Cops Strip Search 6 Kids, Including a Toddler, After Mom Took Too Long to Buy Muffins

 In the land of the free, taking ten minutes during a store to shop for muffins is like robbing a bank or selling heroin.

At least that is the way it played out when Holly Curry ran inside the Cobbler's Cafe to shop for her six children some muffins for breakfast and came out ten minutes later to seek out two cops expecting her.

This visit from police would end with all six of these kids being stripped naked by police and a family's rights being severely violated.

The good news is that in a particularly rare more, the cops who strip-searched children and threatened their mother were just denied qualified immunity.

As Reason Magazine reports in the week , Curry sued the cop and therefore the caseworker, insisting that the day she was investigated for maltreatment , the 2 authorities so overstepped their bounds that they ought to not be afforded qualified immunity.

In other words, their behavior was so egregious, that they had to require responsibility for it.

As we reported at the time, it had been 67 degrees that day on March 30, 2017, so Curry - who was on her thanks to bring her 5-year-old to karate practice - thought it might be easier to go away the youngsters within the car than bring all of them into the Cafe.

Statistically speaking, leaving the youngsters within the car is way safer than herding them through a busy parking zone .

The police didn't care about statistics.

When Curry came out, the officers told her she was being detained.

Curry began to cry because the cops began questioning her and she or he asked if she could call her husband, Josiah.

The cops couldn't have cared less about the youngsters being within the car, as they never mentioned them, and therefore the kids stayed within the car the whole time.

The officer informed Curry that they weren't charging her with a criminal offense , but noted that they were getting to file a "JC3 form" which may be a hotline-type aware of the Kentucky child protection system.

The very next day, a CPS agent showed up at the Currys home.

Curry stood her ground and asked if the agent had a warrant.

Curry's brief rights-flexing victory lasted only about an hour.

Shortly after the first visit, child protective services showed up at the Curry's home again, this point with a cop by her side, and demanded to be let in-despite still not having a warrant.

According to the lawsuit filed by the Currys, the CPS agent and therefore the cop threatened the family with taking all their kids if they didn't allow them to in.

Not eager to have her children kidnapped, Curry allow them to in.

According to a report from Reason magazine, once inside, the lady from CPS:. questioned Curry about her home life.

Curry answered fully, the lawsuit said, worried that any refusal would increase her peril.

The investigator insisted on taking the youngest child from Curry's lap and, without permission, began to undress her.

In the presence of the male deputy, the investigator proceeded to undress each child, male and feminine , right down to the genitals.

Curry tried to object, but she knew she was powerless to prevent the investigator from doing full-body inspections.

The last to be undressed was her 4-year-old son, taught by his pediatrician that he should never let a stranger take his clothes off without his mom's okay.

When the boy tried to form eye contact with Curry, the investigator stood directly in his line of sight, leaving him helpless.

Then the investigator pointed to the deputy and said, "Show that cop your muscles!" the small boy removed his shirt and flexed his biceps as ordered.

The investigator and deputy began laughing while the investigator began to pull down his pants.

When the small boy finally was ready to reminisce at his mother, she was holding back tears.

The little boy's face registered shame and fear.

After humiliating the family and severely tormenting the youngsters with a policeman assisted frisk , the cop and therefore the CPS agent left.

Two weeks later, Curry would be found acquitted of kid neglect.

The Currys then used the lawsuit to show the system for coercion and threats they wont to "Investigate" an innocent mother and her six children.

Curry said, "The experience left an indelible mark on our whole family. We all felt violated."

After the incident and subsequent lawsuit, the officers involved did what cops do, they sought to use the doctrine of Qualified Immunity consistent with Reason, on August 19 in Curry v. Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Human Services, Judge Justin Walker said that it had been clear the govt used an improper threat to enter the house , lacked any evidence which may have justified a frisk , and violated the children's rights to bodily integrity.

Act One: An "Attentive and loving" mother gets muffins for her children.

Act Two: there is a play her door and a threat by the govt to require away her children.

Act Three: Her children are strip searched without cause.

America's founding generation may never have imagined a cupboard for Health and Family Services.

Curry had every right to be worried about the state taking her children as Kentucky CPS are exposed in recent years for illegally stealing children from homes also as circumventing constitutional rights by threatening to steal children.