From: J Corbally (icorb@indigo.ie)
Date: Wed Jun 13 2001 - 17:04:28 MDT
>Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:13:58 -0400
>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com>
>Subject: Latest 4th amendment case...
>I'm surprised nobody has commented yet on the ruling just issued from
>the Supreme Court, where a gentleman growning pot in his attic was
>busted based on evidence from an infrared camera that viewed the heat of
>the grow lamps through the walls of his house. The SCOTUS ruled that
>this is an intrusion into the privacy of the home, and set a standard
>that use of high tech equipment to enable police to view people's
>private property to a greater degree than by normal unaided human
>observation requires a search warrant. They stated that the degree of
>privacy an individual has cannot be determined by the present state of
>technology, that privacy rights have an absolute standard boundary that
>is irrespective of changes in our society like technology. Note that
>this heavily smacks of a natural rights argument.
>This is a great day for privacy advocates, and the alliance of 6
>conservative and liberal judges in this ruling indicates that
>libertarian issues like this are gaining a serious audience in the
>court.
>NOTE: Spike is hereby warned to keep his flying snooper microbots out of
>my airspace! ;-)
>------------------------------
Very interesting, thanks for posting it Mike, I missed this one.
This could have positive impacts in computer-related privacy matters,
especially if as you noted above, it seems to be an area of consensus
between liberal and conservative Justices.
James...
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and
crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures
to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid."
-Q, Star Trek:TNG episode 'Q Who'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:07 MST