Featured Articles

Analyst reveals Apple Watch spec

Analyst reveals Apple Watch spec

An analyst has examined the Apple Watch supply chain in an effort to ascertain the exact spec of Cupertino’s new gadget…

More...
Nvidia's first 20nm product is a mobile SoC

Nvidia's first 20nm product is a mobile SoC

For much of the year we were under the impression that the second generation Maxwell will end up as a 20nm…

More...
Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia GTX 980 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Nvidia adjusts GTX 980 and GTX 970 pricing

Nvidia adjusts GTX 980 and GTX 970 pricing

It appears that Nvidia has been feeling the pulse of the market and took some note from comments regarding the original…

More...
PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

PowerColor TurboDuo R9 285 reviewed

Today we will take a look at the PowerColor TurboDuo Radeon R9 285. The card is based on AMD’s new…

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

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments