A few years back police attached a GPS device to a murder suspects car, which proved useful when the guy drove to the gravesite where he had buried the victim (his daughter). Based on that evidence, the father was convicted, but now his lawyers are arguing that the GPS device was an invasion of privacy and the evidence shouldn't be permitted. The police say it's the same thing as if they were tailing him in a police car. His lawyers respond that would only be true if the police car were invisible and actually in the suspect's car. It's always interesting to see how technology changes the way we think about certain legal issues. On the one hand, I can easily see how there's a risk. What if police could simply attach a GPS device to your car all the time (or worse, tap into the data from an already installed GPS device?). Is that a violation of privacy? At the same time, though, this method did work to catch a murderer. I would think that, in the end, the real issue is how much evidence police had to get a warrant to place the device on the car. As long as the evidence can justify it, then I don't think I have a problem with it.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Scumbag Revenge Porn Site Operator Arrested... But Many Of The Charges Are Very Problematic
- Legal Challenges To Spying Mount In UK
- Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Thinks Google Is To Blame For Infringement On The Web
- Feds To FISC: Of Course We Don't Have To Share Our Full Legal Filings With Companies Suing Us Over NSA Transparency
- Kansas City Cops Tell Man They'll Kill His Dogs And Destroy His Home If Forced To Obtain A Search Warrant