I'm confused. What seems to frost the adjudicator's gourd is that he entered into a relationship with the wife and "took advantage of her" when she seemed to like the relationship long enough to have three kids with him.
Isn't the more serious potential victim here the guy who went to jail for six months because his wife's new boyfriend was the lead investigator and who had clearly chosen sides in this case. That he might have been wrongly impacted by this relationship doesn't seem to get word one in this report.
I mean if this guy had told his bosses about the relationship and been taken off the case would there even have been an issue? It's not like she raised a complaint. It was his talking to a buddy cop about it some seven years later that triggered this hearing.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.