In a sexting case, officer got a warrant for a photo of a 17-year-old's penis (to match it to the photos he allegedly sent).pic.twitter.com/Ck6aBaCvbo
Show this thread
4th Cir.: 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," violates the 4th Am.pic.twitter.com/zdvob9l9qw
-
-
-
Show this thread
-
Cop's estate: Warrant for a photo of a teen's penis was reasonable. It wasn't invasive. 4th Cir.: Really, profoundly, no.pic.twitter.com/8fOEjGxRFw
Show this thread -
4th Cir.: "We cannot perceive any circumstance that would justify a police search requiring an individual to masturbate in the presence of others."pic.twitter.com/TfHcvjZ5qt
Show this thread -
4th Cir.: This is one of those things that's so bad a police officer can't get immunity even though there's no case expressly saying it's a bad search.pic.twitter.com/CshkL7HIkp
Show this thread -
Judge King dissents: Search warrant requiring a teen to masturbate so police could photograph him was " entirely consistent with applicable law and the Fourth Amendment."pic.twitter.com/cbWDuFNUka
Show this thread -
Going forward, police in Del., Md., Va. and W.Va. are on notice that they cannot compel a teen to masturbate in front of them for the purpose of taking his picture, even with a warrant.
Show this thread -
New conversation -
-
-
Unreal that district court ruled the other way
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Good lord
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.