3 ms·
Warrants aren’t always required. Also, lack of a warrant just means the direct evidence they gather won’t be admissible, but it might lead them to new evidence.
by kobeya 9y ago
Warrants aren’t always required. Also, lack of a warrant just means the direct evidence they gather won’t be admissible, but it might lead them to new evidence. Also, it’s not just the police one needs worry about.
- GeekyBear 9y agoEven if an illegal search of your phone led to new evidence, in the US that new evidence would fall under a legal doctrine known as "fruit of a poisonous tree". Fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe evidence that is obtained illegally. For example, if a police officer conducted an unconstitutional search of a home and obtained a key to a train station locker, and evidence of a crime came from the locker, that evidence would most likely be excluded under the fruit of the poisonous tree legal doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree Border agents operate under a different set of rules and have been searching mobile devices without a warrant or even probable cause. However the ACLU and EFF have filed a new lawsuit challenging this behavior, now that the Supreme Court has ruled that the police cannot conduct warrantless searches of cell phones inside the US.
- kobeya 9y ago“Parallel construction”