[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/news/ - Current News



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: copbrute.jpg (24 KB, 300x433)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20171205/16092838751/appeals-court-forcing-teen-to-masturbate-so-cops-can-take-pictures-is-clear-violation-rights.shtml
by Tim Cushing
Wed, Dec 6th 2017

Appeals Court: Forcing A Teen To Masturbate So Cops Can Take Pictures Is A Clear Violation Of Rights

from the well-no-shit dept

I cannot imagine what it must be like as an appellate court judge to have to write these words (h/t Brad Heath):

“Construing the facts in the light most favorable to [Trey] Sims, a reasonable police officer would have known that attempting to obtain a photograph of a minor child’s erect penis, by ordering the child to masturbate in the presence of others, would unlawfully invade the child’s right of privacy under the Fourth Amendment.”

I don't know which is sadder: the fact that this case -- the absolute nadir (so far!) of stupid teen sexting prosecutions -- even exists or that the lower court somehow found in favor of the officer (now deceased) being sued.

A cop engaged in the act of producing child pornography by attempting to force a teen to arouse himself while surrounded by police officers supposedly for the purpose of matching the teen's erect penis to photos the cop already had in his possession as part of a sexting "investigation." The officer was told by prosecutors to do this, which shows the twisted logic of this abhorrent request didn't spring entirely from the mind of Detective David Abbott. He, however, did not turn down the prosecution's request. The prosecutor who ordered this "production" of evidence was Claiborne Richardson. Unfortunately, he has the sort of immunity cops like Abbott can only wish they had: absolute immunity. Richardson walks away from this with little more than reputational damage.

cont.
>>
>>205270

There's a judge out there somewhere with their name scrawled across a granted warrant request ordering a teenager to produce an erection for cops. Actually, there's two of them, though both go unnamed in the decision [PDF]. (Oral arguments are embedded at the bottom of the post.) From the dissent's[!] footnote:

“On this record, search warrants were issued on June 3, 2014, and again on July 1, 2014, by two different magistrates. See Supp. J.A. 72, 76. The June warrant was the only one executed. In executing the June warrant, Abbott was unable to obtain some of the photos being sought. Because the prosecutor and the detective agreed that additional photos were necessary, Abbott was directed to seek the July warrant. That warrant was never executed and was voided.”

And there's the judge who heard the prosecution's request to get this warrant and said that was fine. That judge's name is Jan Roltsch-Anoll. All of these justice system components worked together to put a teen in a room full of cops with the instructions to masturbate so a detective could take photos.

Abbott's representation was willing to take a chance on seeing the lower court's awful immunity decision upheld, despite there being nothing remotely sane -- much less Fourth Amendment-compliant -- about law enforcement's actions. Detective Abbott's survivors continue his fight for him as Abbott killed himself in late 2015 as police tried to arrest him for allegedly molesting two teens he met coaching youth hockey. (Make of that what you will.)
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals finds nothing at all to like about Abbott's pleas for qualified immunity.

cont.
>>
>>205271

“Abbott’s search directed at forcing Sims to achieve an erection intruded “upon an area in which our society recognizes a significantly heightened privacy interest.” See Winston v. Lee, 470 U.S. 753, 767 (1985). Requiring Sims to masturbate in the presence of others, like searches involving physical penetration of genitalia, constituted “the ultimate invasion of personal dignity.” Amaechi, 237 F.3d at 363-64; see also King, 825 F.3d at 215.

Moreover, we observe that this sexually intrusive search was rendered more egregious by being conducted in a manner that would instill fear in Sims. See Edwards, 666 F.3d at 884-85. Here, Sims alleged that he was “surrounded” by three armed officers as he questioned whether he was required to submit to Abbott’s orders. Upon Abbott’s insistence, Sims ultimately attempted to comply. Sims further alleged that the search caused him to suffer emotional harm. Winston, 470 U.S. at 761-63 (explaining that intrusions without risk of physical harm nonetheless damage the individual’s sense of personal privacy and security). Accordingly, both the outrageous scope of the sexually intrusive search and the intimidating manner in which the search was conducted weigh strongly against any finding that the search was reasonable.

