With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in Mangels that in some cases disclosure of personal information will result in a constitutional violation was not sufficient to put a probation officer on notice that the disclosure of a probationer’s HIV status to his sister and employer would violate the constitutional right to privacy. Thus, while Eastwood, Lankford, and Mangels indicate that under some circumstances, a release of personal information regarding a person by a government officer may violate a constitutionally protected right to privacy, none of the cases discuss the question whether the right to privacy protects a probationer who may be HIV positive from a limited disclosure by his or her probation officer to persons whom the probation officer believed might be affected by their contact wit (N.D.Ohio 1991) (<HOLDING>); Doe v. Town of Plymouth, 825 F.Supp. 1102,

A: holding that police officers sued in their official capacity are not liable for a violation of a privacy interest where the police department did not have a policy of deliberately failing to train its officers with respect to the confidentiality of records
B: holding that the pittsburgh police department did not illegally terminate an officers hla benefits and that the police department was entitled to a subrogation interest against the officers thirdparty settlement
C: holding that punitive damages are not recoverable against a state official sued in his or her official capacity
D: holding that the privacy interests of the employee police officers did not exceed the publics right to know
A.