If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Seattle Times)   Policemen: Hey pretty Woman. For your misdemeanor we'll need you to strip naked on video before your mugshot and lets just make sure your breasts and crotch are not carrying anything. Oh and don't you dare call it rape   (blogs.seattletimes.com) divider line 19
    More: Scary, Puyallup, misdemeanors, induction sealing, boobs  
•       •       •

17901 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Aug 2013 at 4:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-24 05:25:43 PM  
2 votes:
soldiers have always been soldiers.  when the police have so nearly all the leeway of martial law, you best keep your young ladies at home.  where they're safe.  this is the point of terrorism.  we don't always outsource it.
2013-08-24 05:18:26 PM  
2 votes:

fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.


Yeah, that was one of the more depressing Supreme Court decisions
2013-08-24 05:06:35 PM  
2 votes:

johnny_vegas: Dragonflew: Pigs will do pretty much anything to get a paid vacation, won't they?

Fark yeah man!!!!!  Fark authority!!!  You Rock dude!!!!


Yes yes, direct your anger to the person who highlights the problem, not at those causing it.  Good Jorb
2013-08-24 03:52:30 PM  
2 votes:

show me: One plaintiff, a 22-year-old Puyallup woman arrested on suspicion of DUI in April, said she was mortified on learning of the video and worried that it could find its way to the Internet because it is part of the public record

Hmmm, interesting...FOIA request, anyone?


And now we have good reason to justify her 8 figure settlement.

Pig.
2013-08-24 09:49:38 PM  
1 votes:

namatad: You dont think that it is about exposing an illegal practice and abuse of police powers?
hmmmmm ok


What's illegal about videotaping people inside a jail? They even gave the tapes to the lawyer during the discovery process. They certainly weren't trying to hide anything. I would think people would expect to be videotaped while in jail.

I'm thinking this lawyer saw a way to coerce the city into making a settlement and now he's upset because they didn't pay him to go away.
2013-08-24 08:47:21 PM  
1 votes:
Morons got caught driving drunk and were treated the same way any other criminal is treated- boo farking hoo. The only time I was ever arrested the cop made me take my shirt off on the road side so he could get pics of my tattoos in case I had 'gang affiliations' (because most gang bangers are 30 something white guys with long hair carrying acoustic guitars). It sucks, but the time to biatch about the laws is before they are passed. Everyone is pissing and moaning about the SC decision regarding strip searches but how many of you wrote letters or circulated petitions before the ruling was made? How many people even knew the decision was going to be made? Who needs secret courts when you can just anesthetize the population to the point that they don't care?
Oooh... is that a Kardashian in a dancing contest? Cool. Pass me a beer and pack a bowl.
2013-08-24 06:02:03 PM  
1 votes:

shtychkn: Smackledorfer: shtychkn: fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Yeah, that was one of the more depressing Supreme Court decisions

I agree.

A better solution is eliminating all physical contact between prisoners. That shuts off the prison gangs' ability to control the streets too. Win-win.

I agree.  But isolation for extended periods has been determined to be cruel and unusual.  Though less human contact is probably less cruel then "too much" in my opinion


I say let em talk. Let em browse the internet. Let them do all sorts of things. But no physical opportunity to rape and kill eachother.

Hell I would let them smoke weed too, though.
2013-08-24 05:23:48 PM  
1 votes:

shtychkn: fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Yeah, that was one of the more depressing Supreme Court decisions


I agree.

A better solution is eliminating all physical contact between prisoners. That shuts off the prison gangs' ability to control the streets too. Win-win.
2013-08-24 05:21:04 PM  
1 votes:

fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.


www.gameknightreviews.com
2013-08-24 05:20:58 PM  
1 votes:

shtychkn: fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.

Yeah, that was one of the more depressing Supreme Court decisions


+1
2013-08-24 05:17:46 PM  
1 votes:

fusillade762: Thank the Supremes.

Supreme Court Ruling Allows Strip Searches for Any Arrest

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.


Wow just wow
2013-08-24 05:07:00 PM  
1 votes:

Churchill2004: This strikes me as a difficult case, legally. I don't  necessarily agree, but the general rule is someone who's been arrested and is being processed has no right to not be strip-searched as part of processing (or whenever else the jailers think the situation merits it), as part of the jail's effort to keep out drugs and, more importantly, any dangerous items. Observing someone changing is actually less intrusive than a full-on cavity search, and whether it's done through CCTV or peephole isn't really an issue.

So what you'd have to show is that they were specifically targeting people based on a lurid purpose and not concern for officer/prisoner safety, which as plausible as it sounds, strikes me as a difficult thing to prove.


No. To be serious a moment, the real issue is not that they were targeting for sexual gratification, but that the authorities did not recognize the right to privacy of the prisoners AND the videos of the prisoners. I can see the use of video during processing, both to protect the prisoner from false charges, and to protect the jailers from the same. BUT the videos should be licensed to the prisoners and not be released for use by anyone. The prisoner, then, would have legal recourse for the videos being out in the ether.
2013-08-24 05:03:47 PM  
1 votes:

Churchill2004: This strikes me as a difficult case, legally. I don't  necessarily agree, but the general rule is someone who's been arrested and is being processed has no right to not be strip-searched as part of processing (or whenever else the jailers think the situation merits it), as part of the jail's effort to keep out drugs and, more importantly, any dangerous items. Observing someone changing is actually less intrusive than a full-on cavity search, and whether it's done through CCTV or peephole isn't really an issue.

So what you'd have to show is that they were specifically targeting people based on a lurid purpose and not concern for officer/prisoner safety, which as plausible as it sounds, strikes me as a difficult thing to prove.


Unless you look at lots of videos and notice an absence of fatties and meth heads.
2013-08-24 04:58:01 PM  
1 votes:
This strikes me as a difficult case, legally. I don't  necessarily agree, but the general rule is someone who's been arrested and is being processed has no right to not be strip-searched as part of processing (or whenever else the jailers think the situation merits it), as part of the jail's effort to keep out drugs and, more importantly, any dangerous items. Observing someone changing is actually less intrusive than a full-on cavity search, and whether it's done through CCTV or peephole isn't really an issue.

So what you'd have to show is that they were specifically targeting people based on a lurid purpose and not concern for officer/prisoner safety, which as plausible as it sounds, strikes me as a difficult thing to prove.
2013-08-24 04:54:09 PM  
1 votes:
Pigs will do pretty much anything to get a paid vacation, won't they?
2013-08-24 04:49:17 PM  
1 votes:

namatad: How confusing is this?
NO, I demand to speak to a lawyer first.
AM, I under arrest?
AM, I free to go?

This is not rocket science, but we need to practice before we are put on the line individually.


I'm all for knowing your rights and making cops' lives difficult, but these were people were already under arrest and being processed at the jail. Their right to a lawyer has nothing to do with it.
2013-08-24 04:47:56 PM  
1 votes:

namatad: How confusing is this?
NO, I demand to speak to a lawyer first.
AM, I under arrest?
I free to go, good bye

This is not rocket science, but we need to practice before we are put on the line individually.


FTFY

Don't ask for your rights, exercise them.
2013-08-24 02:57:10 PM  
1 votes:
How confusing is this?
NO, I demand to speak to a lawyer first.
AM, I under arrest?
AM, I free to go?

This is not rocket science, but we need to practice before we are put on the line individually.
2013-08-24 02:43:34 PM  
1 votes:
The suit was filed after Puyallup refused to meet a settlement demand of between $10,000 and $100,000 per plaintiff.

This ^ is what it's really all about.
 
Displayed 19 of 19 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report