The Supreme Court announced Monday it will rule on sext privacy: whether a boss can read the X-rated text messages employees send on their work phones.
At issue is a California cop who sent reams of steamy texts on his SWAT pager to his mistress.
The case is the first time the courts have addressed the privacy of wireless communications, and the high court's final decision could have far-reaching effects.
"This could change the whole legal landscape of electronic monitoring at work," said Lew Maltby, president of the National Workrights Institute.
Last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation's most liberal, ruled that Sgt. Jeff Quon could expect his dirty messages to remain private.
The reason? Department policy was to let cops text at will and simply charge them for going over a monthly character limit. The Ontario, Calif., officers were told informally that the content of their wireless messages would not be read.
Lt. Steve Duke, who was in charge of figuring out the overage payments, testified that in 2002 he got "tired of being a bill collector" and complained to the police chief about all the extra texting.
Ontario Police Chief Lloyd Scharf then asked Arch Wireless for transcripts of the top texter - Quon. The company promptly handed them over.
Quon's texts totalled 46 pages and many of them were explicit sexual messages to his mistress, dispatcher April Florio; his wife, Jerilyn Quon; and his buddy, fellow SWAT Officer Steve Trujillo.
"i was hoping u could sneak over and spend some time with me? r u mad at me?" he wrote to Florio in one of the few printable exchanges. "i really do miss your tight [rear]."
"We have so much fun don't we?" she replied.
Another text to Florio read, "what r u wearing?"
The sexy exchanges with Florio are interrupted by messages from his wife about paying the cable bill and Trujillo asking about engraving a knife for the lieutenant.
Scharf ordered an internal affairs investigation to see if sexy texting was happening when the cops were supposed to be on-duty.
In an unrelated case, Florio was then fired for conspiring with other dispatchers to alert one of their boyfriends, a member of the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang, that a narc was on his tail.
Further complicating the privacy arguments, Internal Affairs also wanted to read Quon's messages looking for evidence against Florio.
The city of Ontario and Arch Wireless, held liable by the 9th Circuit for invading Quon's privacy, appealed to the Supreme Court.
The players expect the case to be heard by the high court in the late Spring.
The decision, forged on the frontier of privacy rights in the electronic age, could have widespread effects on the privacy of various communications, including emails.
Maltby said privacy advocates have been nervously watching the case wind through the courts.
"We are all holding our breath," he said. "Most of us are afraid the court will do the wrong thing."
Los Angeles lawyer Kent Richland, who will argue the case against Quon before the high court, said it was not reasonable for a police officer to expect his messages on an official pager to remain private.
"The city had made it clear than any messages that were sent using the city's equipment were subject to inspection," he said.
He said that under California's open records law, the texts were open to the public - another reason not to expect privacy.
The text message suit is not the only privacy lawsuit Quon has filed against his bosses.
He and several other cops sued the city in 2003 - and won $2.75 million earlier this year - for violations of their privacy when the police chief put a video camera in the men's locker room in 1996 to catch a flashlight thief.
No comments:
Post a Comment
We appreciates all comments and fosters free speech, however, keep in mind that we have young readers who peruse our site. Having said that, please refrain from using profane language, and know that flaming will not be tolerated. Spam will not be tolerated.