See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Strip-search ruling may aid suits against jails
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.northjersey.com/news/crimeandcourts/39479757.html
Published: Feb 13, 2009
Author: PETER J. SAMPSON
Post Date: 2009-02-13 08:01:50 by Jethro Tull
Keywords: None
Views: 115
Comments: 7
Strip-search ruling may aid suits against jails Thursday, February 12, 2009 BY PETER J. SAMPSON NorthJersey.com STAFF WRITER A federal judge's ruling that blanket strip searches at two county jails violated the constitutional rights of people detained for minor offenses is likely to add ammunition to similar class-action suits pending against Bergen and other counties in New Jersey, a plaintiffs' lawyer said Wednesday. The ruling last week by U.S. District Judge Joseph H. Rodriguez clears the way for upwards of 10,000 people — arrested for petty crimes or violations such as failure to pay child support — to claim damages for being unlawfully strip-searched at the Burlington County Jail and the Essex County Correctional Facility since 2003, said New York attorney Susan Chana Lask. After 3 1/2 years of litigation, Lask said it will now be up to a jury to determine the amount of monetary damages to be shared by class members as compensation for the humiliation they endured. Rodriguez ruled in a class-action suit brought by Albert Florence, 33, a finance director from Bordentown. Stopped by a state trooper in Burlington County in March 2005, he was arrested on a 2003 bench warrant mistakenly issued for a fine that had already been paid. At the jail, he was directed to disrobe completely, turn around and lift his genitals as an officer sat a yard away. Six days later, Florence was transferred to the Essex jail where he was strip-searched again. This time, he and several other arrestees were instructed to disrobe in separate shower stalls, lift their genitals and "squat and cough" in unison in front of two officers. Florence was released the next day when the charges against him were dismissed. "It was a tremendous, horrible experience," Florence said Wednesday at a news conference in Newark. "I can't even use an adjective to describe it. It wasn't a good or pleasurable experience." Officials in Burlington and Essex counties declined to discuss the ruling but vowed to appeal. In court, the two counties argued their intake procedures and policies are constitutional. Burlington said its search policy is not only necessary to prevent smuggling of contraband but also to identify gang members — through body markings, tattoos and piercings – and keep them apart to avert violence that could erupt if rivals are placed in the same cell. It also cited health concerns. Neither county offered any evidence of a smuggling problem at their facilities, the judge noted. The counties also failed to produce any documentation of a reasonable suspicion to justify searches of non-indictable detainees, Lask said. The ruling adds authority to the case law in New Jersey and is likely to buttress the position of plaintiffs in similar class actions, such as those pending against Bergen, Atlantic, Middlesex and Union counties, Lask said. "You can't help but follow it. It's a very well-written, reasoned decision," said Lask. "It follows the law so completely that I think everyone else is going to follow it." "No case in New Jersey has gone this far or has had a decision of liability against them," said Lask, noting the eventual award to individual class members could range from $2,000 to up to $10,000 if the counties fail to correct their practices. In the past 18 months, Camden and Cumberland counties settled similar class-action suits for $7.5 million and $4.5 million, respectively. In November, Mercer County agreed to a $1.8 million payout and a proposed $640,000 settlement is awaiting judicial approval in Salem County. In Bergen County, two plaintiffs are seeking to represent a class of minor offenders who were strip-searched at the county jail from March 6, 2006, to the present. E-mail: sampson@northjersey.com A federal judge's ruling that blanket strip searches at two county jails violated the constitutional rights of people detained for minor offenses is likely to add ammunition to similar class-action suits pending against Bergen and other counties in New Jersey, a plaintiffs' lawyer said Wednesday. The ruling last week by U.S. District Judge Joseph H. Rodriguez clears the way for upwards of 10,000 people — arrested for petty crimes or violations such as failure to pay child support — to claim damages for being unlawfully strip-searched at the Burlington County Jail and the Essex County Correctional Facility since 2003, said New York attorney Susan Chana Lask. After 3 1/2 years of litigation, Lask said it will now be up to a jury to determine the amount of monetary damages to be shared by class members as compensation for the humiliation they endured. Rodriguez ruled in a class-action suit brought by Albert Florence, 33, a finance director from Bordentown. Stopped by a state trooper in Burlington County in March 2005, he was arrested on a 2003 bench warrant mistakenly issued for a fine that had already been paid. At the jail, he was directed to disrobe completely, turn around and lift his genitals as an officer sat a yard away. Six days later, Florence was transferred to the Essex jail where he was strip-searched again. This time, he and several other arrestees were instructed to disrobe in separate shower stalls, lift their genitals and "squat and cough" in unison in front of two officers. Florence was released the next day when the charges against him were dismissed. "It was a tremendous, horrible experience," Florence said Wednesday at a news conference in Newark. "I can't even use an adjective to describe it. It wasn't a good or pleasurable experience." Officials in Burlington and Essex counties declined to discuss the ruling but vowed to appeal. In court, the two counties argued their intake procedures and policies are constitutional. Burlington said its search policy is not only necessary to prevent smuggling of contraband but also to identify gang members — through body markings, tattoos and piercings – and keep them apart to avert violence that could erupt if rivals are placed in the same cell. It also cited health concerns. Neither county offered any evidence of a smuggling problem at their facilities, the judge noted. The counties also failed to produce any documentation of a reasonable suspicion to justify searches of non-indictable detainees, Lask said. The ruling adds authority to the case law in New Jersey and is likely to buttress the position of plaintiffs in similar class actions, such as those pending against Bergen, Atlantic, Middlesex and Union counties, Lask said. "You can't help but follow it. It's a very well-written, reasoned decision," said Lask. "It follows the law so completely that I think everyone else is going to follow it." "No case in New Jersey has gone this far or has had a decision of liability against them," said Lask, noting the eventual award to individual class members could range from $2,000 to up to $10,000 if the counties fail to correct their practices. In the past 18 months, Camden and Cumberland counties settled similar class-action suits for $7.5 million and $4.5 million, respectively. In November, Mercer County agreed to a $1.8 million payout and a proposed $640,000 settlement is awaiting judicial approval in Salem County. In Bergen County, two plaintiffs are seeking to represent a class of minor offenders who were strip-searched at the county jail from March 6, 2006, to the present.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
Too bad the "authorities" weren't held to be personally liable. Hold them to that standard and they will think twice about pulling crap like this. The "just following orders" excuse holds no water. It didn't work at Nuremberg and it won't work now.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files
I see a future 5-4 decision reinstating these searches...
