Post your comments for Judge Orders Drug Evidence Suppressed in Warrantless GPS Tracking Case here
Page 1 of 1
Judge Orders Drug Evidence Suppressed In Warrantless Gps Tracking Case
#2
Posted 24 May 2012 - 07:42 PM
How is that action any different from the police manually tracking them - i.e. discretely driving behind them using an unmarked police vehicle?
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
#3
Posted 25 May 2012 - 03:20 PM
OK since when do lower courts get to "over rule" the Supreme Court???
#4
Posted 25 May 2012 - 03:27 PM
stuartmay, on 24 May 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:
How is that action any different from the police manually tracking them - i.e. discretely driving behind them using an unmarked police vehicle?
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
Because it is the same as a Tpa on your Phone it si an electronic device that is ATTACHED to your car to tell where you drive it.... It is by definition of the law a "SEARCH" of your car and requires a WARRENT! It would be the same as if the Government FILMED everyone who came to you house without a warrent ARE YOU OK WITH THAT? Are your FRIENDS who came to see you??? I do NOT violate the Law but I would have SERIOUS issuses if I was taped buy our govenment without a WARRANT!!!! I would definatly take them to court over it even if I had done nothing wrong because they VIOLATED the CONSTITUTION!!!!
#5
Posted 25 May 2012 - 03:32 PM
stuartmay, on 24 May 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:
How is that action any different from the police manually tracking them - i.e. discretely driving behind them using an unmarked police vehicle?
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
Would the courts have also thrown out this case if this was done using 'old technology' such as 2 police officers using an unmarked police vehicle
It is HUGHLY different they put a tracking device on someones car WITHOUT a Warrant!!! That would be the same if the police listened to your phonecalls by an electronis tap on your PHONE!!! Are you ok with the local police being able to listen to your phone calls without a warrant???
#6
Posted 26 May 2012 - 09:01 AM
Article IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
#7
Posted 26 May 2012 - 04:11 PM
RNR19952, on 26 May 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:
Article IV.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
RIGHT ON! I know law enforcement and politicians use the constitution to wipe their behinds with, but at least we can make some noise about it..... Sad......Very sad.....
Share this topic:
Page 1 of 1
Help












