Beem v. County of Madison, 2008 WL 2561110 (S.D. Ill. June 25, 2008)

Key Insight: Noting that case involved the operation of a government office, and images were contained within a government computer where there could be no expectation of privacy (particularly not when it is alleged that images were already seen by plaintiff and others), and pornographic images were clearly relevant if not ?res gestae,? court overruled County?s objections and ordered County to (1) provide plaintiff with copies of all of pornographic images from criminal investigation that were in its custody and control; and (2) allow plaintiff’s counsel and a computer forensics specialist access to the hard drive of supervisor?s work computer, so that all responsive images could be copied in electronic format for plaintiff’s counsel

Nature of Case: Plaintiff alleged she was required to work in a sexually hostile environment, and specifically that she was exposed to extreme, graphic and debasing computer/internet pornography contained in her supervisor’s office computer

Electronic Data Involved: Pornographic images stored on supervisor’s office computer