Crowe v County of San Diego,593 F.3d 841 (9th Cir. 2010)
This was a case of § 1983 actions brought against city & county officers, psychologist, prosecutors et al, for criminal prosecutions of two teenager brothers. It is a lengthy, 65-headnote opinion. Here goes:
 Fifth amendment self-incrimination claim stated where coerced statements introduced during preliminary hearings. No qualified immunity since coerced confessions are subject to a clearly established right.
 Substantive due process claim stated for interrogation that “shocks the conscience.”
 Because reasonable officer could believe he had probable cause for arrests as several facts consistent with the crime existed, therefore qualifiedly immune.
 Search warrants: Second supported by probable cause. First lacked probable cause (material misrepresentations and omissions) but the circumstances surrounding do not conclusively demonstrate deliberate falsification or reckless disregard for the truth. Officers therefore have qualified immunity. (Okay, hold on here. Material misrepresentations and omissions doesn't rise to the level of reckless disregard? This is what they use (both prosecutors and cops) to "get away" with it....Oi gevelt)
 Strip searches possibly violations for lack of showing consent (for one) and noncoerced consents (for others).
 Drawing blood samples from two nonsuspects to help prove suspects’ involvement is not probable cause and violated clearly established law.
 Private psychologist consulted by police to formulate interrogation technique; § 1983 conspiracy claim stated and not immune. But detective’s mere participation in interrogation not enough to state conspiracy claim.
 § 1983 familial companionship claim stated for using coerced confessions as basis of continued incarceration.
9] “Defamation-plus” § 1983 claim against deputy DA for saying boys or other third parties may have committed murder is not enough to be “provably false” factual statement.
 Psychologist’s comparisons of boy to Charles Manson is figurative rhetoric that reasonable minds would not take to be a verifiable fact, and not defamatory.
 Monell § 1983 claims city’s policy is violation fails where no showing city’s policies permit or encourage coerced confessions.