SAN FRANCISCO – A federal appeals court has decided that a police department acted within its rights when it fired an officer for operating a website featuring sexually explicit material. Ronald Dible and his wife, Megan, launched the adult site in 2000, and charged users for viewing explicit pictures and videos.
Dible was fired in 2002, when the SFPD discovered the site and claimed Dible’s conduct — though it was unrelated to his job — hurt the department's public image.
Although he initially denied involvement with the site, Dible filed suit against the police department in 2003, claiming violation of his free speech rights.
“His activities were simply vulgar and indecent,” Judge Ferdinand Fernandez — who upheld a lower court decision — told the San Francisco Chronicle. “They did not contribute speech on a matter of public concern.” The second member of the three-judge panel, Chief Judge Mary Schroeder, agreed with Fernandez.
The ruling raises questions about what employees can and cannot do with their free time.
Several officers testified against Dible at his disciplinary hearing, claiming that because of the site, they had become the objects of ridicule within the community.
According to the Chronicle, the appeals court cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2004 that allowed San Diego to fire a police officer who had made and sold sexually explicit videos of himself, stripping out of a police uniform.
Judge William Canby broke away from the panel by disagreeing with the ruling, saying that Dible’s initial denial of the site would be the only valid grounds for his dismissal. Canby told the Chronicle that police officers, like other public employees, have a right to free expression outside the workplace that is unrelated to their job, even if some find it objectionable.
