GPS Tracking Beacon placed on 'suspect' vehicle without warrant

[rambone]

A South Dakota man is suing for having his 4th Amendment rights violated. He was a 'suspect' for the world-ending crime of selling marijuana. Cops took the liberty of placing a GPS tracking beacon on his vehicle without his knowledge and tracked his movements for 26 days. No warrant was obtained.

Suspect Tracked With GPS Says Rights Violated

 

[Benny]

Um, not cool.

"The information recorded by the GPS device provided no more information to police than what they could have obtained had they simply assigned a patrol unit outside the defendants residence and monitored his whereabouts," Assistant Attorney General Frank Geaghen said.

So I guess that makes it OK?

 

[Denny347]

This issue will have to go to the USSC to be resolved. The Appeals Court out west says it is OK.
Appeals court OKs warrantless GPS tracking by feds | Reuters
While at the same time the Appeals Court out east says "no way".
Court Rejects Warrantless GPS Tracking | Electronic Frontier Foundation

 

[Leadeye]

Is it illegal for them to install the device or does the law just bar them from using the info obtained in a trial? Trying to keep up with this.

 

[E5RANGER375]

what if you catch them installing this and kick the crap out of them? i mean its not like they are gonna be wearing a uniform when doing this, so can they be hung as spy's?

 

[eldirector]

Not only have many courts OK'ed this, but they have also upheld rulings that the device cannot be legally removed, disabled, or destroyed by the owner of the car. Evidently, the device still is .gov property, even though it is on your car.

Something like that shows up on my car, I'll slap some postage on it and send it to Antarctica.

 

[jedi]

what if you catch them installing this and kick the crap out of them? i mean its not like they are gonna be wearing a uniform when doing this, so can they be hung as spy's?

Then you are in trouble for battery and/or assualt. The mere fact that somone (say me) goes up to your car and touches it or installes something on it is not (at that moment in time) a danger/threat to your life. So you can't use force on the person since no crime (to cause death) is occuring.

 

[dross]

Here's what I don't get: Why not just get a warrant? Is it that hard these days? From what I understand, it's pretty much of a rubber stamp - please correct me if I'm wrong LEOs, that's just the impression I get. Why not just clear this up with policy? Have a good reason to do it, get a warrant, no controversy.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Then you are in trouble for battery and/or assualt. The mere fact that somone (say me) goes up to your car and touches it or installes something on it is not (at that moment in time) a danger/threat to your life. So you can't use force on the person since no crime (to cause death) is occuring.

I'll worry about that after the fact. I thought he was cutting my break lines or attaching a bomb and was in fear of my life. its not like I'm saying shoot the guy. just rough him up.

 

[dross]

Then you are in trouble for battery and/or assualt. The mere fact that somone (say me) goes up to your car and touches it or installes something on it is not (at that moment in time) a danger/threat to your life. So you can't use force on the person since no crime (to cause death) is occuring.

You can use force to prevent your property from being damaged or stolen. Force and deadly force aren't the same.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Here's what I don't get: Why not just get a warrant? Is it that hard these days? From what I understand, it's pretty much of a rubber stamp - please correct me if I'm wrong LEOs, that's just the impression I get. Why not just clear this up with policy? Have a good reason to do it, get a warrant, no controversy.

****ing true. the legal requirement of proof in this country has pretty much went down the ****ter

 

[Hoosier9]

****ing true. the legal requirement of proof in this country has pretty much went down the ****ter

I don't like the idea of warrantless GPS tracking, but that being said, "proof" has never been the standard, with or without a warrant. The standard is "probable cause," per the constitution.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I don't like the idea of warrantless GPS tracking, but that being said, "proof" has never been the standard, with or without a warrant. The standard is "probable cause," per the constitution.

yeah i used the wrong word. PC is what i meant.

 

[INGunGuy]

Not only have many courts OK'ed this, but they have also upheld rulings that the device cannot be legally removed, disabled, or destroyed by the owner of the car. Evidently, the device still is .gov property, even though it is on your car.

Something like that shows up on my car, I'll slap some postage on it and send it to Antarctica.

I will cut the things into 50 pieces and mail it to 50 different countries in the world.

Touch my car without a warrant and I catch you, you will probably get your azz shot.

INGunGuy

 

[Love the 1911]

I will cut the things into 50 pieces and mail it to 50 different countries in the world.

