Exotic dancers who claim these people were held against their will and photographed by San Diego County police officers in a compliance raid can move forward making use of their lawsuit, a federal judge ruled this week.
The 24 dancers, who may have worked in the Cheetahs or Expose strip clubs, claim the officers violated their constitutional rights throughout the raids July 15, 2013, and March 6, 2014.
In line with the complaint, five to 15 police officers visited the clubs throughout the early-evening hours and ordered the san diego female strippers in a dressing room, where these folks were told to hold back until called, the lawsuit said.
The officers then questioned the dancers, who have been scantily clad, checked their city-issued adult entertainer permits, asked about tattoos or piercings and photographed them.
The lawsuit claims several of the officers “made arrogant and demeaning comments for the entertainers and ordered these to expose body parts so they could ostensibly photograph their tattoos.”
The dancers repeat the process lasted greater than an hour, and whenever several asked when they could leave, police threatened all of them with arrest and stationed officers with the exits, the suit says.
Lawyers for San Diego, Ca police asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the search and seizure was reasonable as laid out through the city’s permitting law, allowing police inspections of adult entertainment businesses. Police have mentioned that cataloging tattoos is a simple approach to identify dancers who regularly change their appearances.
“Submitting photographs and providing identification during reasonable inspections, to avoid losing a permit, is qualitatively different than stripping to undergarments, huddling within a dressing room for up to 1 hour, and submitting into a photo shoot that involved the exposure of intimate parts of the body, to protect yourself from arrest,” he wrote.
The judge is likewise allowing the lawsuit to visit forward on the false-imprisonment claim as well as a Monell claim, that may hold supervisors responsible for the actions of lower-ranking officers if 70dexmpky might be proven that the behavior was element of a lengthy-standing custom or practice inside the Police Department.
Even though judge agreed with all the city that three raids in a year don’t figure to a “long-standing” or “widespread” practice, the judge also cited comments by a police spokesman who told the media that such raids were routine.