Having worked in a prison, I can honestly say the the arguments used by the police in this instance have legitimate creditably. Just because a person is arrested for a minor offense does not mean that person is not a serious threat to the officers. A person arrested for Jay walking may have just murdered a street vendor, or mugged a little old lady -- or have a criminal record in another state. Strip searching arrestees ensures that they are not armed; it also is useful in identifying gang members. Weapons are a serious concern in any confinement facility; both inmate and staff safety are at risk if weapons are available to other inmates. Strip searching reduces that threat level to tolerable levels. Identifying gang members has, unfortunately, become a major concern for both prison cops and street cops. Gangs are growing in this nation and innocent people are being victimized by them. Authority wants to know who those gang- bangers are to gain as much info on the gangs as possible in order to stomp them out. Look people, you may hate cops, but they are needed. Good people sleep peaceably at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. Criminals will prey on you if given half the chance. People like me, however, do our best to get those thugs off the street and into a confinement facility to protect you. Stop making our jobs harder by limiting how we can do our jobs. RO
Uh...no offense...but why are rough, criminal, thugs like Cheney, Libby, Feith, Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Perle, Rahmbo, Negroponte, Berger, Madoff et al still walking the streets and living in luxurious surroundings?
Just because someone is arrested for a minor offense does not mean that person is not carrying a weapon, doesn't have drugs in his possession or that his gang affiliation should be ignored. I worked in a medium-level prison for more than seven years. I've confronted inmates with drugs, weapons and several who had a serious intent to escape. Should I have let those poor 'victims of society' have a free ride? Should I have let them kill me? Should I have let them shoot up their heroin? Should I have let them escape to prey on good people like you? I have strip searched thousands of inmates. I have caught inmates with knives up their asses, drugs and money, too. Are these things that I should have ignored? Are these things that street cops should ignore when they strip search people who have been arrested, regardless of why they were arrested? I can just imagine the headlines in the local newspapers when it is revealed that an arrestee murdered two persons in the local jail because the jailers did not search him. Golly, wouldn't such a situation result in a multi-million dollar law suit? If you people think that working with criminals is like working with a steno in the office, you've got something to rethink. Criminals -- whether suspected or convicted -- are a clear and present danger to custody staff. Yet you applaud a court decision that puts both inmate and staff in dire danger because some cry baby didn't like being strop searched when he was arrested. Maybe the punk should have paid his bills or not got drunk and driven a car; humm? If you keep putting obstacles in the path of law enforcement officials, then all you will achieve is a society filled with criminals who prey upon people like you. And that is something that you don't ever want. RO
Well then perhaps you and other staff members should have been strip searched daily since you were the means for the introduction of most of the contraband.
You're right. 100% right, in everything you said, when it comes to your and the inmates safety. Anytime someone enters custody you simply cannot allow those things inside. What I have a problem with is people being put inside over trivial matters and then being further degraded by these searches. Look at what they were arrested for.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files
#2. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
#3. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
Burlington said its search policy is not only necessary to prevent smuggling of contraband but also to identify gang members — through body markings, tattoos and piercings – and keep them apart to avert violence that could erupt if rivals are placed in the same cell. It also cited health concerns.
#4. To: ReallyOrnery (#3)
Look people, you may hate cops, but they are needed. Good people sleep peaceably at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. Criminals will prey on you if given half the chance. People like me, however, do our best to get those thugs off the street and into a confinement facility to protect you.
#5. To: PSUSA (#1)
#6. To: ReallyOrnery (#5)
(Edited)
#7. To: ReallyOrnery (#5)
(Edited)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest