think this young lady, if she made the highway patrol, would ask sexual favours of a male to be let off a traffic infringement?

Being in the force would be tough for a lot of people - they're exposed to bribes and corruption continually.  It's probably hard enough for many policeman/woman to stay on the straight and narrow with all the temptations, let alone one who already has a history of mixing with the wrong people.

Although having a background in prostitution could be handy in undercover work.  

I think the main issue was she did not tell them of her past.

course, would not be an easy thing to do for her.
However, the police or army really have to have total disclosure from applicants

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 17^th, 2008 at 8:34pm:

I think the main issue was she did not tell them of her past. course, would not be an easy thing to do for her. However, the police or army really have to have total disclosure from applicants

I think so too, but my question is how did they find out about her past? This is not easily traceable for someone who works in this arena. And let me quote from the main article:


Quote:

but it is not known how officers at the Goulburn-based facility found out about her alleged past.

Often girls don't even give their real names, and it's not a requirement, as far as I know. Was some personal vendetta at work here? A spurned police officer client? To mention one hypothetical. Where did this information about her past come from? Maybe a relative dobbed her in, I don't know. And surely, sprint, you think she is the first academy trainee police officer to have a "seedy" past? How, in heaven's name, does what she did in the past reflect on her current personality? In my area, please tell no one, police have done deals with drug dealers. Maybe there was some kind of conspiracy to get her in, or maybe she signed up as a joke, but what do we know?

That's why I'm asking this - why was she singled out? And how did the police find out about her? It could not have been done through a check of the electoral rolls only, I presume?  :-/

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 17^th, 2008 at 8:34pm:

I think the main issue was she did not tell them of her past.

Yeah me too.
I have always told the truth about my past in job interviews and found that, generally employers will respect your honesty and take that into consideration. I recently went for a job on a Defence Force establishment where a police certificate is required. My record was discussed openly and my application was processed, I was told it was highly likely to be successful.

I also began an AFP protective services application, after going through my record with the officer he told me that I was still eligable, to my great surprise, although I never proceeded.

The moral of the story......Honesty is the best policy.

I can't resist:


Quote:

List previous employers: 1)Telstra 2)Baker's Delight 3)Randwick City Council 4)Victoria's Secret

I decided to check out the police recruitment standards:


Quote:

CRIMINAL OR RELATED HISTORY - If you have prior criminal convictions or have come under adverse notice, you may not be suitable for police employment. Adult criminal convictions will deem you unsuitable. T his is certainly the case if you have: • any criminal charge by conviction. • a record for a serious offence as an adult (e.g. assault, break and enter, shoplifting, motor vehicle theft, drugs). • an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) which is current, enforceable or less than 10 years old (unless revoked). • serious traffic matters such as drink-driving offences (PCA or DUI) • juvenile offences • adult convictions for street offences (e.g. offensive language or behaviour like urinating in a public place).

This lady apparently didn't have any criminal convictions, or she would never have made it to the academy. Right? Even AVOs more than 10 years old are apparently not considered. So I still don't get it. Is working in the sex industry a crime? Is having previously worked in the sex industry a crime?

Guys the issue here is with her integrity.  It is as simple as that, she lied on her application.  The fact that it is about her former employment as a prostitute is largely irrelevant.  Police officers are expected to demonstrate their integrity at all times and unfortunately this young lady didn't when she completed her application.  

If she had declared her former occupation as a prostitute there would have been no problem.  I know this because I have read the judgements from the various courts about Kim Hollingsworth's case.  The Polcie would have had to accept her regardless of anyone's personal feelings.  Believe me when I say that her brother and sister officers would not have known of her past unless she chose to talk about it.  I know of 3 officers currently serving who formerly worked as protsitutes.  Most of their colleagues don't know that information, but it does not affect my opinion of their abilities as Police one iota.

I know that 2 of the 3 also declared their former employment in prostitution on their initial applications and had no dramas as a result.  The original story from the news media seems designed to sell advertising space by sensationalising the issue.

I'm surprised you know so many prostitutes who have become police. Aren't many of the criteria for the two jobs contradictory?

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 11:14am:

I know this because I have read the judgements from the various courts about Kim Hollingsworth's case.

I haven't read much of the Hollingworth case, so what do you make of this?:


Quote:

It was only after Ms Hollingsworth reported a detective who had asked for help in setting up a brothel that she formally revealed her previous occupation as a prostitute.

And of course, police never do deals with drug dealers for "protection money". I would say Ms Hollingworth had the best interests of society as her motive, exposing a currently serving corrupt officer, who was likely setting up an illegal brothel. Maybe you have more info than I do.

Some more on the Hollingworth case:


Quote:

Ms Hollingsworth was shown the door as a police trainee in 1995 after her controversial past was revealed. Following a four-year legal battle, she was successfully reinstated as a student police officer at Charles Sturt University in 1999. But she left after one day, citing harassment and ridicule at the hands of fellow students. She returned but departed again seven months later, citing the same reasons. In the commission last week, Ms Hollingsworth's barrister, David Patch, said his client was prepared to relive the battle if it meant justice being served.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23226323-5006010,00.html

Ridicule for what? Being a former prostitute? Or a "dobber"?

Freediver:
Mate I know 3 out of 15,000 serving officers.  To be honest I don't necessarily see any particular conflict between ahving worked in the sex industry and serving as a police officer.

Ray:
Considering that Kim Hollinsgworth first attended the Academy in 1995 around Mayish I think, and considering that brothels were made legal either in 1995 or just prior, I ahve no reason to suspect that the brothel she was advising on was not legal.  

About "protection money" for drug dealers.  Do I detect a note of sarcasm?  In any large organisation you will get the occasional bit of corruption.  It is inevitable as well as deplorable.  I know most serving officers hate corruption at least as much as you do, if not more.  After all, when corruption is found, the entire police are tarnished in the minds of the public because of it.  Thankfully it is pretty rare these days.  One of the most recent investigations, some years ago called Operation Flordia, uncovered "protection money" or "green lighting" for drug dealers.  As a result two detectives were charged for it and I think another 2 or 3 sacked because of other issues identified in the investigation.  It took $40 million to conclude that investigation but it had to be done.  Corruption allegations shuld always be investigated, but it is far from commonplace these days.  

Your second quote must be a bit old, Kim Hollingsworth lost her final appeal last year (2007) in the Court of Appeal.  The issues were a little wider than your quote implies as well.  She did cite "harassment and ridicule" from other students, as you so kindly point out in bold type however there were always other issues with Ms Hollingsworth.  Perhaps some of the ahrassment and ridicule was because of the pet rat she kept in her room?  or the fact that she carried the rat around on her shoulder?  Perhaps some of it was a response to her comments to other students about eating dead animal flesh and wearing animal skins like primitive cave men?

None of those issues were reported on but they were certainly present.  Kim Hollingsworth was not just a girl trying to get along with everyone at the Academy.  She was abrasive, actively sought out conflict, divisive and generally surly and unpleasant in the 3 times she was at the Academy.  Ultimately there were quite a few reasons she was not allowed back into the Police.

Can I humbly suggest you have a look at the cases and the judgements made in those cases.  I am sure once you ahve that you will if not agree with the decisions, at least understand why they were made and perhaps that they were right in the end.  Please don't take this last as sarcasm or me taking a shot at you, her case is quite misunderstood mostly because of the way it was reported, I really do urge you to have a look at the facts of the case beyond what was reported.

You only know three cops, all of whom are ex prostitutes? None of the female officers I have met looked like they could make a living as a prostitute.

wrote on Feb 25^th, 2008 at 12:45pm:

Your second quote must be a bit old, Kim Hollingsworth lost her final appeal last year (2007) in the Court of Appeal.  The issues were a little wider than your quote implies as well.  She did cite "harassment and ridicule" from other students, as you so kindly point out in bold type however there were always other issues with Ms Hollingsworth.  Perhaps some of the ahrassment and ridicule was because of the pet rat she kept in her room?  or the fact that she carried the rat around on her shoulder?  Perhaps some of it was a response to her comments to other students about eating dead animal flesh and wearing animal skins like primitive cave men? None of those issues were reported on but they were certainly present.  Kim Hollingsworth was not just a girl trying to get along with everyone at the Academy.  She was abrasive, actively sought out conflict, divisive and generally surly and unpleasant in the 3 times she was at the Academy.  Ultimately there were quite a few reasons she was not allowed back into the Police. Can I humbly suggest you have a look at the cases and the judgements made in those cases.  I am sure once you ahve that you will if not agree with the decisions, at least understand why they were made and perhaps that they were right in the end.  Please don't take this last as sarcasm or me taking a shot at you, her case is quite misunderstood mostly because of the way it was reported, I really do urge you to have a look at the facts of the case beyond what was reported.

As I said I'm not all that familiar with the Hollingsworth case, except for what I read at the time back in the '90s. I haven't followed it subsequently, hence my (sincere) questions. If, though, what you say is correct, the only official reason given is her initial dishonesty. Abrasiveness doesn't seem an appropriate reason for dismissal, unless she was abrasive to senior officers, which might be. I suppose there could be other reasons, as you suggest.

Thanks for your info anyway, and I'll do some more searching after lunch. I do need to catch up on this case, but a Turkish kebab might help my brain cells function better. (You'll have to get used to my weird sense of humour. )

Freediver,
lol
I know an awful lot more than 3 out of the 15, 000, that was pretty poorly worded now I reread it.  I know what you mean though, some would probably starve, a fair few wouldn't though.

:)

Ray,
No worries mate.  Seriously have a read, some of it is quite interesting.  I meant the explanation of her behaviour as an alternate reason for her copping a bit from the other students rather than dismissal grounds.  Frankly she didn't seem to cop too much more than anyone else down there though.

Weird sense of humour?  I think I have one of those lying around here somewhere :)

If she can't be honest in a job application (for whatever reason), she probably isn't trustworthy enough to be a cop in my view.