We cannot perceive any circumstance that would justify a police search requiring an individual to masturbate in the presence of others.”

cont.
>>
>>205273

Abbott's estate argued the search violated no clear precedent. In other words, no comparative case had reached this level in the justice system and found ordering a teen to masturbate in front of police officers (while one of them photographed him) was a clearly established violation of the Fourth Amendment. The court agrees, but notes there's a very good goddamn reason why there's no precedent exactly on point with this abysmal abuse of power.

“We further observe that the Administrator is not entitled to invoke qualified immunity simply because no other court decisions directly have addressed circumstances like those presented here. See Clem, 284 F.3d at 553. For good reason, most outrageous cases of constitutional violations rarely are litigated. See K.H. ex rel. Murphy v. Morgan, 914 F.2d 846, 851 (7th Cir. 1990) (explaining that never before had there been a case accusing welfare officials of selling foster children into slavery, but those officials nevertheless would not be entitled to immunity). Abbott’s conduct affronted the basic protections of the Fourth Amendment, which at its core protects personal privacy and dignity against unjustified intrusion by governmental actors.”

The dissent actually believes Abbott should still be granted immunity because a) he obtained warrants and b) he consulted with Commonwealth prosecutors (namely, Claiborne Richardson, whose reputation should be just as worthless as Abbott's) before obtaining them. If we follow this line of thinking, we are being asked to absolve all officers of egregious misconduct so long as certain procedural steps are followed before they go off the deep end. In fact, it asks to reward officers (and other government employees) who can find support from equally-questionable colleagues for their actions. According to the dissent, the whole rotten barrel should be excused from punishment because the rot was caused by several bad apples, rather than a single, rogue actor.

cont.
>>
>>205274

Even worse, if you're going to choose a qualified immunity hill to die on, why would you choose the one containing cops and prosecutors taking photographs of a masturbating teen? What possible public service could a decision in the detective's favor possibly provide? All it would do is create one more line an Appeals Court has yet to draw, allowing cops to force minors to strip and masturbate as long as they have a warrant. But that's what Judge Robert B. King apparently wants: no precedential declaration that forcing minors to masturbate in the presence of officers is a clear violation of established rights. But that's the way the system works. It so insulates police officers and prosecutors from accountability, no one at the bottom level of this pathetic prosecutorial food chain took any action to stop this from happening until after two warrants were issued and one was executed.

True fact: people in these positions can stop at any time. They don't need to wait for clearly-established precedent from high-level federal courts. No one forces prosecutors to suggest taking photos of a teen's erect penis and insane requests from prosecutors can always be turned down by law enforcement officers. But no one did anything to head off the clear rights violation. And once it was done, Detective Abbott tried to Nuremberg his way out of it and the Commonwealth's attorney -- Claiborne Richardson -- ducked out of the public eye as soon as the shit started hitting the fan. The legacy of everyone involved, from the detective executing the warrant to the juvenile court judge who granted time for it to be executed should be tarnished forever.

FIN
>>
If he achieved an erection while several cops surrounded and acted menacingly towards him, color me impressed.

Also, what the fuck?
>>
holy shit. this is fucking golden. what a time to be alive where a fucking group of cops is making cp for "investigational purposes"
>>
>>205357
a photo of a naked child is not intrinsically cp if it's for an ostensibly valid purpose, even if its close up genital shot. obviously they severely impinged on the kid's rights, but they factually did not make cp.
>>
>>205384
>a pic of a child masturbating with a boner is not intrinsically cp
>"Federal law defines child pornographyas any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old). Images of child pornographyare also referred to aschildsexual abuse images."
>a minor masturbating, getting an erection, and getting his photo taken
>not child sexual abuse
>not child pornography

