Featured Articles

Microsoft officially announces the Xbox One

Microsoft officially announces the Xbox One

As announced earlier, Microsoft has now finally unveiled its next-generation console, the Xbox One. Although it did not shed much light…

More...
AMD poaches more Nvidia talent

AMD poaches more Nvidia talent

AMD has apparently managed to grab yet another high-ranking Nvidian, but this time it was no engineer or developer.

More...
Qualcomm and Samsung overtake AMD

Qualcomm and Samsung overtake AMD

It’s no secret that the mobile boom is taking a toll on makers of PC components and AMD is one of…

More...
Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 detailed

Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 detailed

We managed to confirm the full spec of the upcoming Nvidia Geforce GTX 780 graphics card as well as some performance…

More...
HIS iCooler Turbo HD 7790 reviewed

HIS iCooler Turbo HD 7790 reviewed

Today we’ll take a closer look at a factory overclocked HD 7790, courtesy of HIS. The HIS HD 7790 iCooler Turbo…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Thursday, 01 November 2012 11:58

US coppers can install cameras without warrant

Written by Nick Farrell



Land of the Free?


A US judge has decided that cops can install cameras in open fields without a warrant. In a move which should give the do Internet porn movie industry a boost a federal judge has ruled that police officers in Wisconsin did not violate the Fourth Amendment when they secretly installed wifi cameras on private property without judicial approval.

To be fair in this case the coppers were not looking to make a quick killing on the internet porn market, but had installed the cameras in an open field where they suspected the defendants, Manuel Mendoza and Marco Magana, were growing dope. They eventually got obtained a search warrant, but not until after some potentially incriminating images were captured by the cameras.

Mendoza and Magana wanted to suppress all images collected prior to the issuance of the search warrant. But Judge William Griesbach rejected the request saying that the  Fourth Amendment only protected the home and land directly outside of it and not open fields far from any residence.

The judges found that this did not establish the "reasonable expectation of privacy" required for Fourth Amendment protection.

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments