4 ms·
Most people install cameras to monitor their own property. That is where reasonableness begins. If some installed a camera to surveil their neighbor on their ow
by nulbyte 3y ago
Most people install cameras to monitor their own property. That is where reasonableness begins. If some installed a camera to surveil their neighbor on their own property, and that was the end of it, no one would know. But if as a result of that surveillance, one neighbor began harassing another, it would be problematic. This seems to be exactly what happened here, only the spying neighbor worked for the government and used the power of the state to conduct such harassment.
- giantg2 3y agoIt depends on what you consider harassment since the article doesn't detail that. Even in your example, the filming isn't the problem, just the harassing. If your neighbor catches you on video committing a crime and turns you in based on that legally obtained video, there's no legal issue with that. The question here is should the government be held to stricter rules? The current test for whether something violates 4th amendment rights is if there wasa reasonable expectation of privacy. If your neighbor can legally video you, then that's pretty plainly demonstrated that you do not have the expectation of privacy. That's what this is really all about.