Gay & Lesbian Times readers have read here about the plight of a former San Diego Police Department officer, John Roe (pseudonym). Like millions of others with webcams today, Roe performed on camera and sold items on the “adults only” section of eBay. He never wore an SDPD uniform, nor did he ever identify himself with the city of San Diego or the SDPD. Nor did anyone complain to the SDPD that his conduct affected the SDPD.

Roe had been an officer with the SDPD for seven exemplary years. In July of 2000, the SDPD contends that Roe’s supervisor, Sgt. Robert Dare “just happened” to be searching eBay when he discovered that someone by the name of Code3 was selling a tan San Diego police uniform, one that was no longer used by the SDPD. Dare entered the “adults only” section on eBay and entered a “gay” site to find that Roe was selling the uniform and videos of himself masturbating.

Dare identified Roe (because Dare was his supervisor). The SDPD demanded Roe stop his activity, and then fired him when he refused to stop selling some of the items. Captain Glenn Brierstein and former Chief David Bejarno upheld the firing.

Recognizing the implications of Roe’s firing for all police, and believing the First Amendment protected Roe’s off-duty conduct, the police officers’ union backed Roe’s efforts to get his job back.

A federal panel agreed that Roe’s conduct was off-duty speech and ordered a lower court to give him a hearing to determine whether it affected his police work, injured the SDPD or caused substantial disruption. The city couldn’t prove any harm.

So the SDPD (and the city of San Diego) appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ironically, on his last day in office, former City Attorney Casey Gwinn persuaded the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that public employees have no First Amendment rights off the job if the agency thinks the conduct could be harmful to its image.

The court based its ruling on the fact that Roe portrayed himself as a police officer on the web. The court found there was a sufficient link between his “off duty” speech and his employer.

The timing of the case was strange, as the Roe case was one I expected new City Attorney Mike Aguirre to drop. Aguirre would have seen through the sordid facts for what this case was – a witch hunt pursued not just against a gay cop, but against all police officers whose off-duty conduct offends their supervisors.

Check chat rooms on Yahoo and AOL (both offered for gay and straight chatters/viewers); there are chat rooms for police and firefighters.

In light of the SDPD’s tight budget, we trust Chief William Landsdown and Sgt. Dare are not diverting time away from solving local homicides to find out which of the millions of internet “cops” is or is not a real police officer.

The reality is that the LAPD and SDPD have no idea which of their 10,000 plus officers are on AOL, Yahoo, Gay.com, or the zillions of other sites that allow people to meet via cam and chat. When a female LAPD officer posed naked for a magazine and website, the city attorney in L.A. rightfully said it was protected speech.

Do police officers go to Hooters, strip clubs and adult bookstores? Do they rent adult cable? Do they appear in beefcake calendars? Do women officers appear in Playboy? Is it OK for a female police officer to dress as a hooker on El Cajon Boulevard for the vice unit, but she can’t sell photos on eBay of herself dressed as a hooker?

The Ninth Circuit correctly saw the Roe case for what it was – the government singling out a gay cop for discriminatory treatment. So it ordered the SDPD to prove that Roe’s conduct had somehow adversely effected the department.

Like it or not, social mores have changed to the point where lots of men and women are now “porn” stars, except they appear on the internet, phone lines, or are unknowingly photographed by camera phone in locker rooms, restrooms and dressing areas. How long will it be until we are strip-searched and body-cavity-checked just to board a plane? Aguirre should examine whether the SDPD singled out Roe because of his sexual orientation. The Legislature should make it clear that public employees cannot be fired for their off-duty conduct, unless the conduct (e.g., such as viewing child porn) is illegal. Otherwise, to our right-wing friends: Today it’s a gay cop caught masturbating on the Internet; tomorrow it’s the cop who attends a pro-life rally.