Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 208 posts

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#121

Post by cyberax »

anon6362 wrote: post #108
hiatus wrote: post #2

> U.S. District Juste Miranda M. Du rejected this argument, but wouldn’t suppress the evidence. “The Court finds that a tower dump is a search and the warrant law enforcement used to get it is a general warrant forbidden under the Fourth Amendment,” she said in a ruling filed on April 11. “That said, because the Court appears to be the first court within the Ninth Circuit to reach this conclusion and the good faith e…

US police, in effect, are a lawless, violent, honorless, untouchable, mafia who protect and serve primarily a landed aristocracy. In some ultra-exclusive communities, city police are literally reduced to Dashers and grocery getters. Similar venues and communities in the States also pay for hybrid PMC/LE QRFs who roll with battle rattle more than body armor and long guns.

Dude, lay off the bong pipe.

> In some ultra-exclusive communities, city police are literally reduced to Dashers and grocery getters

Care to name a few?

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#122

Post by lIl-IIIl »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #87
LinuxBender wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never talk to the police. Let your lawyers do the talking.

To add to this: it is the police's job to positively identify those who commit crimes. If they are questioning you, it is because 1) they are investigating a crime and you are a suspect (maybe not the prime suspect but a suspect) and 2) they do not have evidence that reasonably proves that you committed whatever crime (or lack thereof) they are investigating. (Simple game theory for 2: if they had the evidence, they'…

Couldn't they also be questioning you because 3) you are a witness?

What is one to do if they have material information and a vested interest in crimes being solved and getting the right people be held responsible?

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#124

Post by dghlsakjg »

nemomarx wrote: post #25
Terr_ wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that, when they lie in conversations/interrogations, they can lie about what the law is , as well as what official acts can/will undertake. To me there is a fundamental difference between lies like: 1. "Your buddy in the next room already ratted you out." 2. "Sign this admission and you'll only get 6 months, tops. If you don't, we can seize your house and your mother will be living on the streets. "

I get your point but actually why can they lie and claim your buddy ratted you out?

Simple answer?

Because there is nothing prohibiting it.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#125

Post by djrj477dhsnv »

mjd wrote: post #63
Jimmc414 wrote: post #48

Interesting that the recent ruling against blanket cell tower data searches wouldn't have affected the Mark Gooch case. In that insatnce, investigators used targeted cell phone data (ie "geofencing") to track his movements, not a mass data collection. Under the new standards, this type of focused surveillance would still be permitted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBBTfy29WKI They absolutely wouldn't have caught hi…

The judge's opinion explains this in detail. It depends on the so-called "good-faith exception" to the exclusionary doctrine. The idea is that if the police tell the truth in their warrant application of what they are looking for and why, the judge issues a search warrant, and the police lawfully execute the warrant, then there's no point in suppressing the evidence just because, years later, it's determined that the…

There is a point: protecting the accused against unconstitutional searches. That certainly seems important.

Whether the police violated the constitution in good faith or not is irrelevant when it comes to the rights of the accused.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#126

Post by djrj477dhsnv »

mjd wrote: post #38
flipnotyk wrote: post #4

"It's unconstitutional and illegal, but you're not being held accountable and you can still use the data." Yeah that tracks.

It is not reasonable to hold someone accountable for doing something illegal in 2020 that was only determined to be illegal in 2025. The police officers applied to a judge for a warrant. The judge gave them the warrant. Now another judge says that the warrant should not have been issued in the first place. How is that the police's fault? How would you hold them accountable?

> It is not reasonable to hold someone accountable for doing something illegal in 2020 that was only determined to be illegal in 2025.

Tell that to a financial regulator and see where it gets you. That's how it works for everyone else. Just because a law hasn't been clarified yet doesn't stop it from being applied to your past actions after courts have clarified it.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#127

Post by reaperman »

underdeserver wrote: post #106
some-guy wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a child, I thought police had to go to law school. How else would you enforce the law if you didn't know what the law was?

We all have to go to law school. How could you live in the world without breaking the law if you didn't know what the law was?

There have been many periods in US history where sets of laws were purposefully created that criminalized activities that nearly ~100% of the population engage in. The intent of those isn't to stop those activities, and there's no intent of prosecuting everyone. The intent is to be able to prosecute any individual person or someone close to them, at any arbitrary point in time.

Many of today's lawmakers no longer have that intent, but the system as a whole still keeps running in a manner that allows tools of that nature to be used against targeted individuals and populations.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#128

Post by keernan »

I've never been completely comfortable with the concept of potentially freeing criminals because of wrongful conduct by the police.

The argument is there must be a way to protect society against the use of illegal methods by the police. I'm not confident, however, that the Exclusionary Rule actually accomplishes its purposes. I suspect the police 'roll the dice' all the time in their investigations, knowing full well they are unlikely to pay much of a personal price if their illegality gets discovered.

I've always thought charging police for their illegal conduct in a special federal system that handled all cases of wrongful conduct by police nationwide; with high conviction rates and penalties that start with termination and loss of pension and move on from there to add long prison terms. A system with special judges and prosecutors and civilian oversight.

Not likely to happen, so I guess we are stuck with letting criminals and the cops walk free.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#129

Post by axus »

fsckboy wrote: post #70

what's the difference between eyewitnesses reporting their recollections of EMF data gathered by their eyes, a surveillance camera collecting and recording EMF data, and a cell tower collecting and recording EMF data? In the case of the cell tower, the suspect is always carrying a "flashlight", but in the other cases he may be.

Reasonable eyewitnesses omit people + location + times weren't suspicious. The camera only leaves out people at other locations, the cell tower data doesn't leave anyone out.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#130

Post by deepsun »

p_ing wrote: post #30
nemomarx wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your point but actually why can they lie and claim your buddy ratted you out?

Tax payers don't care enough to force the congress critters to change the laws in . Instead, you get human beings who are shielded by a thin piece of paper who can summarily execute you, then say "whoops, my bad". Police are nothing more than State-sponsored gang members.

State (any country, since the birth of monarchies) is the gang. It literally robs you ("taxes"), monopolized violence (only state is allowed to utilize it). But if it does a poor job at that, other states swoop in with their rules, no invitation needed.
Post reply on HN