http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/4/19/scotus.text.messaging/index.html?hpt=Sbin
I think this situation is ridiculous. Quon signed the policy stating that his government issued phone is not for personal use, it was for work. And even though he paid his overage charges he was still in the wrong for using his phone for personal matters while on duty. I also this that becaus ethe police did a department investigation that they should have had the right to view his phone because it was issued for his job. He was not paying the bill hinself unless he went over his text messages and so I think it really wan't his phone to begin with. I don't think he should be able to sue because it wasn't his own personal phone they searched. If it were his phone that he bought and paid for I could see the issue of privacy, but it wasn't his phone and they had every right to do the investigation because they were trying to see if they should raise the limit of characters on the officers phone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The link in the post was not working when I highlighted and pasted into the address bar; however, based upon the poster's response to the article...I am in 100% agreement that the officer has no right to sue for privacy violation. This actually sounds quite ridiculous because the phone did NOT belong to him and was the property of his employment facility. He probably got caught cheating on his wife/girlfriend/etc., is now facing the consequences of that fate and wants to somehow point the blame elsewhere. Haha.
ReplyDelete