from the abusing-their-own dept

Apparently, exceptions apply. The “Thin Blue Line” is the supposedly united front of law enforcement that protects society against evil. But it’s not unconditional. If you’re a good cop, you get frozen out. And, if you’re a woman, you get treated like most cops treat most women.

The “Blue Line” often seems to be the most solid when it’s depicted as something else: circling the wagons. The unwritten code of silence goes into effect when officers are accused of misconduct. What’s viewed as a jailable offense in the real world (obstructing investigations) is just considered part of the job.

What’s worse are things like this: cops are willing to violate the privacy and rights of other cops just because they’ve been given the opportunity to do so.

Following a fraud investigation, California Highway Patrol (CHP) overtime coordinator Doris Peniche was being fired after it was discovered multiple officers under her supervision got paid for overtime they never worked. (In total, 54 officers were hit with felony fraud charges.) Shortly, after that, she sued the CHP. It wasn’t because she was fired. It was because private photos and videos from her phone — which was searched during the investigation — were shared between several of her co-workers. And by co-workers, I mean her fellow cops.

Now, she’s getting a little justice, as Caroline Petrow-Cohen and James Queally report for the LA Times.

Years after a controversial overtime fraud probe, a Los Angeles County jury has awarded a former California Highway Patrol employee $1 million in damages after she sued the agency for mishandling sexual content found on her cellphone.

Doris Peniche, a former CHP overtime coordinator at the East Los Angeles office, claimed her colleagues improperly viewed and shared her sexual photos and videos after obtaining the material through a search warrant.

If you’re unhappy the LA Times has chosen to phrase non-consensual sharing of sexual content between officers as “mishandling sexual content,” you’re going to be absolutely incensed by the language used by the cops who discovered the material while executing a search warrant and decided their fellow officers should be given access to this content as well.

Lt. Martin Geller, who was author of the search warrant, discovered photos and videos of Peniche giving and receiving oral sex upon his initial review of the evidence. He told other investigating officers about the content in order to alert them, he testified.

Hmm. Doesn’t seem like photos of consensual sexual activity would be relevant to an overtime fraud investigation. And why “alert” other investigating officers? According to Geller, he claimed it was “policy” to share any “potential evidence.” But this wasn’t evidence. This was something Geller happened to see because he was searching Peniche’s phone. And that should have been something he kept to himself.

From Geller, it spread outward across the CHP. Why? Because Lt. Geller didn’t simply “alert” others to the existence of this content. He uploaded it to a shared drive accessible by other investigators, including those who weren’t actually involved with this particular investigation. That’s not an alert. That’s basically just Lt. Geller emulating Craig Brittain because he had the means and access to do so.

The worst cop-out, however, doesn’t actually come from a cop. It comes from the defense lawyer for those accused of sharing Peniche’s sexual photos and videos with other CHP officers.

Defense lawyer Joseph Wheeler said his clients appropriately reviewed the content as part of their investigation.

“You can’t determine whether something’s relevant unless you actually review it,” he said during the trial.

Wheeler attempted to place some responsibility on Peniche, arguing that she should not have allowed sexual photos of herself to be taken.

“Once that search warrant is issued for the data on your phone, any expectation of privacy is gone,” he said. “If you wanted to keep your body private, why would you let other people take photos of you?”

Classy. Blaming the victim. It was apparently at least partly Peniche’s fault this content was passed around by officers and uploaded to a shared drive. Yeah, private content is going to be accessed during search warrants. But since it was completely irrelevant to the investigation, it should have remained on her phone. It should never have been uploaded to a shared drive. And those with access to the shared drive should have approached other officers (and supervisors!) to “alert” them to its existence.

If nothing else, Doris Peniche is $1 million richer and never has to work with these assholes again. But it would be much more satisfying if these members of the Nonexistent Blue Line were expected to pay this judgment out of their own pockets while standing in the Thin Blue Unemployment Line.

Filed Under: california, chp, doris peniche, martin geller, matt lentz, melissa hammond, pedro chavez, police abuse, police misconduct, privacy, robert ruiz