>if its for an ostensibly valid purpose
can you give an example of a reason to make a child get an erection and take a picture of a childs erection that is in any way valid at all?
>inb4 physical trauma/medical setting
adult penes work fine for anatomy reasons, and dont require a kid, or anyone really, to jack off. any photo taken of a child who has been injured is property of the child and its parents and is confidential thanks to doctor/patient confidentiality, and no medical procedure you would perform on a child would not require inducing and photographing a kiddie boner. yes plural for penis is penes etymologically
>>
Court says alleged pedophile police officer violated rights of minor ordering them to masturbate in front of camera, but minor is not a victim of child pornography
http://archive.is/58AiU
2-1 decision, dissenting Judge Robert King says officer David Abbott's humiliating treatment of the teenager was justified search warrant. and was not of lasvicious nature

David Abott committed suicide during an attempt by police to apprehend Abott of several alleged pedophilia charges, David Abott prior to death had sued the teenager's lawyer for defamation claiming psychological stress for being accused of pedophillia
http://archive.is/Uu3Uy

Manasas City police dept publicaly denied that the search warrant demanding a photo of the minor's genitalia was executed
http://archive.is/AJecC
>>
>>205390
the human body is not intrinsically sexually explicit. that includes boners.
you're also directly lying to me by claiming they took a picture of him masturbating. they didn't. why bother making up such a dumb lie? just makes you look pathetic and desperate to have an argument.

>can you give an example of a reason to make a child get an erection and take a picture of a childs erection that is in any way valid at all?
if he committed a sex crime involving his penis, and the victim described his erect penis, and they wanted a photo of his erect penis that experts and jurors could compare to the victim's descriptions. this exact scenario occurs frequently in criminal sex cases.

>and no medical procedure you would perform on a child would not require inducing and photographing a kiddie boner.
you mean 'would require'? and i bet there could be a medical situation where a photo of a kids boner might help a doctor in some way for that particular kid. for example the family pediatrician might need some sort of kid-dick expert's opinion on a prognosis and who happens to be out of town and cant show up in person.
>>
>>205491
>you look at the dick that rapes you not the body or face
>>
>>205384
So if he sent dick pics it's actually not sexting, since he didn't send a pic of him masturbating?
>>
>>205494
this may come as a surprise but anyone that has seen your face can describe your face but only someone who's seen your penis can accurately describe your penis.

>>205499
>for a valid purpose
the purpose of sexting is intrinsically sexual, therefore it would constitute cp.
>>
>>205384
It's child pornography by any reasonable definition of the word.
>>
>>205505
except not only does the court disagree with you, but all reasonable definitions of the word disagree with you as well, not that you've actually looked up any of those definitions and are relying purely on your own indignation as an argument.

the police abused the child and his rights, but they factually did not produce child porn. so cry impotently as long as you want.
>>
>>205508
You are talking about a picture of a person who is engaged in a sex act. These cops can't claim that it isn't porn because it's evidence any more than you or I could compel a minor to masturbate for a camera and claim that it isn't porn because it's really art or educational material.
>>
>>205508
So the pictures weren't CP. But didn't they watch CP if they were in the same room with a masturbating minor?
>>
Now watch the same asshats from /pol/, that think lo'll icon is CP, claim the cops weren't creating child pornography and weren't violating anyone's rights.

Take your greasy Russian loving Racist shit stained ass and kys.
>>
>>205508
>all reasonable definitions of the word disagree with you as well
No, you're just fucking retarded.
>>
>>205509
>You are talking about a picture of a person who is engaged in a sex act.
No I'm not, you retard. An erection is not a sexual act, it's not any kind of act. Why do you HAVE to lie to make an argument?

