Featured Articles

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel has released a 3G cellular modem with an integrated power amplifier that fits into a 300 mm2 footprint, claiming it…

More...
Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

It's not all rosy in the house of Intel. It seems that upcoming Atom out-of-order cores might be giving this semiconductor…

More...
TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC will start producing 16nm wafers in the first quarter of 2015. Sometime in the second quarter production should ramp up…

More...
Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S is the ‘tock’ of the Haswell architecture and despite being delayed from the original plan, this desktop part is scheduled…

More...
Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool is well known for its gamer cases with aggressive styling. However, the Dead Silence chassis offers consumers a new choice,…

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