>I certainly get the argument against the search. That said :
>
>Fellow is arrested for unpaid parking tickets, whatever. No reason to think he concealing a dangerous weapon. He is put in the tank with other people. He kills someone with a razorblade he has taped to his thigh.
>
>Is there legal liability on the part of the jail for putting those other prisoners in a potentially dangerous environment with exercising due diligence?
>
>And if not, why?

:-}
I guess that hinges on an acceptable definition of due diligence. How many people have been arrested for non-payment of a parking ticket and, on the off-chance that that might happen, have taped a razor blade to their thigh in case they had an opportunity to kill another prisoner?

>>I'm not sure if this was already posted but just in case you missed it, the Supreme Court has completely done away with the 4th amendment.
>>
>>The Supreme Court ruled Monday that jailers may subject people arrested for minor offenses to invasive strip searches, siding with security needs over privacy rights.
>>http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2012/04/supreme_court_upholds_jails_st.html
>>
>>4th Amendment : The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
>>
>>Franklin : They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.