efelony: Illinois Police Officer Uses Ticket To Ask Woman On Date

Who needs eharmony? Evangelina Paredes found a match in a handwritten note on her windshield. It was from Stickney police officer Chris Collins who used the information that he recorded on a $132 speeding ticket to track her down and ask her out. Collins pointed out “I did cost you $132 — least I can do is buy you dinner.” It is a police version of the slogan “fall in love for the right reasons.”

The note stated “It’s Chris … that ugly bald Stickney cop who gave you that ticket. I know this may seem crazy and you’re probably right, but truth is I have not stopped thinking about you since. I don’t expect a girl as attractive as you to … even go for a guy like me, but I’m taking a shot anyways. . . . But hey, I did cost you $132 — least I can do is buy you dinner.”

Collins, 27, is now being accused of violating Paredes’ privacy and is being sued for causing “plaintiff to suffer great fear and anxiety.” While I am not sure of how much fear and anxiety is reasonably caused by such a note, he clearly did use his position as a police officer to violate her privacy. He is in far better a legal position than if he had made the date a quid pro quo for the ticket — which would have led to a criminal charge. There remains the threat of criminal charge if there is any allegation of the withholding the ticket or unauthorized access to other areas of police records — which I have not seen in the articles covering the case.

The lawsuit also names Stickney Police Chief Joseph Kretch and the village of Stickney.

The village is likely to argue that this is a rogue officer who acted in violation of city protocol and rules. It is also likely to argue that the note was not left under the claim or appearance of official authority. To perfect such a defense, however, it would be necessary to discipline and likely terminate the officer for the breach. Even then, it may not protect the city from liability. The question is how serious the damages would be in such a case. What do you think?

Source: ABC

39 thoughts on “efelony: Illinois Police Officer Uses Ticket To Ask Woman On Date

  1. Jonathan was the one who claimed that President Obama snuck the NDAA under our noses under the cover of New Years holiday cheer.
    This post does deserve some comment though. SHE SHOULD HAVE SAID YES!

  2. I think this is another stupid overreaction. Yes, he should be slapped for misusing data, with whatever the internal penalties of the department are. But a lawsuit? Come on. She should just grow up, say “No thank you,” and move on. Only if his behavior actually crosses a line into stalking – if he continues to pursue her after being turned down, etc. – should this become a legal issue. As it is, it’s a shakedown.

  3. There was a case in the Minneapolis, MN suburbs a few years ago of an officer stalking a woman using the tools of his trade. Not only did he stop her repeatedly, he cruised her house regularly and finally arrested her actual boy friend on some trumped up charges.

    Some guys just won’t take no for an answer I guess.

  4. Surprised huh people. This guy is probably a LEO just so he can check out the women he sees in his cruiser. He can carry a firearm to compensate for a lack of turgidity in his member. He figures he will get lucky one day. It’s really an issue of abuse of one’s position of power. All you men are piggies!

  5. This officer should be sanctioned. The misuse of the information could have lead to more serious issues. If he had any brains in that bald head of his, he would have just give her a warning, and then ask her out!:)

  6. I think he should be straight out fired for misuse of authority. Given that he admitted using his LEO position to obtain personal information on Ms. Paredes, it is reasonable to think that the note had menacing overtones. Therefore, there is some measure of damages that she has suffered. How one devolves that into a money figure though is beyond me.

  7. My daughter was ticketed by a cop after she refused a date with him. He had stopped her on a highly questionable pretense, told her he was going to issue a warning, asked for a date, she refused and knowing she’d done nothing wrong, took the ticket which was not issued as a warning.

    She hired a lawyer. They figured the cop would deny the date asking so contested the ticket as it stood but insinuated the request for a date … it was very cleverly done. The Judge dismissed the ticket and issued a private caution to the cop to have no further contact with my daughter. The cop then tried to approach her in the hallway outside the Courtroom. She yelled for her lawyer and they all went back into the Courtroom where the Judge made the caution to the cop formal and notified his Chief.

    The fine for the ticket and court cost would have been less than $100. Her lawyer’s fee was $350. She claims it was the best $350 she’d ever spent.

