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

161–170 of 208 posts

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#161

Post by qingcharles »

mjd wrote: post #17
ty6853 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I believe, in good faith, I have not broken the law. I should not be convicted.

This is not responsive. The police did not commit a crime here. Also note that there are good-faith defenses to all sorts of crimes, because (for example) there is a difference between knowingly defrauding a customer and just making a mistake.

Police can commit statutory crimes to gather evidence in the USA. I'd like to see any solid ruling that says otherwise.

What they cannot do is violate certain constitutional rights to do so without triggering exclusion.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#162

Post by voxic11 »

decimalenough wrote: post #155
voxic11 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can't do 2. Or at least it would make the confession inadmissible evidence. The case law for this goes back more than a century. The general rule is that the police cannot promise you anything in return for a confession. > Bram v. United States, 168 U.S. 532 (1897), was a United States Supreme Court case that ruled that an alleged confession to a crime, in order to be admissible, must not be obtained by threats…

> The general rule is that the police cannot promise you anything in return for a confession. Yet plea bargaining is basically a promise in exchange for a confession (guilty plea), and that's why it's not allowed basically anywhere except the US.

Can you give any sources for plea bargains not being used outside of the US? I'm mostly familiar with US law but my understanding is that plea deals are used in most commonwealth/adversarial system countries such as the UK, Canada, and Australia.

For example I can find a lot of Australian lawyers discussing plea deals.

> There are three main types of plea deals in Australia:

> Charge Bargaining – The defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge than initially filed. For example, a charge of aggravated assault may be reduced to common assault.

> Sentence Bargaining – The defendant pleads guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence recommendation from the prosecution.

> Fact Bargaining – The prosecution and defence agree on which facts will be presented to the court, potentially influencing sentencing outcomes.

https://newsouthlawyers.com.au/plea-deals-in-australia-what-...

If you just mean that plea deals are not used by inquisitorial systems then obviously that makes sense.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#163

Post by voxic11 »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #157
decimalenough wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The general rule is that the police cannot promise you anything in return for a confession. Yet plea bargaining is basically a promise in exchange for a confession (guilty plea), and that's why it's not allowed basically anywhere except the US.

plea bargaining in the U.S also is a promise that they will recommend that you get a particular deal, but the judge in sentencing can decide not to take that deal.

Yes maybe my wording was clumsy but that is what I was attempting to say. The important thing is the prosecutor is not allowed to lie to you as part of the plea bargain. If they promise to do something like give a specific recommendation to the judge they must do it or risk the verdict being overturned.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#164

Post by [deleted] »

testing22321 wrote: post #101
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

This x 1000. A friend was a career LAPD detective, and he gave me the talk. He said because I’m a nice guy I might try to help the police by explaining what I saw in detail. He was adamant that I never ever do that, because in the absence of someone to pin it on, they would find a way to pin it on me. He saw it as literally their job. No matter what, even if you are just standing there when something happens, don’t t…

[deleted]

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#165

Post by cyberax »

TheJoeMan wrote: post #131
cyberax wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Not OP, but have you heard the craziness of Indian Creek Village in Miami? [1]. Their police force is 15 for a community of 41 homes[2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Creek,_Florida [2] https://www.indiancreekvillagefl.gov/police/police-staff-dir...

And where does it say that they bring groceries?

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#166

Post by brigandish »

voxic11 wrote: post #162
decimalenough wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The general rule is that the police cannot promise you anything in return for a confession. Yet plea bargaining is basically a promise in exchange for a confession (guilty plea), and that's why it's not allowed basically anywhere except the US.

Can you give any sources for plea bargains not being used outside of the US? I'm mostly familiar with US law but my understanding is that plea deals are used in most commonwealth/adversarial system countries such as the UK, Canada, and Australia. For example I can find a lot of Australian lawyers discussing plea deals. > There are three main types of plea deals in Australia: > Charge Bargaining – The defendant pleads…

Please bargains are allowed and used in the UK but their existence is not as explicit as in the US, hence most (English or perhaps British) people thinking they may not exist in English or Scottish common law. There’s certainly less statistical data on their use collected.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#167

Post by galkk »

Loughla wrote: post #109
testing22321 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This x 1000. A friend was a career LAPD detective, and he gave me the talk. He said because I’m a nice guy I might try to help the police by explaining what I saw in detail. He was adamant that I never ever do that, because in the absence of someone to pin it on, they would find a way to pin it on me. He saw it as literally their job. No matter what, even if you are just standing there when something happens, don’t t…

I've told this story on here before. When I was 16 or 17, the place I was working got robbed. The guy just opened the register while I was fixing part of the greenhouse building. The police showed up and took my statement, in which I said I didn't hear a car, so I assume he just ran off. They took me in about two weeks later for an official statement. Then told me I had to take a polygraph because my stories didn't m…

This is just wtf…

In my origin country they require witnesses to sign off witness statements. This isn’t the case here, in the US?

How you were summoned? Was it official? What if you’d shown with lawyer?

I think that now it’s already established that polygraphs are bullshit. Could you refuse it?

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#168

Post by rendall »

galkk wrote: post #167
Loughla wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've told this story on here before. When I was 16 or 17, the place I was working got robbed. The guy just opened the register while I was fixing part of the greenhouse building. The police showed up and took my statement, in which I said I didn't hear a car, so I assume he just ran off. They took me in about two weeks later for an official statement. Then told me I had to take a polygraph because my stories didn't m…

This is just wtf… In my origin country they require witnesses to sign off witness statements. This isn’t the case here, in the US? How you were summoned? Was it official? What if you’d shown with lawyer? I think that now it’s already established that polygraphs are bullshit. Could you refuse it?

> Could you refuse it?

Definitely, unless ordered by a judge. He needed a lawyer to advise him.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#169

Post by immibis »

autoexec wrote: post #115
equinoxnemesis wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is obviously a line between what is and is not a permissible search somewhere and it's virtually inevitable that judicial rulings will from time to time err on both sides of that line (and they do). Punishing judges for ruling in ways which are later overturned would destroy rule of law at a fundamental level.

> Punishing judges for ruling in ways which are later overturned would destroy rule of law at a fundamental level. Not where people's most fundamental rights are concerned. What it would do is cause judges to err on the side of caution before making a ruling that would violate the constitution which is exactly what we want judges to do.

Then a Republican judge could just rule that obviously constitutional things were unconstitutional and punish all judges who don't agree, right?

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#170

Post by darawk »

djrj477dhsnv wrote: post #125
mjd wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

There's no point in protecting one individual against an unconstitutional search that proves him guilty. The constitutional issue is the ability to have conducted the search in the first place. The only reason we suppress accurate, but unconstitutionally obtained evidence is to disincentivize the action in the future. This "good-faith exception" strikes that balance pretty ideally.

The defendants rights were violated, but there is no doubt about the legitimacy of the data, and what it implies. Police now know they cannot use this method in the future, so suppressing the evidence in this particular case does not disincentivize anything, as long as its made clear that it cannot be done in the future.

Post reply on HN