by Mike Masnick
Wed, Jun 22nd 2011 5:32am
The EFF has the unfortunate story of how prosecutors in Vermont, doing an investigation into an identity theft, requested an incredibly broad warrant to seize computer equipment, CDs, mobile phones and other devices in someone's home. The judge realized this might be way too broad, and limited the warrant, "putting reasonable bounds on the search, as well as including basic privacy protections for information and data not connected to the identity theft under investigation." It's hard to see how anyone could argue against such limits... but apparently, the prosecutors feel otherwise. They filed a petition in the Vermont Supreme Court to allow the original, overly broad warrant be allowed instead. I can't fathom the argument for such a fishing expedition. Warrants are supposed to be narrowly executed around the specific crime being investigated. The court limits made sense here, and yet prosecutors seem to be admitting that they want to go fishing for anything else they can find as well.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- UN Report: Encryption And Anonymity Deserve 'Strong Protection'
- How Much Of Europe's Regulatory Interest In Silicon Valley Is Just Jealousy Over Successful Foreign Companies?
- Financial Info On 100,000 Taxpayers Now In The Hands Of Criminals, Thanks To The IRS's Weak Authentication Processes
- Obtained Emails Show FBI's General Counsel Briefly Concerned About Privacy Implications Of License Plate Readers
- Paper Says Public Doesn't Know How To Keep Score In Privacy Discussion While Glossing Over Government Surveillance