Sujet : Re: Wildlife agents need warrants to place cameras on private property (was: Fourteenth and a half amendment: Warrantless searches of two PA hunt clubs by game wardens upheld at trial court)
De : ahk (at) *nospam* chinet.com (Adam H. Kerman)
Groupes : rec.arts.tvDate : 14. May 2024, 22:06:21
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v20g7t$c4u8$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
shawn <
nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
. . .
One would think they aren't just going out and placing these cameras
randomly. So they've either heard or been told of people shooting (and
presumably hunting) on the land. As that's the only reason I can see
them deciding to place the cameras on that land. Which would suggest
that , at least in the case of someone reporting the shooting/hunting,
that there was time to get a warrant.
Randomly or not, there's no concern with immediate loss of evidence as
these cameras are placed for a month at a time. Lehto's point is that
there's clearly time to obtain a warrant.
. . .
Wildlife agents need warrants to place cameras on private property (was: Fourteenth and a half amendment: Warrantless searches of two PA hunt clubs by game wardens upheld at trial court)
Re: Wildlife agents need warrants to place cameras on private property (was: Fourteenth and a half amendment: Warrantless searches of two PA hunt clubs by game wardens upheld at trial court)