  8. What do you think?”

    It depends on the foundation the plaintiff is relying on. If it is 42 USC 1983 they will have to allege and prove a pattern of allowing such activity for the city to be liable. There may be a state or municipal law that allows the suit under non-federal law.

  9. When I was young, many years ago, I was traveling on a rural road in my bright yellow convertible when an oncoming cop car passed me, did a u-turn and came after me. I knew I had done nothing wrong. I was polite, somewhat assertive and rather obvious in showing my wedding band. The officer didn’t give me a ticket, nor even a warning. We both went on our way. If it had happened at night, I wouldn’t have stopped, but continued on to a well lighted and populated area.

  10. OINK! oink.,

    This little piggie says that if this was my daughter; I would tell her to be afraid; be very afraid.

    I have taught my children to avoid cops whenever possible.

    Avoid any contact.

    Avoid sobriety checkpoints, crime scenes and never but never interact with a cop on a off duty social basis.

    I would never approve of them being involved with a cop. No more than I would approve their being involved with an organized crime extortionist.

    Same thing really isn’t it?

    I want my children to marry a man with integrity and self-respect. Not some grunting, musclebound pinhead whose only carreer options were working as a Stormtrooper for the Fascist Government or a Torturer for the Corrections System.

    It doesn’t matter what this cop’s intention was.

    Anytime a woman is approached; for whatever reason and addressed by a member of todays Police Forces; it is perfectly reasonable for her to be in fear.

    Fear of being arrested, raped, imprisoned and raped, offered freedom for sex etc.

    If she happens to be wearing the same color jacket as a woman suspected of murder in the next town; she could be arrested; charged; convicted; and executed long before the crooked, power hungry DA allows the DNA evidence to be examined.

    Or even if they find you are innocent of that crime they can imprison you indefinitely just because that cop you refused to have sex with says, “Gee I think she looks Lahk’ a Terr–st'”

    No; this young woman was Sexually Harrassed by this Cop. She had to have felt pressure to say yes.

    Yes he should be discharged and prohibited from working in any position where he has authority over others.

    Liberty1st1, January 4, 2012 at 8:28 am

    “Jonathan was the one who claimed that President Obama snuck the NDAA under our noses under the cover of New Years holiday cheer.
    This post does deserve some comment though. SHE SHOULD HAVE SAID YES!”

    She id say Yes. She said yes I am going to stand up and speak out about corruption.

    She said yes I am going to fight the devient actions of this Fascist Pig.

    She said Yes. I am going to stop this Cop from doing to me what he and his kind of Mercenary Bullys do to the American people every day.

    She said Yes I will not allow myself to be defiled by the repulsive Hired Enforcers of Corporate Will.

    This woman; unlike so many of the more right-wing chippies that follow the Republicans and their Henchman like groupies offering themselves to whichever cop is free at the moment in hopes of grasping a hold of that very bottom shred of the Corporepublidemofascinazi Power Structure; refused to sacrifice what Cop Lovers never have.

    Pride and Dignity…………………..And her rights; don’t forget her rights

    Because I’ sure that what this Cop had on his mind could be appropriately termed;

    “Unreasonable Search and Seizure”……oh hell I forgot we already lost that one

  11. I’m not a cop. But if I used customer’s private info for a personal matter such as this I’d be fired. That’s how it is when you work for a living. Lousy pig.

  12. In response to the police abuses and brutalities that seem to be ubiquitous these days, I’ve come up with 20 (so far) changes that would prevent such abuses. I apologize in advance for the randomness of them; I listed them as I thought of them and they are not yet in a cohesive order yet.

    I believe they are all reasonable solutions although to some they may seem extreme. They should be extreme! LEOs are expected to protect us from unnecessary and illegal acts of violence and abuse, rather than being the perpetrators of it.

    1. When a cop is suspected of or charged with a crime, he is unconditionally suspended WITHOUT pay until the matter is resolved. If the cop is found innocent or not responsible, he gets full back pay in a lump sum upon his return to work. Taxpayers should not be responsible for footing the bill for long, paid vacations for the guilty.

