◆ SpookStack

112 Nos. 77-1698, 77-1210 & 77-1370 substantially chilled if there should be the prospect of becoming a defendant in a suit for monetary damages whenever information concerning law violations is com- municated by one agency or official to another ageney or official having primary jurisdiction over the crime. ° At this point in the preparation of this dissent, I have become confronted with an increasingly compelling necessity to turn to other cases of this court with which I am concerned, many of which have statutory priority over this civil case, notwithstanding Judge Swygert’s concluding admonition that upon remand this case Should be given “high priority.” I have not requested, nor have I been given, a respite from a full calen- dar of sitting accompanied as that must be by the necessity of preparing opinions or orders on at least one- third of the cases on which I have sat. Therefore, while not doing so happily because of my belief that sending virtually the complete case back for another extended trial constitutes a miscarriage of justice and a misuse of the federal judicial facilities, I will endeavor simply to outline as briefly as possible my remaining observations on this case.3 1. Post-raid prosecutorial matters. An initial difficul- ty for the plaintiffs here is that the occupants were in possession of illegal firearms and were subject to prosecu- tion. In any event, under Jmbler-v. Pachtman, 424 USS. 409 (1976), most of the post-raid direct prosecutorial activities of the state’s attorney and his assistants provided to them. absolute immunity from civil liability. It is true that the Imbler Court expressly left open the question of whether absolute immunity extended to a * The incentive toward continuing a fuller discussion is not encouraged by the realities of the situation being that there is very little probability this case will not go back for that retrial. Two of the eight active judges of this court have disqualified themselves, two more, of course, are in the majority of the present anel, and all four of the remaining would have to vote to rehear the case en banc. Insofar as the Supreme Court of the United States is concerned, the small Percentage of the heavy volume of petitions for certiorari which can be granted minimizes the likelihood in any case of being successful in the pursuit of certiorari. ; ;