Case 2:20-cv-09582-JFW-E Document 367 Filed 08/03/22 Page 16 of 22 Page ID #:31186
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
such as “high speed police chases”—the more demanding “purpose to harm” standard applies. Id. at 1137. When the officer’s conduct is more akin to negligence, courts have found such conduct insufficient to “shock the conscience.” For example, in Jones v. Jinparn, No. C 19-02817 SBA, 2020 WL 999806, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2020), the plaintiffs alleged that a police officer failed to make reasonable efforts to contact the decedent’s heirs before releasing the body for cremation. The court there reasoned that the officer’s conduct “sounds, at most, in negligence.” Id. at *5. “The Due Process Clause serves to protect the individual from the abuse of governmental power” and thus is not implicated by a negligent act. Id. By contrast, in Shelley v. County of San Joaquin, 996 F. Supp. 2d 921 (E.D. Cal. 2014), plaintiffs, who were the decedent’s family members, alleged that defendants violated their right to privacy by engaging in large-scale digging to exhume the decedent’s remains, which caused the remains to be “chewed up, pulverized, destroyed, crushed and commingled with other unknown murder victims” in the presence of the decedent’s mother and before news media. Id. at 931. The court concluded such conduct was likely to cause the family “profound grief” and therefore shocks the conscience. Id. (citation omitted). Here, the officers’ conduct at issue is more akin to that in Jones than in Shelley. First, with respect to the taking and internal sharing of photos among County personnel, the evidence will show that site photography at an incident is both appropriate and common practice in both the Fire and Sheriff’s Departments. Such photos are used, among other things, to provide intel, to assess the progress of an incident response, and to facilitate training post-incident. Indeed, some of the photos taken by County personnel here were shared with the NTSB to assist them in their investigation of the crash. With respect to Plaintiffs’ allegations that photos were shared with people outside the County or outside the confines of County business, Plaintiffs’ case is
570887.2 11 DEFENDANTS’ TRIAL BRIEF
Source: Basketball - nytimes.com
