Jury rejects gay ex-LAPD officer's discrimination lawsuit against city

What a sad commentary on the world we live in that a jury can find that misconduct occured and yet not find that this woman was damaged by it. The LAPD presented such a poor defense and the jury bought it. The most honest person in the work place at one time or another has lied to get the day off. If an officer can be fired for such a small infraction, then police officers around the country need to lose their jobs for letting fellow police officers go when they have been pulled over for speeding, etc. I have seen it happen and no police officer can deny it. Too bad the jury didn't want to hold the LAPD accountable for their actions. The status quo continues...what a shame

We have a jury process in this country and we need to respect the conclusions of our follow citizens that sit on a jury. Trials and elections don't turnout they way we want all the time. Welcome to democracy.

The sad thing is that anyone who sat through this trial knows that the jury actually felt that this officer was wrongfully terminated and that she did NOT lie as the LAPD asserted, given the evidence presented by both sides...funny how none of that makes the news.

This officer was caught in a straight out lie, and then tried to sue the city by making it a sexual orientation lawsuit. Just another person trying to hit the LAPD lotto and take advantage. Comparing her lie to an officer speeding is ridiculous!! She lied to a superior probably would lie in testimony in court also. Take responsibilty for your mistakes!

No one sues for "being caught in a straight out lie". She was a victim of sexual orientation harassment. That's the "misconduct" committed by LAPD that the jury found. It's no defense to victimizes the victims with bogus attacks on credibility. LAPD should look at its own lack of credibility when it claims it treats gays and lesbians equally and covers up harassment in the department.

Hey "Steve," god help us ALL if we are held to the same standard this officer was held to, being that an ex-girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband contradicting ONE of our statements off-duty would lead not only to the termination of our job, but our career!! It's insane! This is an absolute waste of tax payer money and I personally am pissed that a perfectly good officer (whose credibility was obviously okay when the ex-girlfriend wasn't yet an EX) has been thrown away over this petty drama. Unless you were there you might want to keep your obvious ignorance to yourself..there are currently LAPD officers who have had DUI's, picked up prostitutes, beat their wives, etc--but they are still there! But "Steve" as you said, comparing officers letting each other off for speeding IS incomparable to what they accused this officer of, those speeding officers are committing CRIMES, endangering the safety of others on the road-- while this officer (who the jury found WAS harassed and retaliated against) was fired over a "she said-she said" and permanently labeled a liar?!! I mean come on I'm a dude and I'm claiming B.S. on this one.

Is everyone gullible? I am very intimate with this case, and a female. Shelby's actions were beyond just a "lie". The person who was ultimately responsible for her termination did not have a clue about her sexual orientation, and for that matter if he did, it would not have made a difference one way or the other. I have been on LAPD for almost 30 years and we are so far beyond sexual discrimination. We have had Deputy Chiefs, Captains, among others who are gay, and were able to survive on this police department without being terminated. The difference with them was their work integrity. Shelby's work ethic was reprehensible, and there was more than one incident involved. That is the reason we have a probationary period. If Shelby was displaying an extremely poor work ethic from the beginning, where was it going to go from there???? The posted story has left out a number of facts, and as usual, has skewed the story.......

Shelby Feldmeyer was terminated because she was caught lying on a number of occasions. She had zero integrity and some of you should take the time to know more about the facts than what you read in a newspaper clipping. She was a flake employee who was on probation and got caught lying, calling in sick when not sick and would not take responsibility for any of her actions. She ended up with a bottom feeding attorney that thought they could use the "Lesbian retaliation" defense to win the LAPD lottery, but the jury saw through it...no one even knew she was a lesbian who made the decision to terminate her. Did some people at work ask her out...maybe? However, that does happen in the workplace. Is LAPD responsible for people asking people out????? Who were the main witnesses against her...LAPD lesbian officers. But the bottom line is she got caught lying and did not want to show up for work. Is that who we want for an LAPD officer, gay or straight? I don't think so. Both she and her attorney are both losers and the jury saw it....and they lost. Plain and simple...

I heard that the jurors out in the hallway after the verdict was read told LAPD Captain Weinstein that LAPD should be ashamed of itself for going after Feldmeier with bogus exaggerated discipline and never investigating her complaints. Most didn't believe LAPD's "star" witnesses. I also heard that jurors said they would have found a wrongful termination if the jury verdict form had let them. The City broke the law with a hostile work environment and that's what the jury found. Sadly, LAPD will always have people like Kerry and Darlene (the same person judging by the style of grammar) to make excuses for it. Suggesting that LAPD "won" when LAPD broke the employment laws and subjected Feldmeier to a hostile work environment is cynical. Unfortunately, there are too many people like Kerry, apparently, who don't get the message unless there is a dollar sign attached to it.

Everyone can speculate what happened, what should have happened, or what she was supposedly a victim of without knowing the facts. The jury had the facts. The jury spoke loud and clear with the verdict. It is astonishing people can tout "facts" about a situation they know nothing about. Please state facts, rather than "I heard from a person who knew a person..." Then you will have a basis for argument. She was not subjected to a hostile work environment. She just did not want to come to work, until she was not receiving a paycheck. Only then did she decide she needed her job back. If it was so horrible working for LAPD, why did she want her job back????