4 ms·

"According to court papers filed Friday, federal agents placed secret recording devices in at least three locations around the entrance to the San Mateo County

"According to court papers filed Friday, federal agents placed secret recording devices in at least three locations around the entrance to the San Mateo County courthouse in Redwood City without first getting judicial approval." The part of not getting a warrant is really the problem.

pavel_lishin 11y ago
I don't disagree, but isn't it also a problem since they'll be indiscriminately gathering a lot of irrelevant data? It's not like bugging a suspect's house; they're bugging a lot of unrelated people.
- pyre 11y ago
  Presumably judicial oversight would take these factors into consideration. Lack of judicial oversight allows them to value their own goals over the rights of other people.
- GauntletWizard 11y ago
  Recording cameras on buses also catch plenty of indiscriminate random conversation. These recording devices were placed in a public space, so you have no expectation of privacy. However that doesn't mean that they should be permitted in court or is that the FBI isn't quite rude in having placed them. It really is up to the judges to prevent tainted evidence and flat out fishing from being made cases of. The method is not unreasonable, in the right circumstances, but the justification and building of a case makes all the difference.
  - gohrt 11y ago
    > so you have no expectation of privacy. > However that doesn't mean that they should be permitted in court Really? I thought these two items were quite tightly connected.
  - gleenn 11y ago
    They also don't record sound which is a huge difference. You can try and read people's lips but that's a whole different ball game. Recording voice without explicit consent in California is illegal.
  - sologoub 11y ago
    The expectation to privacy and the admissibility of the evidence is closely tied together. The problem here is that I would argue that a reasonable person would not expect that his or her conversation in "hushed voices" (from the article) would be recorded by the normal security cameras located in the public space. Without knowing the details, it's really hard to say, but it sounds like this was a very targeted operation more similar in nature to bugging the home than to a general purpose security camera catching a glimpse of someone on the street.

pavel_lishin 11y ago

I don't disagree, but isn't it also a problem since they'll be indiscriminately gathering a lot of irrelevant data? It's not like bugging a suspect's house; they're bugging a lot of unrelated people.

pyre 11y ago
Presumably judicial oversight would take these factors into consideration. Lack of judicial oversight allows them to value their own goals over the rights of other people.
GauntletWizard 11y ago
Recording cameras on buses also catch plenty of indiscriminate random conversation. These recording devices were placed in a public space, so you have no expectation of privacy. However that doesn't mean that they should be permitted in court or is that the FBI isn't quite rude in having placed them. It really is up to the judges to prevent tainted evidence and flat out fishing from being made cases of. The method is not unreasonable, in the right circumstances, but the justification and building of a case makes all the difference.
- gohrt 11y ago
  > so you have no expectation of privacy. > However that doesn't mean that they should be permitted in court Really? I thought these two items were quite tightly connected.
- gleenn 11y ago
  They also don't record sound which is a huge difference. You can try and read people's lips but that's a whole different ball game. Recording voice without explicit consent in California is illegal.
- sologoub 11y ago
  The expectation to privacy and the admissibility of the evidence is closely tied together. The problem here is that I would argue that a reasonable person would not expect that his or her conversation in "hushed voices" (from the article) would be recorded by the normal security cameras located in the public space. Without knowing the details, it's really hard to say, but it sounds like this was a very targeted operation more similar in nature to bugging the home than to a general purpose security camera catching a glimpse of someone on the street.