Remember that this particular controversy is about allowing prosecutors access to a list of "problem officers" so that they don't have to rely on their testimony in court.
It has nothing to do with ridding the sheriff department of deputies who have a record of domestic violence, brutality, theft, falsifying reports, etc. Nope, their jobs are entirely safe, regardless of how this lawsuit turns out.
The Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs argues that the disclosure would violate state laws protecting officer personnel files and draw unfair scrutiny on deputies whose mistakes might have happened long ago.
"Mistakes" made by these deputies include "domestic violence, theft, bribery and brutality".
Because who hasn't slipped up and totally accidentally brutalized someone. oops!
Why should the cost of the window come out of the pocket of the victim?
Bureaucratic hassles notwithstanding, under already-existing Arizona law, it doesn't have to.
Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-603:
C. If a person is convicted of an offense, the court shall require the convicted person to make restitution to the person who is the victim of the crime or to the immediate family of the victim if the victim has died, in the full amount of the economic loss as determined by the court and in the manner as determined by the court or the court's designee pursuant to chapter 8 of this title.
Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, said the new criminal laws are necessary.
“If they get thrown in jail, somebody pays to get them out,’’ she said. “There has to be something to deter them from that.’’
Ooh! Maybe they could also seize the assets of people who pay the bail for to get people out. And seize the assets of defense attorneys too! I mean, why stop at just an attack on the constitutional rights of protesters? Need to bring the whole criminal enterprise down, amirite?
On a related note, R-Snowflake is just a little too on-the-nose.
Like I have said here before, before crossing the border into the United States, you just simply factory reset your phone, and wipe it clean. That will solve the problem of phone searches.
The problem of phone searches is the government seizing and searching your personal property and violating your privacy without a warrant.
Deleting your data in order to protect it from the government is not a solution to this problem. It's a workaround, and a high-cost one at that. It may be advisable, it may even be necessary, but it does nothing to address the fundamental problem: This is attack on our civil and human rights.
Of course, there's lots of irony to go around here. Timothy Edgar -- who was the director of privacy and civil liberties for the White House National Security staff under Obama (and also did privacy/civil liberties work in the Bush administration) has noted that the leaking of the contents of his phone calls actually means that Flynn's own civil rights have been violated and even suggests he gives the ACLU a call (oh, and another layer of irony: Edgar has been warning about how Flynn and others in the Trump administration might trample on civil liberties... and yet here, he's arguing that Flynn's civil liberties have been violated.)
I wouldn't necessarily call that irony. On the face of it, it looks like... absence of hypocrisy. Principle, even.