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