The police chief who led a highly criticized raid of a small Kansas newspaper has been suspended, the mayor confirmed to The Associated Press on Saturday.

Marion Mayor Dave Mayfield in a text said he suspended Chief Gideon Cody on Thursday. He declined to discuss his decision further and did not say whether Cody was still being paid.

Voice messages and emails from the AP seeking comment from Cody’s lawyers were not immediately returned Saturday.

The Aug. 11 searches of the Marion County Record’s office and the homes of its publisher and a City Council member have been sharply criticized, putting Marion at the center of a debate over the press protections offered by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

  • macaroni1556@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Are you asking in good faith? It doesn’t seem like it.

    Thr article and the ones linked about the warrant lay it all out.

    • spider@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Are you asking in good faith? It doesn’t seem like it.

      Nailed it.

      Th[e] article and the ones linked about the warrant lay it all out.

      Unfortunately, some would rather argue and waste others’ time. See below for details.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Good faith. I don’t get the outrage here.

      The article above lays out nothing about the law. Just a throwaway sentence with a link to a prior story, that quoted two legal experts who disagreed about what law the search and seizure violated.

      There’s a vague allusion to potential federal criminal civil rights charges, as well as civil liability.

      That’s true if the police did something wrong. I just can’t seem to pinpoint what it is the police are alleged to have done wrong here.

      What statute, what recognized constitutional right?

      • spider@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The judge’s ruling goes against the First and Fourth Amendments (free speech, illegal search and seizure), and established case law regarding these amendments.

        • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t have to cite the cases, but what case law?

          There’s no special Fourth Amendment right for journalists. The Fourth Protects warrantless search and seizure. The police here had a warrant. If the warrant affidavit didn’t support the probable cause, how? The crime alleged seems clear to me.

          • spider@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You don’t have to cite the cases, but what case law?

            You can find that yourself.

            There’s no special Fourth Amendment right for journalists.

            Read closely, I never wrote that.

            The police here had a warrant.

            Which shouldn’t have been issued; the judge erred, and the prosecutor dropped charges against the newspaper.

            Just because the judge approved it doesn’t make it legal.

            If the warrant affidavit didn’t support the probable cause, how?

            The police chief may have misrepresented the reasons for the warrant; the pending lawsuit(s) should resolve this.

            If you think the judge and police chief are in the right here, fine; you have a right to your opinion.