This set of questions, asked by our Supreme Court, makes me think most of them are morons.
Justice Stephen G. Breyer said that a certain amount of personal texting was to be expected. “You want to let them have a few,” Breyer said. “You need pizza when you are on duty.”
or this gem:
“He’s talking to the girlfriend,” Justice Kennedy said, and the caller “gets a voice message that says: ‘Your call is very important to us. We will get back to you.’ ”
They went straight into debating internal police department policies that they have no experience, or standing, to get into.
This is simple. Ontario PD provides a phone, or a pager, and says “you have no expectation of privacy with this device”. End of story. The officer could say “I need privacy, I quit”. Or he could say “okay, I’ll bring my own phone”. Ontario’s policy isn’t onerous. It doesn’t say no personal communication – just keep it minimal, and we are watching.
I notice no questions from Justice Scalia – he must have been bemusedly quiet as the other morons on the court had their policy discussion.
April 20th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Stupid questions. I doubt they would have gotten in trouble if the texts were just about pizza. My guess is they will o erturn the 9th circuit, as is their custom.
April 20th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
What’s left out is why they are doing all this conversing on city time. We aren’t talking about a couple of texts but numerous texts, many when they should have been working.
April 20th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
By the way, Orielly mentions it in his legal segment tonight