>>205510
What kind of delirious retardation is this? Porn is media. Real life is not media. It's real life. They were abusing a child, but they had nothing to do with the production of child porn. Why do you have such a hard time coming to terms with this irrefutable fact?
>>
>>205515
>masturbation
>not a sex act
Now that it's out in the open that your defense of these child molesters is based on this assertion, I think my job is done.
>>
>>205513
Okay you impotent braindead asswipe, what is a reasonable definition of child porn?

>>205518
They weren't taking photos of him masturbating you lying faggot.
>>
>>205519
>tell somebody to jack off until they are visibly aroused so that you can take a picture
>it's not a picture of them masturbating
Why are you even still trying?
>>
Well he's dead now, sad but this cop was probably molested as a child himself, which doesn't excuse this sort of behavior but might explain why he thought that doing such a thing was acceptable.
>>
>>205520
>take a picture of someone who isn't masturbating
>it's a picture of someone masturbating
why do you feel the urge to keep embarrassing yourself over and over?
>>
>>205522
Anon you seem a tad too defensive over this even for this site, and that’s saying something, you might want to reconsider your priorities if your honestly trying to defend this retarded miscarriage of a situation.
>>
>>205523
I think he's the prosecutor who is just bitter because his scheme to obtain free cp fell on its face
>>
>>205522
>alright, start jacking off
>yeah, get it nice and hard
>that's perfect, move your hand so I can get a picture of that
>"This picture is not cp because at the time it was taken the subject was not masturbating."
>>
>>205523
>s-shit i have no comeback w-what do i do now
glad it's settled then. sorry you had to be such a pathetic sniveling little faggot about it instead of just admitting when you're wrong.

>>205528
That greentext is correct and the picture wouldn't be cp, assuming the purpose of the picture was for something other than sexual purposes IE to be used as evidence in a court case. Forcing the kid through that was itself abusive, as I've said in almost every post.
>>
>>205270
I'm getting heavy vibes of when the police pretty much scared a kid into suicide.
>>
>>205508
>court disagrees
>pedophile with two other men with guns orders minor to masturbate in front of him while he takes a picture
>not CP
>>
>>205558
So you think it was abusive, but that it wasn't cp?
Just neck yourself you autist fucking hell
>>
Are all US judges kiddy fiddlers?
Asking for a friend.
>>
>Land of the Free

Didn't some cop literally just get off after executing some guy in a hallway?
>>
>>205571
>I'm getting heavy vibes of when the police pretty much scared a kid into suicide.


The kid didn't kill himself, the pedo cop later killed himself when he was being investigated on _other_ pedo charges.
>>
>>205902
something is only abusive when it's cp? how about you "neck" yourself you pathetic worthless autistic faggot.
>>
ACAB
C
A
B
>>
>>205384
this is why you dont let autismos into positions of power
>>
>>206004
yes we're all glad you're not in power
>>
>>205999
>>205902
Neck both yourselves you pathetic worthless autistic faggots.
>>
>>205384
Legally an erection from masturbating is CP regardless of any purpose, full stop.
>>
>>205275
>All it would do is create one more line an Appeals Court has yet to draw, allowing cops to force minors to strip and masturbate as long as they have a warrant.


This is just wrong, and the basic mistake of this whole thread.

This isn't a decision over whether cops should be allowed to do this OR this cop should be prosecuted, the decision on the first is already made, this is entirely about the 2nd. Police being at risk of prosecution for obeying judicial orders (if those orders are later overturned, which is EXTREMELY common in the US), is problematic.

Any use of rape kits on a minor, for example....would you do it? You've got a court order...but you heard someone in another county ended up in prison for child abuse when their court order was [years] later ruled wrongly given.


"only obeying orders" being a legitimate excuse sounds straight outta the reich, but it's also an absolute requirement of having a judiciary.
>>
>>205384
They took sexual photos of a child. In any other country they'd have already been fucking shot.
>>
>>205270
All cops should be put in prison.
>>
>>206110
who will run the prisons if cops are in there?
>>
>>205356
lolol
>>
>>205384
Everyone look , a pedophile
>>
>>205938
Only if your family is really rich.

