Woman Declines to Cooperate With Police in the Investigation of Her Partner So Police Report Her to Air Force as a Lesbian

Jene Newsome, 28, had succeeded in living under the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy of the Air Force for years despite the fact that she lived with her lesbian partner in Rapid City, South Dakota. However, her nine-year career as an aircraft armament system craftsman came to an end when members of the Rapid City police department outed her as a lesbian in what appears to be an act of raw retaliation. Police Chief Steve Allender has supported his officers’ decision to report Newsome.

When police approached Newsome with an arrest warrant for her partner (who was wanted on theft charges in Fairbanks, Alaska), they found her uncooperative at work at Ellsworth Air Force base. She refused to give them keys to their home. Officers, however, proceeded to peer into the home through the windows and spotted a marriage license from Iowa on the kitchen table. The couple had married in Iowa when same-sex marriage became legal in that state.

She is now suing the police department with the help of the ACLU.

Police Chief Steve Allender stood by his officers and indicated that the officers were compelled to share such information with the Air Force: “It’s an emotional issue and it’s unfortunate that Newsome lost her job, but I disagree with the notion that our department might be expected to ignore the license, or not document the license, or withhold it from the Air Force once we did know about it. It was a part of the case, part of the report and the Air Force was privileged to the information.”

Why? This is not a federal crime. Since when are officers compelled to report matters of potential internal discipline to an employer? If the officers hoped for greater cooperation from the gay community, this is hardly the way to secure it.

Newsome’s partner is now out on bail with one felony and three misdemeanor counts for theft stemming from an incident last year in Fairbanks.

For the full story, click here.

30 thoughts on “Woman Declines to Cooperate With Police in the Investigation of Her Partner So Police Report Her to Air Force as a Lesbian

  1. I thought they would have posted it on the web. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t want everyone to know the levels and features of their security. 🙂

  2. All’s I will say on this get past the first level of security and you are on your own. It is a specialized force that makes it through the training period or not. If you make it through that process then you are good as gold. Maybe 15 people in total in rotational shifts for 2 year gigs. Not that I know this to be a fact. Informational purposes only…..

  3. AY,

    I was trying to point out that “loose lips sink ships”, without coming right out and saying so. All security information should be devulged only on a need to know basis. Those measures that we may consider to be of no consequence may be the missing piece of the puzzle.

    Back to the topic of this thread:

    Knowing the level of security at the Base; don’t you think a service member with a career ending secret presents a significant risk of being extorted? She didn’t hide something that no one would ever find out about. She was so arrogant about her disrespect for the law that she performed a public act, and created a public record to document it. Do you think she could obtain a clearance if the Air Force knew that she wasn’t trustworthy enough to follow the law? Isn’t getting married to another woman a violation of her oath? The fact that a discussion about the police officer’s possible impropriety is even taking place demonstrates the seriousness with which the National Security of our country is recognized by far too many.

    I can’t believe that the same people who are complaining about the police officer reporting a security risk, are the same people that are constantly bitching about others who violate “the rule of law”.

    “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof;…shall be the supreme law of the land”. I must have …ed past the part that says ‘except those I don’t agree with’.

  4. And to think that rum is given as a ration in the British Navy and used to be that way in the US Navy. That Flogging at sea was accepted. Oh and don’t forget that freedmen could own slaves…..Somethings do change…..

  5. AY,

    You’re right; somethings do change. And the laws regarding homosexuality in the military will probably change too. I have no problem with that. Until such time that the law does change, I will continue to support the current law. Not because I like it or don’t like it, but because it is the law.

  6. Duh:

    and that is the problem, too many people support stupid laws because it is the law. we have so many stupid laws on the books now that will eventually be used against us. If the government wanted to we could all be thrown in jail for one transgression or another without even knowing we had broken a law.

  7. Well, Byron. Do we have a method of getting rid of “stupid laws”, or do you suggest that we just ignore them and bitch about them being used againsts us? What specific law do you find to be “stupid” and what steps have you taken to get it repealed?

    Are we a government of laws, or are we a government of men?

  8. Really? Did these cops really think through what it means to set the standard that anything you do outside of work will be reported to your employer? How many cops want all of their “off duty” activities reported to the department and the municipal government (mayor/council)? I suspect this may come back to bite one or more of them in the proverbial ass.

    That said, and as much as I oppose anti-gay discrimination, if you’re in the military and you marry your same-sex spouse, you really are asking for trouble.

Comments are closed.