Probation for ex-trooper charged over roadside cavity searches

Via the Dallas News ("Former DPS trooper gets probation, fine for illegal body cavity searches," May 23), we learn of a dissatisfyingly ambiguous outcome from the infamous 2012 episode when a Texas state trooper performed roadside cavity searches caught on dashcam video:

A former state trooper was sentenced to probation and fined Friday for performing illegal roadside body cavity searches on two women that were described as “humiliating and shamefully embarrassing.”

State District Judge Dominique Collins sentenced Kelly Helleson, 34, at the recommendation of Dallas County prosecutors after Helleson pleaded guilty to two counts of official oppression. She received a year in jail — which was suspended — and instead will serve two years of supervised probation. She must also pay a $2,000 fine. Two counts of sexual assault against Helleson were dropped.

The convictions stem from a July 13, 2012, traffic stop on the side of State Highway 161 near Irving. Angel Dobbs and her niece Ashley Dobbs were pulled over after state trooper David Farrell said he saw the women throw something out the window, according to the complaint.

Farrell called Helleson to perform the searches, which the women said she did using the same latex glove and in full view of passing motorists. The searches were captured on dashboard video camera.
 But Russell Wilson, special fields bureau chief with the [Dallas] district attorney’s office, said Helleson confessed the crime to authorities. ...

Following the incident, the Department of Public Safety changed its policy to prohibit troopers from conducting body cavity searches without search warrants.

Helleson, a state trooper for 10 years, was fired after the search and lost her peace officer’s license. Her attorney, Bob Baskett, said Friday that she has no desire to get back into law enforcement “after this crap.” ...

Farrell was indicted but later acquitted on a charge of theft by a public servant for allegedly stealing a bottle of hydrocodone pills during the search of the Dobbses’ car. DPS officials said last year that he would return to “full-duty status.”

Last June, the two victims received a $185,000 settlement from the state in a federal civil rights lawsuit. After Friday’s hearing, Angel Dobbs, 39, said she was disappointed with Helleson’s probation sentence.

Considering prosecutors walked in the door seeking felony sexual assault charges, walking out with probation and a $2,000 fine for a misdemeanor is a significant step-down, despite all the self-congratulatory rhetoric from the Dallas DA's office. Perhaps, given that DPS changed its policies after this and similar episodes to eliminate roadside cavity searches, Hellerson's claims that she was following DPS training carried some substance. We won't learn those details from the legal process, though, since the case resulted in a plea deal rather than a jury trial. Lots of records are newly available about the case under the Public Information Act now that the criminal cases are finished. This'd be a good spot for journalism to pick up the ball.

Strip searching in jail overkill for minor traffic violations

Last year the US Supreme Court okayed jails strip searching defendants upon entry, even for minor offenses. CBS-11 out of Dallas reported last week on a case in Richland Hills where a driver was arrested by the city marshal for an unpaid ticket from August (rolling through a stop sign), during which she was forced to disrobe at the jail. Reported the TV station:

[Sarah] Boaz’ expected trip to work Wednesday morning never happened. Because of her unpaid ticket, the Richland Hills City Marshal was waiting at her house with a warrant for her arrest. “I’m like, nobody puts out a bench warrant after 60 days. Why would you do that? You wouldn’t do that.”

Even when Boaz arrived at the jail, in handcuffs, she still didn’t think it was real. Then a female officer started giving her instructions. She remembered the officer saying, “’I’m going to need you to undress. I’m going to need you to stand against the wall. Please don’t step in front of this white box, or I’ll take that [as]… aggressive toward me. Obviously I am going to jail.”

CBS 11 News learned being stripped down is standard procedure for anyone brought to the jail in North Richland Hills. In an email to CBS 11 News Friday morning, the North Richland Hills Police Department said though Boaz was forced to undress, the search is not considered a strip search. In that email they said, “She was given a dress out. Before they go into the cell they are taken by a detention officer of the same sex to a private room with no cameras. They have to remove all clothing and they are given a jumpsuit. The officer searches their clothes, at no time does the officer touch them.”

Richland Hills is small enough that it only has one marshal. Warrants for unpaid tickets don’t sit around for months, like they might in larger cities.

Attorney Jason Smith told CBS 11 News though, there’s nothing requiring the city to put people in jail. “The constitution doesn’t keep the government or government officials from using common sense. Unfortunately, some police officers, some governments get overly aggressive because they want that ticket revenue.”

Ms. Boaz may perhaps be forgiven for failing to see the distinction between being forced to strip in the jail and a "strip search." The Supreme Court's ruling last year left the decision to strip search jailed defendants up to the discretion of localities, but the decision leaves no recourse when that discretion is abused. Putting drivers through that ordeal for failure to pay small-time traffic fines seems like overkill.

Another question comes to mind: Is it a good or bad thing that the room where strip searches are performed had no camera? Eliminating cameras there might prevent voyeurism on the part of other jailers, but it also means any potential abuses during the process wouldn't be documented. What do readers think?

SCOTUS okays strip searches in lockup for any offense

See SCOTUSBlog and the New York Times for inital coverage of the US Supreme Court's decision allowing strip searches of anyone, no matter what their alleged offense, in American jails.

Though Grits hopes to be wrong, I wouldn't be surprised to see Texas county jails quickly changing their policies to take advantage of this new authority unless the Legislature steps in next year to regulate the practice. Just a couple of years ago, Bexar County  paid out a $4.5 million settlement over its strip searching policy at the jail and changed their procedures so that "Only detainees charged with felony crimes or those suspected of having contraband will continue to be searched," a local TV station reported at the time.

The ruling overturns a 5th Circuit ruling previously governing jails in Texas which held that jails couldn't strip search inmates arrested for petty offenses without being able to articulate "individualized reasonable suspicion." This new ruling overturns that precedent and clears the way for Texas jails to begin strip searching every arrestee if local Sheriffs choose to do so.

I've not heard of the 5th Circuit restrictions on strip searches in jails (which have been in place since Kelly v. Foti in 1996) posing any particular problems, and IMO the Legislature should reintroduce those same restrictions when they meet in 2013. When the courts refuse to protect liberty, it's up to the other branches of government to step in.