>>206112
Prison guards, paid by the private corporations that own prisons/jails/whatever you call them, themselves paid by the government (aka taxes) corrupted by prison corp share owners.
>>
>>205273
>We cannot perceive any circumstance that would justify a police search requiring an individual to masturbate in the presence of others.
We cannot perceive any circumstance that would justify a police search requiring an individual to masturbate.
why not just end it there?
looking for real answers
>>
>>205270
More based cops! Time to put these ungrateful civvies in their place. MAGA! And no faggots, I'm not being a sarcastic or trolling. Talk shit about the police, you get the boot cuck. Obey the law.
>>
this is just fucking stupid plain and simple. what is this world coming to?
>>
>>206648
If you need a sperm sample to decrypt some kind of advanced biometric device, maybe. In legalese you need to have compelling public interest to force the person to comply with such an invasive type of search, in which case maybe bypassing the biometric is the only way to defuse a bomb or get into a terrorist hideout or some James Bond shit like that.
>>
>>205986
yeah but our freedom is measured with a $ sign according to the supreme court.
>>
>>205521
From what Ive gathered its more likely that he was just a "just followed orders" guy scared to lose his job. As usual the man giving the orders is immune to consequences.
>>
>>207804
>From what Ive gathered its more likely that he was just a "just followed orders" guy scared to lose his job.

The cop is the one who suggested the "search" procedure and the prosecutor then agreed with it and got the warrant.

The same cop later killed himself after he came under investigation for additional and unrelated gay pedo charges, so this clearly wasn't the cop's first time pulling this kinda shit.
>>
>>206648
You could possibly ask someone to fap into a test tube. In that case, you give him a test tube, a few porn magazines, a room that closes and some lone time. Even then, you can take DNA with a cotton swab in the mouth, sperm is only needed for reproduction and James Bond porn parody scenario.
Looking at someone fapping is super creepy (or kinda kinky as a couple thing.)

>>206655
We're talking about people disobeying the law by forcing a kid to produce child pornography.
>>
Getcha dick out
>>
Remember drones, #BlueLivesMatter!
Don't mind us as we brutalize the people and gun down unarmed workers begging for their lives, be sure to vote to expand the police state and the prison-industrial-complex!

>>207804
The "just following orders" defense was bullshit during the Nuremburg trials and its bullshit now, both the cops and the guys calling the shots are scum. If you're ordered to perform heinous crimes then you should go against those orders.
>>
>>207852
look at all those citations
>>
>>210011
In reality people are meek and tend to just follow orders. It's didn't work at Nuremberg because they were Nazis, and those have no rights.
>>
Fucking sick straight up anybody else would be arrested for child porn
>>
this is literally the reason why i come to 4chan here and there. just to hope to find some crazy shit and laugh at all the things going on. yeah theres a lot of fucked up shit but dan some of this is hilarious on different standpoints.
>>
>>210011
Who is more guilty, the one proposing to let a child masturbate in a room full of cops or the one saying: "okay, do it"?
>>
>>210055

Who is more of a bitch, Rosie O'Donnell or Hillary Clinton?
>>
>>205356
Plot twist: being watched by a group of big guys forcing him to masturbate in front of a camera is just down his alley of fetishes
>>
>>205390
>can you give an example of a reason to make a child get an erection and take a picture of a childs erection that is in any way valid at all?

I don't understand why he couldn't give the most obvious answer...
3 murders have been committed, all of them had a witness or a camera catching the crime, and they all saw the same thing, a boy dressed fully in black, the only thing that could be seen was his erect penis as he murdered those people.
The witness said he sounded like a young boy although the only thing said witness heard the murderer say was "choo choo here comes the train" which the victim had apparently replied to while bleeding out with "nooo, it's too big", the witness said that the last words heard by the assailant just before he thrusted a 10" blade into the victims skull was "for you".




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.