COPS CIRCUMCISION PROVES HIS INNOCENCE?

If you're a guy, how can the picture above not make you cringe a little bit. As a glutton for punishment, I had to read what this story was all about. It turns out, a New York City police officer was fired for flashing a woman. The only problem is that she says he was uncircumcised, but the officer kind of has proof that he is, and now he wants his job back!

NYPD officer Owen Hopper's lawsuit against the NYPD says that the woman who accused him of flashing her insisted he was uncut, but he has evidence that his foreskin was removed when he was a child. Hopper said a hearing officer's ruling that arousal can make it difficult determine if the sex organ is uncut was just wrong-headed. At no point during the trial was an expert called in to render an opinion.

Hopper is a decorated officer receiving six medals and high performance ratings during six years on the force, and now he wants his uniform back and rightly so. He says he was fired on September 29 after pleading guilty to minor charges stemming from an incident at Iona College, where his then-girlfriend was a student. The details are sketchy, but Hopper claims those charges amounted to little more than administrative violations that normally result in docked vacation days. He contends that the real reason for his firing was the allegations that he exposed himself and made 'vulgar' comments to a woman being held at his precinct.

The nameless accuser repeatedly stated and testified that she clearly saw the officer's penis and it was uncircumcised. Hopper says that he submitted evidence that he was circumcised as a child, but the hearing officer didn't believe him and concluded that an erect circumcised penis and uncircumcised penis will appear the same when aroused. WHAT? That statement is true, but then how did the accuser know that it was uncircumcised if he was aroused? Besides, what made that hearing officer an expert on penises to fire this poor guy? Shouldn't they have consulted a doctor?

At any rate, Hopper went on to say that the idea that he exposed himself in a busy station house equipped with surveillance video and no one saw him is "somewhat far-fetched"! He's right! If he did expose himself to this woman, wouldn't it be on video somewhere. There's something really dirty about this, and it's not because a penis is involved! Okay, I'm done talking about male genitalia for one day!