Touch my car without a warrant and I catch you, you will probably get your azz shot.

INGunGuy

While I hate thieves, I feel a bit sorry for the 15 year old that decides to try to get your GPS in the middle of the night. Hope you keep a good attorney on retainer because you'll need a good one for years following an incident that you just described.

 

[INGunGuy]

While I hate thieves, I feel a bit sorry for the 15 year old that decides to try to get your GPS in the middle of the night. Hope you keep a good attorney on retainer because you'll need a good one for years following an incident that you just described.

Since my car will be within my Curtilage I will be completely within my legal rights to dispatch the worthless SOB. Oh and I do keep a lawyer on retainer just in case...

INGunGuy

 

[Benny]

While I hate thieves, I feel a bit sorry for the 15 year old that decides to try to get your GPS in the middle of the night. Hope you keep a good attorney on retainer because you'll need a good one for years following an incident that you just described.

May I ask why? 15 year olds know right from wrong.

More than likely I am just calling the popo if someone is breaking in to my car, but I certainly don't feel bad when I read stories of thieves getting shot and killed.

 

[Denny347]

Here's what I don't get: Why not just get a warrant? Is it that hard these days? From what I understand, it's pretty much of a rubber stamp - please correct me if I'm wrong LEOs, that's just the impression I get. Why not just clear this up with policy? Have a good reason to do it, get a warrant, no controversy.

I have VERY limited exposure to GPS, I'm just s patrol "pee-on", but I do believe we do obtain warrants to attach GPS's. It is not a rubber stamp BUT if you have PC then a warrant is easy to get. If you don't have PC...then why are you wasting time with it in the first place. When in doubt...get the warrant. There was a warrant for a GPS for former IMPD Officer Jesse Russel who was arrested for arson. The GPS was attached to his dept vehicle and we still got the warrant. GPS put him in the area of other arsons before he was arrested. He is now fighting the GPS warrants saying they were an invasion of his privacy...or something like that, I saw it in the paper.

 

[E5RANGER375]

I have VERY limited exposure to GPS, I'm just s patrol "pee-on", but I do believe we do obtain warrants to attach GPS's. It is not a rubber stamp BUT if you have PC then a warrant is easy to get. If you don't have PC...then why are you wasting time with it in the first place. When in doubt...get the warrant. There was a warrant for a GPS for former IMPD Officer Jesse Russel who was arrested for arson. The GPS was attached to his dept vehicle and we still got the warrant. GPS put him in the area of other arsons before he was arrested. He is now fighting the GPS warrants saying they were an invasion of his privacy...or something like that, I saw it in the paper.

what part of department vehicle did he miss?
and with the warrant to boot. nice!

I have a boring life. but heres the way I see it. if the cops get a warrant and start following me, im gonna probly know it based on my training and background, unless they are very damn good. then if I know it im gonna be kinda pissed cause I know im clean of whatever. they arent gonna find anything illegal (i have a wife and kid so why would I wanna jeapordize them?), so in my mind that means, they need to PAY ME!!!! for my hassle when they find nothing. where in this country is the the punishment or negative reinforcement for getting warrants wrong but still invading my life (job, family, door frame, etc)?? If you get a warrant and score a bust then good. they probly deserved it if convicted. but if you (cops) come and trash my (any citizen) house and find nothing what then? gonna fix my door? gonna fix the doubt in all my neighbors minds afterwards? gonna make my boss give me the promotion back that im probly not gonna get because he or she will always question me in the back of their minds? when the govt at any level throws out an acusation of criminal behavior (and thats what a warrant is, is an accusation) then they had better damn well be right! and have a warrant too! because if they are wrong that person is still ****ed, and in my mind entitled to reparations for having their life unfairly ****ed up. I dont like shady ****. I dont like entrapment (which is what the GPS thing without a warrant is). I dont like shady **** from cops, and I dont like it from criminals.


this all reminds me of that preopt **** in that movie with tom cruise. where the cops arrest you for **** you havent even done yet in real life. The whole judicial system is ****ed up. you got shady lawyers getting real criminals off on technicalities, you got the prosecutors toting the line of legal and illegal. etc etc. SHADY! i just wanna go live in a log cabin and never even see an airplane again. im accepting donations.

 

[Benny]

^^^Reading that post was like trying to watch Sopranos on network TV.