3 ms·
Let’s flip this over. In the case of a woman who is murdered and who has a male partner, it is nearly ALWAYS the partner. It isn’t a growing problem, it has bee
by braythwayt 8y ago
Let’s flip this over. In the case of a woman who is murdered and who has a male partner, it is nearly ALWAYS the partner. It isn’t a growing problem, it has been with us forever.
Now obviously, the easiest and cheapest thing for the taxpayer would be to simply lock up the partner when a woman with a partner is murdered.
That would be unjust, even if it is nearly always right and easiest and cheapest. Ok, but MRA folks would go ballistic, so let’s make it easier:
If a woman with a male partner is murdered, we simply require the male partner to give up their cell phone’s contents. No silly paperwork for a warrant, no laws about self-incrimination or any of that, we just cite the “Taxpayer’s Efficiency Act of 2019” and they have to hand it over, or sit in jail for contempt until they do.
Is that still unjust?
It is, isn’t it?
I put it to you that if false accusations of rape, which happen rarely, justify examining phones belonging to the victims, then murder of a woman by her male partner, who is usually the perpetrator, justifies the exact same thing.
What stops us in both cases is the notion of justice. It is unjust whether the person is likely or unlikely to b a law-breaker. And we as a society have decided that justice is a greater good than saving a few bucks or making things easier for police.
- 5trokerac3 8y agoThere's a huge difference between incarcerating someone and getting a warrant for their phone records. Your analogy is made less relevant by the fact that if a woman is murdered they very likely would get a warrant for her partner's phone records. Where the 4th amendment applies here is if any evidence of a different crime were found while looking for information on the first. If the phone records were acquired by a warrant, that evidence would not be admissible in court.
- braythwayt 8y agoNot at all, you said the magic word: “Warrant.” A warrant involves judicial oversight. Warrantless searches do not.
- 5trokerac3 8y agoIt is your responsibility to protect your 4A rights. This is why you never let the police in your house without a warrant. Inviting them in allows them to search and charge you based on anything they find. Step outside and talk to them if they want to interview you, and password protect your phone and demand they get a warrant if they want to look at it.
- braythwayt 8y agoAbsolutely true, but it is not your sole responsibility to project justice. Society also should enact regulations and oversight to prevent the police from coercing people into forgoing their rights. That’s why there is the Miranda warning, for example. You should know and protect your rights. Yes. AND the police should not as a matter of course attempt to coerce you into giving them up.
- wtdata 8y agoYou are - willingly or unwillingly - mixing two very different legal statuses there. One is being the accuser, to whom evidence is asked about the validity of the accusation (this law proposal). The other is to automatically accuse someone (in your proposal) and demand evidence to deem them innocent.
- 5trokerac3 8y agoIf someone came to the police and said, "so and so murdered someone", and there's no body to be found, would the police not demand as much evidence as is available? Would they charge someone with murder just based on an accusation?
- DanBC 8y agoYou example is odd because it would be the murdered woman's phone that is investigated by police.
- braythwayt 8y agoThe police would almost certainly seek a warrant to get cell phone records, location records, and even access to the suspect’s phone if they can show probable cause. But as I noted in another comment, a warrant involves judicial oversight.
- DanBC 8y agoWhy are you talking about suspects? The linked guidance has nothing to do with suspects. It is the victims phones the police want to see. The police will already have access to the suspect's phone.
- tracker1 8y agoMore likely they get a warrant for the male partner's phone and get the data involuntarily... this is probably the closest actual equivalence here.