    2. When a lawsuit against cops goes in favor of the plaintiff, it is the cop(s) who should be responsible for payment of restitution and damages, NOT taxpayers. This should also apply to any other cop, such as any LEO who did nothing to prevent or stop the incident, or attempted to whitewash it after the fact.

    3. When a LEO is found guilty of any crime he should suffer at least the same punishment as everyone else. Ideally the penalties should be greater than for the average citizen, as public officials should be held to a higher standard. This applies to restitution, fines, and jail or prison sentencing, community service, and probation. NO MORE LENIENCY!

    4. Any cop found guilty of a crime or who loses an excessive force lawsuit can NEVER again carry a badge or be involved in any way in law enforcement or private security work anywhere. No more moving on to another jurisdiction so they can continue their abuses on a different group of people.

    5. When drug cops murder an innocent citizen due to overzealous failure to ensure they are attacking the correct address, they receive a mandatory life sentence with no parole.

    6. When any cop misuses his weapon in any situation and inadvertently kills or wounds the wrong person, see #5 above. Human life has got to start meaning something to these people.

    7. Police chiefs, regardless of department size, should be elected and be subject to recall if and when they lose control over their officers or knowingly and willingly defend abusive or corrupt behavior.

    8. Any cop who kills a non-threatening pet or stray (the only reason they would do this is to satisfy a blood lust) should be fired immediately and charged with animal cruelty and their gun rights revoked. Plus #4.

    9. Any cop who looks the other way when other cop(s) commit a crime or indulge in unnecessary abuse or brutality are as guilty as the cops they are protecting and should be charged accordingly. The “blue wall of silence” that has flown for so long needs to be grounded once and for all.

    10. Any cop who plants evidence, or in any way tampers with evidence, and then lies on paper or the witness stand to secure a conviction or conceal their own or others’ incompetence/corruption should receive a mandatory 20 years in prison with no parole.

    11. When cops destroy personal property while looking for drugs, the cops (not taxpayers!) should be held personally responsible for restitution, regardless of whether drugs are found or not.

    12. A standardized battery of psychological testing should be developed and implemented before any person can be hired to be a LEO at ANY level. Those who indicate a propensity toward violence, aggressiveness, abusiveness (including animals), over-reaction, deceptiveness, dishonesty, etc. should be disqualified from being issued a badge and gun, regardless of who they are or who they might know. Disqualifications should be entered into a national database so a permanent record of the information is on file.

    13. All current LEO’s at ALL levels should be subjected to the same battery of tests whether they’ve been on the job for a week or a decade or more. If they fail, they get immediately terminated, POLICE UNIONS BE DAMNED!

    14. Standardized collective bargaining agreements should be developed for nationwide use and limited to matters of compensation only. No language that allows for Union protection of rogue cops should ever be tolerated. It is a slap in the face to morality and justice, and undermines public respect for both the law and law officers.

    15. Arbitrators who force the re-hiring of fired officers should be abolished. If it is discovered a cop was unjustly terminated, an arbitrator is unnecessary for the cop to be rehired. Arbitrators (arbitraitors?) are only necessary when the cop is actually guilty.

    16. Whenever police have a suspect in custody or the suspect is defenseless or cooperative and video evidence clearly shows police continuing their attack, the standard defense of “department policy, procedure, or protocol was followed” will cease to apply. Violence beyond what is necessary to subdue a suspect should NEVER be a part of standard anything.

    17. Any LEO who assaults a citizen for legally video-recording them and then steals or destroys their video recording device should be immediately fired and proper charges filed against them followed by harsh punishment. The only reason a cop would want to do such a thing is to conceal and protect his or another cop’s improper conduct. This wouldn’t apply to the several remaining Dark Ages states that actually have laws that make video-taping a cop illegal.

    18. If any situation(s) in a LEO’s private life (familial problems, dispute with neighbor, financial difficulties, etc.) may cause him to take out his anger on an undeserving citizen, he should be removed from patrol and assigned to a desk. This would also apply to work related problems, i.e., a cop gets mad at his sergeant or whoever. One’s bad mood is never justification for abusiveness, and if a cop can’t handle it, he shouldn’t be on the job.

    19. Every LEO should be subjected to random, frequent, and “surprise!” drug testing that should be controlled by a citizens panel rather than departments themselves.

    20. Cops should never be allowed to investigate themselves for any reason. This would be best done by a panel of neutral citizens.

    These citizen protections should be applied evenly throughout the entire USA. We’re all Americans and have every right to be safe from LEO abuses regardless of what state we live in.

  13. I have heard of this happening before. Back in the 70s I heard of a local cop where I lived in Georgia who would pull women over and ask them for dates and got caught doing it and wound up committing suicide. I also knew a girl who told me she had had a cop one time pull her over and ask her for a date. (She didn’t accept.)

  14. Are there normally so many crackpots visiting and commenting at this website?

    Some of these comments are off the charts ridiculous, not to mention mentally unstable.

  15. When I was much younger and the better half and I had just moved in together I had an occasion to call the police and one of the police (the young, handsome one) that responded to the call-out returned to do a follow-up. The better half and I worked different shifts so he wasn’t around when the police came out so it looked like I lived alone.

    He didn’t seem to have much to say of a policing nature, all he seemed to have on his mind was conversation of a non-business sort so I figured it was a personal visit and indicated that I had to let out the dogs or something before my fiance got back. No more follow-ups.

    I wasn’t at all disturbed that he would use his job as an excuse for a second opportunity to chat. You can’t always control how you meet people. Finding an excuse to meet someone again even if that excuse is your job isn’t, or hasn’t traditionally been, dangerous or dishonorable as I recall. LOL, maybe I was just more slutty in my youth- it was the very early 70’s after all. :-)

    The magnitude of information on any given person that is available to a police officer today, their obligation to safeguard it by not using it inappropriately, and their position of authority changes the game though. I would hesitate to brand someone as a stalker or sue the city over a first contact of the sort in the above article but I’d make it clear that he could be in hot water for misusing his position to get information for personal use.

    He may just be semi-stupid (stupefied?)in some regards, due to his smitten condition; who among us have never been thrown into a state of semi-stupidity in some respect because of our hormones? This cop should have worked harder for that (faux-accidental?) next encounter like everyone else does, not taken the easy and prying way out.

  16. AngryMan, I don’t think it rises to the level of sexual harassment because there was no offer or implication of beneficial consideration for the date. It was stupid and an abuse of his position but probably not sexual harassment.

  17. InalienableWrights, probably, but if you weren’t white you’ve been catching hell from the police forever. Now you can throw steroids and whole post 9-11/militarization into the mix- everybody is the potential ‘enemy’.

  18. “I think modern day cops have worn out their welcome with most citizens and most wish they would go away — for good.” (InalienableWrights)

    Sadly, I think you are right.

    In saying that I have to remember that many of my friends in the minority communities have felt this way about cops for a hell of a long time.

  19. There is also the phenomen of Cop Groupies thatgives LEO’s that they are more attractive then they are.

  20. Technically he violated privacy, that’s wrong and he should be disciplined.

    The woman is being a bit opportunistic with the law suit, using it as a means of getting her own back for the ticket but that shouldn’t detract from her case.

    I expect that had she been attracted to the cop then she wouuld have said yes and all would be fine.

    I don’t do cop hate (or any form of group hate), it a drop dead gorgous female cop did this to me I’d take her up on it. If she were butt ugly I’d respectfully decline; I’d probably be bemused; guess I’d miss out on a chance to come out ahead financially.

  21. What he should have done was not write her the ticket and give her his card and left the ball in her court. He clearly states that he is not attractive and she is… so of course the risk is high she wouldn’t want him. If he had left his card and said I am the officer from the other day pleaae call me…there wouldn’t have been such evidence and he could have felt out the situation.
    He was out of his league and out of his mind. He knew the risk he was taking and if he is fired it is his own fault. He should be suspended for 30 days and sent to retraining.

  22. A long time ago, I dated a young lady who had a fascination with undergarment engineering: a collection of pushup bras. She drove a hot rod Camaro, in which she was stopped numerous times. By the time the LEO got to her window, she’d undone a couple blouse buttons, allowing a view of her manipulated appurtenances. She never got cited, but was asked out regularly. She claimed that she wasn’t tempted, but was at eye level with some “cop flashlights” that tested her resolve.

