I don't think jail cells should have a an expectation of privacy. For that matter, especially a holding cell. Who is to say that the individual doesn't have something hidden and missed by a pat-down/search?
Jail/prison is a different category for everything.
Take for example egress codes. Jails don't automatically unlock or let people out during a fire.
However, the video should NOT be available to a public request, possibly with the execption that it is part of an investigation of an incident.
There are two things: expectation of privacy to security officers (police, etc), and expectation of privacy to the public.
Think about an elevator. Let's say you are in an elevator, all alone. And, you tuck in your shirt, ajust yourself, and pick your nose. Do you have an expectation of privacy? I believe that you do have an expectation of privacy from the public. If there are cameras in there, they should be for security use only, not a public view of everyone picking their noses.
We have a lot to discuss and determine for expectation of privacy in a 24/7 video recorded world.
In the US you do not really forfeit or lose any rights when you are arrested per say. But by committing an act against another individual you have infringed on their rights and as such forfeit some of your own. The legal system allows limiting freedom of movement (most people can bond out) and a search to provide for a safe holding environment. You are innocent until proven guilty (though in this modern police state it seems the other way around). As such you do not lose rights until convicted at a trial by an impartial judge and jury of peers.
I agree the video should only be available to the person involved or if someone in the public has other proof that the video holder had committed criminal acts and that the video would provide evidence.
They wouldn't require the divider if there wasn't some expectation to privacy. This is a very typical design for holding cells. I recently worked on a scope that involved a holding cell where the metal panel installed did not provide for adequate privacy. The federal agency involved took this as a concern and required the contractor to fix.
BTW: it made for some interesting video having the CCTV integrator stand and sit in differenct positions in the room to validate the new panel provided adequate coverage. :)
I'd like to see where the Pyallup case goes, It may depend on what type of room/facility the camera is in, but if I was a judge I would lean towards this violates privacy.
The federal standards require a divider on the locations with CCTV and toilets, but these are typical holding areas I deal with and not hardened prison areas that may require additional scrutiny (after the person has been convicted). Again release of the video should be highly controlled.
You people are removing all the entertainment value out of being incarcerated (especially for the correctional officers). Somehow I don't connect a naked Justin Beiber in a correctional institution with the need for a toilet.
Simply put, there ain't no reasonable expectation of jailhouse privacy. Expectation, maybe. Reasonable? No.
The poll becomes challenging because it's not exactly clear what is meant by the words "reasonable expectation of privacy."
I second (or third or tenth) the notion that a person in detention has a resonable expectation that they are under observation at all times.
Likewise, I concur that a person using a rest room has a reasonable expectation that these activities will not be available for public consumption.
In a typical row of "public" urinals, men do not have a reasonable expectation that nobody nearby could possibly observe them doing their business, but that doesn't make it reasonable for these activities to be (for example) broadcast on CNN.
Not quite what I intended ("nobody nearby could possibly observe them" doesn't address the social mores of attempts to do so), and some urinals like Home Depot's trough systems lack dividers, but I have to admit that your response is both colorful and funny!
Mr. Gligorich, I urge you to consider scientific publication of your results in one of the more respected journals, possibly Nature or at least Field and Stream.
Although preparation is difficult and acceptence uncertain, I believe you to have a leg up on the process since you have clearly gone beyond the call of duty and have easily overshot any and all requirements for peer review.