Source – A lawsuit filed Wednesday says invasive and unnecessary rectal exams followed the mass arrest of 235 people in the nation’s capital during President Donald Trump’s inauguration.
At least five people were rectally probed, the lawsuit says. And the number of demonstrators, journalists and legal advisers forced to remove their pants for the procedure may be much higher, says Scott Michelman, senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia.
“I think part of the reason this hasn’t come out more is that people are reluctant to talk about it,” says Michelman, who is representing the four original plaintiffs on the lawsuit.
“It is shameful, it is traumatic and a lot of people are still dealing with it,” he says.
Two of the lawsuit’s plaintiffs – photographer Shay Horse and demonstrator Milo Gonzalez – say they were probed by police alongside three other detainees who are not part of the lawsuit.
“Without warning,” it continues, “[the officer] grabbed Mr. Horse’s testicles and yanked on them. He then put his finger into Mr. Horse’s rectum, through his underwear. As [the officer] pushed his finger into Mr. Horse’s rectum, he ordered Mr. Horse not to flinch. [The officer] pushed his finger an inch deep into Mr. Horse’s rectum and wiggled it around for several seconds.
The officer then allegedly turned to Gonzalez.
“[The officer] then reached inside Mr. Gonzalez’s underwear and fondled his testicles,” the lawsuit says. “[The officer] reached inside Mr. Gonzalez’s underwear and put his finger into Mr. Gonzalez’s rectum. As [the officer] pushed his finger into Mr. Gonzalez’s rectum, he ordered Mr. Gonzalez not to resist. [The officer] and other officers laughed at Mr. Gonzalez while this degrading search was performed.”
The officer “did not change gloves when he moved from one individual to the next,” the lawsuit says.
“The manual rectal searches were performed in the presence of several other detainees and approximately five to ten other MPD officers, including at least one or two female officers,” the lawsuit says. “No circumstances provided reasonable suspicion or probable cause to suspect Mr. Horse or Mr. Gonzalez of concealing contraband in any body cavity. No contraband was found on either Mr. Horse or Mr. Gonzalez.”
Anytime I read “Unnecessary rectal exam” you have my undivided attention.
The times we live in you can never to be too safe and if you’re a man or woman in uniform you want to make extra sure the perp you’re patting down doesn’t have anything on them. If you want to make sure, you look inside the someone’s anus. And whats unnecessary to the person whose anus is being inspected might be very necessary to the person looking in the anus. It’s a matter of perspective. You never know what someones about until you walk a mile in their shoes. Or until you’ve looked in their asshole for contraband. Small courtesy would have been changing gloves but there were lots of bungholes to inspect and time was of the essence.
The disconcerting portion of the story to me isn’t the ass play it’s the ball fondling. They’re on the outside, and you could probably tell with a quick look as opposed to an extended testicle fondling, if the person is hiding something or not.
Having said that I’m no cop and these are dangerous times. Am I pissed when TSA goes through my luggage or tells me to take off my belt? Somewhat. But I know that’s the authority they have, and the privilege of flying carries a price. So does rioting during a Presidential Inauguration. Apparently, that price is anal spelunking. Nice to know.