Is recording women after their arrest as they undress merely for the act of security, or is it just a “peep show” as attorney James Egan described?

Twelve plaintiffs filed a lawsuit after the police of Puyallup Department were accused of recording suspects undressing and using the toilet.

CNN reported that, according to the lawsuit, “For an extended period, the Puyallup Police Department has engaged in a pattern and practice of violating the fundamental rights to bodily privacy, dignity, and unlawful searches and seizures of the inmates detained within the Puyallup Police Department’s Jail.”

Police of the department denied their “wrongdoings;” however, one of the plaintiffs expressed her great violation that was received from the police.

The police stated that the suspects are given clothes to change into for their mug shots and they simply stated that the act of recording is for “the safety of everyone” at the jail.

But certain inappropriate comments were made by the police, such as “I love red heads,” and “You have a nice body,” which brings one to question whether the act of secretly recording is to ensure the safety of the jail or merely for personal and self gratification.

Although these suspects, who were arrested for DUI, were in jail for their unlawful actions, don’t they have a level of privacy? Because of their unjust actions, should they be completely stripped of their privacy rights to the point where the police may violate them?