Live data from Hacker News

Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

404media.co

81–90 of 208 posts

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#81
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is not the fault of the police, and there is no reason to punish them for it. It's not punishing the police. It's not allowing them to use evidence that they shouldn't have been allowed to gather. Fining them, firing them, and/or jailing them for breaking the law; those would be ways of punishing them. That's not what is being discussed here. Admittedly, we pretty much _never_ punish police no matter what they…

They were allowed to gather the evidence - they had a warrant from a judge. The judge erred, not the police.

But the point is justice for the people put through curt. It does not matter to them whose mistake it was.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#82
post #60
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It apparently doesn't in one of the areas of which I have a high level interest. The ATF is constantly changing their mind on what a machine gun is, and if it is one, it is a strict liability crime. Not long ago a guy was put in jail for creating business-card sized metal sheets with the image of a 'lightning link' (machinegun conversion device) on it. Not the actual device, just a picture of it etched Up until the g…

Are you talking about the AutoKeyCard case, Kristopher Ervin and Matthew Hoover? Ervin finally gets out of prison on 2025-05-03 and Hoover gets out on Christmas 2026.

Yes. Honestly I am astonished Ervin, the leader of that enterprise, is getting out so much sooner than Hoover who IIRC just advertised it.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#83
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.

because the law is not a math equation and context matters.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#84
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?

I imagine a lot of it is tradition, AFAICT it was never really banned in the US (or Britain), although in the US it was codified in 1969. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazier_v._Cupp

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#86
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. "

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

Because someone, somewhere needs to see this today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#87
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. "

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'd use it to obtain an arrest warrant and then prosecute the case; no need for more investigation.)

This isn't good advice only for people who have possibly committed a crime but also (and especially) for those who are confident that they have not. The police are asking you questions to "get to the bottom of it" and they encounter people every day who do think they can lie to get out of a crime; they think you might try to lie to get out of a crime. They won't trust your words but they will verify your words. If your words turn out to be false, then they'll tell the judge/jury that you lied to them, not that you were mistaken; in the absence of stronger evidence (against someone else) they might claim you were possibly even intending to direct their investigation toward a red herring with your falsehoods.

The only revision to this advice I've heard in the past decade-and-a-bit: tell the police your real first and last name if they ask. It's not always a requirement but some states have "stop and ID" laws, which means you have to identify yourself to law enforcement during a "lawful detention" (other states instead require it after an arrest).

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#88
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. "

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?

They're supposed to be trained on it, and they probably get a week maybe, depending on the academy. The rest is how to beat your ass.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#89
post #85

I assume this will go all the way to the Supreme Court. Is issuing a warrant to do blanket search of cell tower data unconstitutional?

“and the persons or things to be seized” suggests otherwise. NSLs wouldn’t be challenged this way.

Re: Judge Rules Blanket Search of Cell Tower Data Unconstitutional

#90

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'…

> The police are asking you questions to "get to the bottom of it" and they encounter people every day who do think they can lie to get out of a crime;

I don't even think they are all that interested in getting to the truth of the matter, they are mostly concerned with getting an arrest and conviction. If it'll be easier to throw you behind bars than to find and arrest the dangerous person who actually committed the crime they aren't all going to choose more work and risk "officer safety" when they can just take you and call it a day. Especially not if they're already prejudiced against you or you bruised their fragile ego somehow.

Post reply on HN