  23. Kyle 1, said:

    “In response to the police abuses and brutalities that seem to be ubiquitous these days, I’ve come up with 20 (so far) changes that would prevent such abuses. I apologize in advance for the randomness of them; I listed them as I thought of them and they are not yet in a cohesive order yet……”
    Kyle study your history and most of our history we did not have cops.
    I think getting rid of the vermin is the best and most logical solution.


  24. InalienableWrights,

    “Kyle study your history and most of our history we did not have cops.”

    Given that should dueling be legal, or won’t that be moot since we’ll have no laws? Perhaps my Sig Steyr vs. someone’s Glock. In the alternative my AK47 vs somebody’s Uzi. A world where firepower prevails and might makes right. Sounds like fun if I was 22 and suicidal.

  25. @InalienableWrights. I agree cops and all people in positions of authority should have greater oversight by the people. I strongly believe that having a badge should not grant extra rights. I do not however support the idea of removing law enforcement because then we’d end up with an ochlocrasy. Until the human race has matured enough to form a proper anarcy (some time yet, if ever) it’s a bad idea not to have laws and people to enforce them.

    What needs to be done is ensure the right laws are in place, bad laws are removed and those that police and prosecute said laws are not themselves above the law.

  26. You need to use the cranial unit that God gave you. Without cops you have the county sheriff that has been the law enforcement unit since this country began.

    And you analogy of the Uzi verses the AK is the way it is now since the only way the state exists is by the threat of lethal force to be used against you if you do not go along with each and every whim of the state.

    And no matter what we will have laws since we are the law. We are the sovereign and the common law will always exist. Remember guys these are the principles that this country was founded upon after all. That all state authority comes from the people.

  27. He never said he used his authority to obtain her information. He did leave a note on her car. Once. Being asked out one time doesn’t fall under the category of stalking, in my eyes. How do we know that he didn’t just happen to see her car parked in his town, since she apparently works there…and then that was when he decided to put a note on her car? There is no evidence of any wrongdoing and he should countersue for defamation. This made not just national, but international news and all he did was ask her out on a date in a love note! Would she still sue him if he weren’t a cop? I doubt this woman fears for her life. That is just ridiculous.

  28. The difference is that cops have access to personal information on people that has a very high potential for abuse. I for instance can not get the home address of every good looking woman that I run into, but a cop can and would very likely get away with illegal access to this information.

    If you ask me this makes a very good case against having your home address accessible to the State at all. What excuse does the state have for 4th amendment access to information of people that are not accused of a crime? They should require a warrant to try and get ones address.

    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

    How can you be secure in your home when the state demands to know where innocent people live? Is no access to your home address an unreasonable search? I sure think so.

  29. “Being asked out one time doesn’t fall under the category of stalking, in my eyes.”

    Yes. I think it does.

    As was pointed out by InalienableWrights; Cops have access to priviledged information.

    Using that access to contact anyone for personal reasons is inappropriate use of their authority and a breach of trust with the public who is paying him to hold that information as priviledged to avoid just such stalking activities from others.

    The argument, that it is Ok because he is a Cop, is diametricly opposed to the terms of that trust and allows the Caretaker to become the Violator.

    “Would she still sue him if he weren’t a cop?”

    I would hope so. I would say yes if she was smart.

    I worked for the Public Library system for 13 years as a Supervisor in the Circulation Department (those are the people that check your items out for you and back in when you return. they take care of your records, fines etc.) These people all have access to priviledged information and confidentiallity is a huge issue; always.

    If I had; at anytime; looked up the address of a girl or woman in the records; crept to her house; and left a love note on her car; my job would have been immediately forfeit. Inappropriate use is inappropriate use; Cop or not.

    “He never said he used his authority to obtain her information.”
    “How do we know that he didn’t just happen to see her car parked in his town, since she apparently works there…and then that was when he decided to put a note on her car?”

    Copied from the article you just read:
    “It was from Stickney police officer Chris Collins who used the information that he recorded on a $132 speeding ticket to track her down and ask her out. Collins pointed out ‘I did cost you $132 — least I can do is buy you dinner’.”

