A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Police us Secret GPS Device to Track Suspects!

Legal storm growing over secret use of GPS units to track suspects

Defense attorney Randall Lewis, representing a man charged for the fatal shooting of Livonia police when he discovered something surprising: Livonia police knew about his client’s exact location at all times take 11 days shooting.

“I mean, it was like they knew what this guy was having dinner,” Lewis said.

The police knew the whereabouts of Terry Bowling, Lewis learned, because they had secretly planted a GPS tracking device under the back bumper of his Ford Taurus. Bowling is a suspect in several home invasions.

“I was totally surprised, because there was no mention of the police reports,” Lewis said. “And the first thought was:” What guarantee? ‘”

There was no reason.

Bowling event, and hundreds like it is in the middle of the growing legal storm set the land before the U.S. Supreme Court on 8 November. Question: Can law enforcement authorities to use GPS devices to track people without their knowledge?

Case in the United States v. Antoine Jones, with Jones’ arrest, and finally the conviction in 2005 for drug trafficking. The police use a GPS unit to follow Jones, four weeks before his arrest.

“This is one of the most important decisions – perhaps the most important decision – in my lifetime, life offered to us under the fourth amendment,” said Susan Walsh, who wrote the brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers high right thing.
The right to privacy, law enforcement seem to be inconsistent in the use of GPS tracking

At first sight it seems a reasonable practice: the researchers to keep track of suspects by using the latest technology.

Police equipment Global Positioning System is a useful law enforcement tool that gives them an easy and inexpensive way to track people suspected of committing serious crimes.

But Defense Attorneys, civil libertarians, many of the judges, and some conservatives say the devices are so intrusive as they violate the fourth amendment to the Constitution, to protect against invasion of privacy.

Critics note that equipment such as scientists tell intimate details such as whether he sees a psychiatrist, remote jump, going to AA or go to church.

Next month the U.S. Supreme Court to immerse yourself in a legal battle when it takes up the case of the U.S. A., Antoine Jones. The Court of Appeal decided the police violated Jones’ constitutional rights when they will be monitored in Washington, DC, nightclub owner weeks the GPS unit, the collection of evidence used to condemn a drug trafficking charge in 2005.

The government is now asking the Supreme People’s Court to rule on the constitutionality of the GPS, and whether the search warrant be obtained before any use of police equipment.

“The government’s position is that they do not even need to believe that you are a criminal, that we can do this for all Americans without judicial oversight,” said Susan Walsh, New York criminal defense lawyer, who wrote the brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of the Supreme Court the case.

Law enforcement bristle idea to shorten what has proven to be efficient and cheap way to run a police investigation.

“Do not take away the tools we have left law enforcement,” said Fred Timpner, Director, Michigan Association of Police, which represents 2000 police officers throughout the state. “My members, this is a very important issue. It is a very, very effective law enforcement tool.”

Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe is blunter.

“See, we are using this to chase the bad guys,” he said. “We do not have time to see anyone else around. It’s not a problem.”
Why and when GPS is used for

Just a few years ago, the police relied on the old-fashioned surveillance, and bird dogs, electronic devices, which helped the researchers to monitor the defendants were behind. These devices can the police track suspects physically, but they did not follow a remote location for long.

With the advent of the GPS – Navigation System, which allows the police monitor the suspect’s laptop computer and save the suspect’s movements over a long period of time – the police suddenly there was a cheaper, safer way to spy on.

“It popped up all over the place,” said Walsh, “but has been a widespread reluctance of law enforcement actions very forthcoming about use of GPS.”

Oakland County’s McCabe said the devices used in “maybe 10 or 15 times a year” in his department. In Macomb County Sheriff Anthony Wickersham said his researchers are using GPS, “context.”

“It is a tool that is available to us,” Wickersham said. “It is used to expand in some studies. It is not something that we just rely on all the time.”

Wayne County Sheriff Benny Napoleon’s spokeswoman Paula Bridges, would not say whether the department used GPS devices. Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office spokeswoman Maria Miller said, “the police have used our GPS cases, and it is a very useful tool.”

Livonia uses GPS to track suspects were identified by the police, Larry Nehasil, 48, died in Walled Lake Shootout january 17

Terry Bowling and his brother, David Bowling, were suspected of a string of burglaries in metro Detroit Undercover investigators put a GPS in their Ford Taurus. Police tracked the men were burglarizing their home in Walled Lake. When confronted by David Bowling Nehasil in the backyard, the two exchanged shots. Both were killed.

Terry Bowling appealed to no competition, second-degree murder and faces up to 30 years in prison when he is sentenced on Wednesday.
All Americans can be affected by

Critics of the law in the implementation of GPS technology, said control itself is not frowned upon – it does not have legal control, and extended the time equipment is often used.

Michigan, law enforcement and private investigators to be able to use GPS devices, but private citizens should not use them to spy on others.

Massachusetts, New York, Oregon and Washington to ban police use of GPS equipment without permission. Other states are considering the guarantees.

“This is a case where a society, we must grasp the impact of new technology is the right of privacy that we as Americans have always enjoyed,” said Dan Korobkin, staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

“The problem is not where the GPS goes, it is what happens to the GPS time. If the police do not follow us, or spy on us for weeks or even months without supervision, no accountability, then it becomes a problem.

“That’s what most Americans are worried about when it comes to the government using this technology.”

Courts across the nation have given conflicting decisions.

Alex Kozinski, a conservative judge federal appeals court in San Francisco, called the GPS tracking “creepy and un-American.” In a dissenting opinion in 2010, he said, free to use the GPS to give “the government the power to monitor the movement of each of us, every day in our lives.”

But Richard Posner, a federal judge Court of Appeals in Chicago, compared the GPS devices of the old-time monitoring, where the investigators followed the suspect around.

The suspects are not subject to the privacy of public streets, he wrote, adding: “It compromises the safety and privacy, and often it favors security.”

The Constitution Project, a nonprofit, mutual Think Tank in Washington, DC, has studied the matter and issued a statement in September condemned the use of GPS technology, without any options.

According to the Committee, William Sessions, former FBI director, and David Keene, a former president of the American Conservative Union.

The Committee called on the options required for all GPS monitoring, or, alternatively, to limit to 24 hours unless a warrant is obtained.

Defense attorney Randall Lewis, who was represented by Terry Bowling, Bowling said that if the case had gone to court, he would have fought against the screen, which is based on the fourth amendment.

“There must be judicial review,” Lewis said. “We live in a police state, then see: Why not just get behind? This is all we’re really talking about. When you knock out the judicial control, you’re moving to democracy.”

source – 11BRASIER

Comments are closed.