Warrantless GPS Tracking Is Legal, Says WI Court 594
PL/SQL Guy writes "A Wisconsin appeals court ruled Thursday that police can attach GPS trackers to cars to secretly track anybody's movements without obtaining search warrants. As the law currently stands, the court said police can mount GPS on cars to track people without violating their constitutional rights — even if the drivers aren't suspects. Officers do not need to get warrants beforehand because GPS tracking does not involve a search or a seizure, wrote Madison Judge Paul Lundsten."
Re:Perfect! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:But... (Score:2, Informative)
It's easier to take the battery out of your phone (or can the FBI activate some hidden battery!!?) than it is to closely monitor and inspect your vehicle.
Re:True, but ... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:But... (Score:3, Informative)
Is it? What law is it illegal under? You can legally put fliers and such under people's windshield wipers. I don't see how this is any different. It's one thing if they permanently attach something to your car in a manner that defaces it. But simply attaching something temporarily to your car in a way that doesn't diminish your car's value in any way? I'm not aware of any law generally preventing that.
Re:But... (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, undoubtedly. You think you're going to get away with acting against the will of the police? They'll charge you with something just to spite you. In New York, we have this convenient little crime called "Obstructing Governmental Administration"; basically, if you do anything the police don't like, they'll charge you with it:
A-Mis can get you up to a year in jail if you have the misfortune of having a really zealous DA.
(IANAL (just a student), even when IAAL, I won't be your lawyer, &c. &c.)
Re:But... (Score:5, Informative)
NO.
The right to free association also imbues privacy of that association. Such tracking without probable cause violates privacy, free speech, due process, and is high in calories.
Police have a right to follow me, as I have a right to make it difficult for them to do so without probable cause. My presence is my business, and not theirs.
Re:New law? (Score:3, Informative)
The drive is not public, clearly, however, people have an implied right to walk accross your land to deliver something or knock on your door - so the police were just acting like a postman - delivering something to you by walking on to your property.
That would be my guess. IANAL.
Sell it!! (Score:1, Informative)
This is about a guy in NZ who found one on his car.
http://xmb.stuffucanuse.com/xmb/viewthread.php?tid=4399 [stuffucanuse.com]
Has happened here in New Zealand (Score:1, Informative)
A cop was attaching a device to the suspects car when he was spotted, they went after him and shot him dead. They are of course going down for murder. Interesting though, because the police officer was on their property, in plain clothes, and of course under their car. In the USA if they had shot him on the spot they might well have got away with it, at least in some states. However, I think there are few places where pursuing him down the street and shooting him would have been acceptable. I haven't seen much discussion here about the rights and wrongs of him attaching the device.
Then of course we had an earlier case, where the car owner discovered the device and put it up for sale on Trademe, the local equivalent of Ebay. Thereby causing much consternation for the police involved and much amusement for the rest of us.
My own attitude would tend to be that if you attach it to my car, it is mine. If you manage to get it back, perhaps with a court order you might well be disappointed anyway, as it is unlikely to work afterwards.....
Both of these cases should be easy enough to find with a google search if you are interested.
Do I see reasonable doubt? (Score:1, Informative)
The question whether installing the GPS logging device warrants a warrant is intresting, but doesn't cover all the disturbing elements.
1. How is it possible for anyone in a courtroom to confirm the authenticity of a GPS based logfile of movement? (irrespective of private or public space) Can such a file be simulated, created, "case/finetuned", hacked, distorted etc etc and how would we know and prove it.
2. What does the thing prove? Back in the good old days (yes when everything was so much "better" ;-), police observation of a suspects movements was actually observing the suspect (in a car, on the sidewalk, whatever but it was observing him/her/them). I'm assuming that the GPS device is left on its own to do the observing, given the nature of its installation what does it observe? A CAR'S movement/location, nothing more nothing less, so there's basically no proof whatsoever on the actual suspect, unless there's some way of proving the suspect was driving the car for the observed period, don't think they covered that.
Re:But... (Score:3, Informative)
If Blackwater "doesn't exist" anymore, someone needs to tell their webmaster (see www.blackwaterusa.com).
As a matter of fact, if you visit www.blackwaterusa.com (for the company that "doesn't exist anymore") you'll find that they offer professional training to police departments. They run the U.S. Training Center Midwest at Mt. Carrol, Illinois and they'll even sell you a "Blackwater" hat or tour jacket. Maybe they've changed the name of their mercenary division to "Xe" because of all the uncomfortable press (including a great interview in the NYT with their CEO, who's a christian religious nut who's going to save the world from brown people) but they're still doing bang-up business training police departments and even military groupies who want to play dress up. They'll even sell you a nice gun.
When the two Blackwater semis (from the company that doesn't exist anymore) were sitting in the parking lot of the Chicago Police Academy, I was moved by the Lord to take a few pics with my cellphone. I called the number they list in Mt Carrol and asked if they're affiliated with the Blackwater that was in the news for being in Iraq and New Orleans during Katrina, and they actually bragged that they were (but I guess he might have been just so proud). The young man on the phone asked if I was interested in one of their weekend training exercises for civilians and that I could download an application from their website (www.blackwaterusa.com). If you still don't believe Blackwater "exists anymore" I'll be happy to post the pics for you, but for now, I've spent enough time on you.
So sod off, wanker.
Re:True, but ... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:But... (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/48059 [stuff.co.nz]
Re:But... (Score:4, Informative)
-- Cruise by the local donut shop just before dawn and stick it on a cop's car
Later, GPS evidence reveals you visited half a dozen crime scenes that day, including returning to the scene that sparked the original investigation!
There is no decision here.... (Score:3, Informative)
If you read the judges decision, he hasn't actually decided anything. He looks at four allegations.
The judge essentially shows that attaching a tracking device in a public place to determine things that can be determined by visual observation has already been decided to not require a warrant, that police have the right to observe someone on a public road without a warrant(including by satellite), and that while information gathered while the defendant is not on public roads is illegal and must be suppressed there have already been decisions determining that just because some evidence is obtained illegally and must be suppressed does not mean that other evidence obtained legally has to be suppressed.
Everything this guy has decided is based on previous decisions, and from the referenced portions of the decisions it seems that he applied those decisions validly.
You could certainly argue that the existing decisions aren't valid, but since they're supreme court decisions this guy doesn't have the authority to overturn them.
There's also the plus that he's basically already decided that any evidence gathered about your location when you're not on or able to be seen from public roads is illegal and must be suppressed. It's good law for what he was given.