4 ms·
I’d bet 1:2 odds that this activist wasn’t the target and they’re just trying to get some low effort dope busts.
by ponker 6y ago
I’d bet 1:2 odds that this activist wasn’t the target and they’re just trying to get some low effort dope busts.
- Rebelgecko 6y agoI think you're right. It's a little confusing to me, but this article makes it sound like the camera was set up on a pole in front of a relative's house, but pointing at a different "family property" where Antonio was living. There's some older articles talking about how he lives at his grandmother's house, and his uncle lives across the street. Both houses were raided by cops in 2018 due to alleged cocaine dealing and they made 2 arrests (One cousin had a small amount of weed, and another cousin had an outstanding warrant for assault) When that happened he talked about how he felt like his family was being targeted due to his activism. Perhaps, but IMO the generic "the war on drugs" is a more likely cause
- soulofmischief 6y agoGiven the circumstance, it's more likely that the War on Drugs is a cover for this kind of behavior, thus the bogus cocaine dealing charges. If MPD comes out and hides behind the drugs defense, take it with a painstakingly large grain of salt.
- blinkengus 6y agoI'd bet 1:1 odds that even if it were, ITS STILL ILLEGAL TO POINT A SURVEILLANCE CAMERA AT A HOUSE WITHOUT A WARRANT.
- anamexis 6y agoI'll take that bet.
- klyrs 6y agoChill on the allcaps, and there's quite a lot of precedent that anything visible by the public is fair game. For example, evidence you throw into the trash becomes public property once you put it out on the curb
- blinkengus 6y agoApologies, surveillance-state apologists get me worked up. Things done in public or in other locations without "an expectation of privacy" are legally fair game for evidence gathering. Pointing a camera toward a home which may have open windows, etc. is not unless there is a warrant for that kind of surveillance.