    Also to be considered is the manner that he chose to approach her and his words to her.

    This guy is a Cop. Brave, Strong, Confident; right?

    “The note stated ‘It’s Chris … that ugly bald Stickney cop who gave you that ticket. I know this may seem crazy and you’re probably right, but truth is I have not stopped thinking about you since. I don’t expect a girl as attractive as you to … even go for a guy like me, but I’m taking a shot anyways. . . . But hey, I did cost you $132 — least I can do is buy you dinner’.”

    Sound more like: Self-conscious, Self-deprecating, and Cowardly; to judge from the fact that he didn’t even have the balls to approach her in person so as to explain himself.

    No. He rather snuck around hiding notes like a middle school child; told the girl all the reasons why she shouldn’t want to date him; and then says something that changes the intent from a romantic date; to a repayment of a debt he owes her; for giving her a ticket.

    Why does he feel he owes her for the ticket if the ticket was given in the honest performance of his duty?

    “I doubt this woman fears for her life.”
    Answer #1:
    I don’t believe it’s relavent. He is being charged with “Violating Her Privacy”
    The other is a civil suit filed by the victim.

    “I doubt this woman fears for her life.”
    Answer #2:
    She should.

    He should be charged with misuse of his authority and some charge dealing with his attempt to extort co-operation from this woman as follows:
    “Collins pointed out ‘I did cost you $132 — least I can do is buy you dinner’.”

    Were I this woman; I would be asking myself some questions.

    Is he saying that if I don’t go out with him; I could get more such tickets?”

    Did he purposely stake me out to give me the first ticket as an excuse to meet me?

    Did I even deserve the ticket?

    If I say no; will his attitude change and become vindictive?

    Anyone who is in touch with events in this country should be able to see that Cops; on orders from the Corporate Power Structure i.e. the 1% are becoming more violent and more intrusive.

    As our rights have been eroded; first by the Un-Constitutional; Patriot Act and NDAA; then by the violent, blatant; and yet unchallenged violation of those rights by Cops and Courts all over America; the abuses have increased in number and severity until we are left with no option but to admit the obvious. *

    * 1) Something has changed in America; no matter how much we try to deny it.

    2) The change; although visable throughout our society; is especially obvious where the Government most directly, tangibly, and confrontationally; interacts with the civilian population; that being the Police/Citizen interaction.

    3) The language that we use to talk about the Cops has changed. The only time you hear the words “Protect and Serve” is with a snear or a sarcastic twist to the words. people everywhere are complaining about the level of service; the order of priorities; and the overly agressive and abusive attitudes and actions of the Police. Like never before in my 53 years. even in the 1960s the Police got more respect from the average citizen.

    4) They deserve all of the critisizm they are receiving.

    5) This problem will only get worse unless we stop it.

    So; any woman (or man or child) who is approached by a Cop today should fear.

    For your life; your freedom; your dignity; your rights.

    In fact any contact with Police may potencially be turned around on you.

    If you are an immigrant or your English is less than perfect or your skin color is darker than beige; it is almost a certainty.

    Todays Police are little more than Thugs; hired by the 1% to bully and browbeat the people into submission to their twisted Fascist Dream State.

    Take as just one example, the Cop in the video on this blog who wasn’t sure if it was Ok for the Lady driving the car to read the Constitution or not.

    He thought he might aught’a conficeulate that there radical reading material.

    So I guess what I want to say is: I disagree with you about the nature and severity of the case and the possible injury and trauma experienced by the victim.

    “That is just ridiculous.”

    Indeed. Indeed. It is ridiculous.

    It is ridiculous that; in a supposedly free country; peopled by descendents of those who hungered and bled to be free of one or another brand of Tyrany; I should have to come here and consider such issues.

    Christopher Hitchens: Died Dec. 15, 2011: “Take the risk of thinking for yourself. Much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way” – in a debate Nov. 2010

  30. “Being asked out one time doesn’t fall under the category of stalking, in my eyes.”


    Brilliant summation of why this Cop violated his trust and should suffer for it. I’m with you on this all the way.

Comments are closed.