4 ms·
Doesn't all surveillance require a warrant?
by SN76477 6y ago
Doesn't all surveillance require a warrant?
- 0xcde4c3db 6y agoAs I understand it (not a lawyer or law enforcement), 4A protections effectively only apply where either the search is of a space where the subject has a "reasonable expectation of privacy" or the police are actually handling the subject's property (e.g. attaching a GPS tracker to a vehicle).
- godzillabrennus 6y agoFor it to be admissible in court. Most people can’t afford an attorney and end up taking a plea.
- gruez 6y agoActually, there's a "good faith" (aka. "ignorance of the law") exception for cops. So even a lawyer might not be able to save you. https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/search-and-seizure-rules/the-good-faith-exception/ https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/search-and-seizure... >A mistake of law by a police officer sometimes can trigger the exception. If an officer takes steps based on the existing interpretation of the law, but a court later rules that the law should be interpreted differently, they may be found to have acted in good faith.
- jdsully 6y agoYour mainstream explanation isn't correct. This only applies when a court replaces an existing precedent - a relatively rare occurrence. Police shouldn't be expected to anticipate the court's change of heart ahead of time.
- loteck 6y agoMass surveillance certainly doesn't.
- stjohnswarts 6y agoOn public streets and property? Outside your home in plain view (from the street)? no.
- syshum 6y agoWelcome to the world of "Parallel Construction" which is a "legal" way of ignoring the constitution