discrimination action alleging despair treatment of a female police officer who is also a homosexual as developed in the professional standards board investigation  which in which she produced evidence that the police officers and the officials of the pertinent professional standards of bureau failed to treat her and other women as favorably on the issue of what is or is not similarly situated situations here the problem is the start why wouldn't the fact that there's a supervisor supervise patches tried to bring was the process the process in evaluating prior incidents or conduct depended to a great extent on whether or not the issue was one of sexual harassment that had relevant considerations associated with that under the circuit case upon which she has relied you know for the argument purposes  here rather than the six churkin case which the truck court relied on stance if you look at all of the conduct dealing with issues of sexual harassment or more importantly issues of gender based discrimination particularly with the statements of which there were statements against patches of inappropriate touching and other such things the conduct was always principly determined to be in violation of professional standards there was no determination as a part of the procedure that was being followed by the department of addressing the issues involved to questions of sexual discrimination or sexual harassment in determining whether or not either the eighth of the sex circuit standard should apply are in applying the issue of treatment one of the relevant issues plainly has to be whether or not there is a history of sexual harassment or sexual discrimination being committed by individuals in the department for which the department has pretty much a policy or procedure of covering up that is important because her claims that it is patches claims process both the way the investigation was conducted the procedures that were utilized in determining what would in fact be the issues to be investigated thing a lot of  was arguing the patch is subjected to about what some of the other people upon who she realized was doing was violative of the right rather than the record and the issue that i think is important and would like to take a moment to argue is that that was a strong position for patches to take because there is no systematic way of building a record of identifying what the relevant criteria are either under the sex or already a circuit decision for comparison if the comparison analysis deals with the individual officers who for example were engaged in domestic violence what does that have to do viz of the domestic violence with their spouse or significant other with issues of patches trying for personal reasons to check the computer on her significant others conduct on how can those to be relevant and the issue i think in the ones she or calculated  below is attempting to attack you like this morning is good conduct reasonably relate to allegations of sexual gender based discrimination or sexual harassment under phoenix policy and under phoenix policy those matters were reduced to obscurity by simply being determined to be conduct unbecoming all of those cases discrimination in accordance with the policies of the police department or the city for maintaining records of such conduct and the reason we respectfully submit that it was just that all of you are crimes that's something that  have the example of the male officer who was suggesting to one of the females who is pregnant that they engage in intercourse so  yes but it was in all of these examples the invest the results was and the determination was less serious than that which was accorded to patches for conduct which quite frankly fall within this box you get sixty days we don't care about the details now on the contrary this isn't like workers compensation where a broken arm equals action dollars that's what it sounds like you're asking for and it's the to me determine how we want to get in there and start rethinking all the discretionary applications of its power now if you want but patches sincerely argues that you want to look at all of the relevant criteria not whether or no investigation and a simple denial but there is still evidence that there was an affair and their relationship had an impact on the workplace but gentleman was treated differently than patches is  evidence said another way to warrant and investigation but that's one of many examples the other course is sergeant thomas and detective cara psych i've already mentioned it's like this one where there is neither direct evidence section of gender discrimination and starts only assuming assuming you but you by the district courts rel there were no editing what really was present here is a situation where if anything the department was never concerned about looting and pensions lifestyle until a complaint got raised at the highest level which was in the disciplinary review board hearing concerning basterds opposing counsel say is that well let me show you your honor there is this case with respect investigated as the record indicated and it came up with no evidence and both people said no president was not treated any differently the record reflects the record reflects that commander thomas when with first faced with allegations from bassett that there was rumors that they were spending too much time together but there were rumors that well that's he had extended preferential treatment commander thomas himself harassment and discrimination have far more exacting standards legal standards that have to be satisfied a department that ultimately is going to base misconduct upon whether or not department and disrupted her department that became a valid reason for the department to look into whether or not that relationship instead was occurring and whether or not there was the disruption there was nothing homophobic about it there was nothing out of the ordinary about it that placed her at a disadvantage because of either her gender or herself in this case it seems to although we argued that she didn't even get that given the fact that the comparison she young lads were not apples and apples but of apples and everything else the district court nevertheless based upon the notion that in these kinds of