If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wisconsin State Journal)   Wisconsin man all butthurt over police putting a tracking device on his car to stop him from breaking into houses. (insert sound of tiny violin here)   (host.madison.com) divider line 17
    More: Interesting, Wisconsin, GPS, tracking system, Wisconsin Supreme Court, Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Janesville, U.S. Supreme Court, burglary  
•       •       •

3422 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Feb 2013 at 11:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



17 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-07 03:04:32 AM
Police obtained a warrant from a Walworth County Circuit Court judge to "place an electronic tracking device" on the Pontiac, but the warrant did not specify the device's features in detail.

The cops had a warrant.  In my not-a-lawyer mind, that's sufficient.
 
2013-02-07 10:55:36 AM
userserve-ak.last.fm
You think the perp would have noticed the Warrant on his car.
 
2013-02-07 11:24:22 AM

RodneyToady: Police obtained a warrant from a Walworth County Circuit Court judge to "place an electronic tracking device" on the Pontiac, but the warrant did not specify the device's features in detail.

The cops had a warrant.  In my not-a-lawyer mind, that's sufficient.


But of course the article doesn't specify the probable cause for obtaining/signing the warrant to install the GPS device.  Just that the car had been impounded.  Could use a little more information than was given.
 
2013-02-07 11:24:23 AM
The cops proceeded the right way. They got a warrant first.
 
2013-02-07 11:25:42 AM
So, if I find an unidentified object attached to my vehicle and call in the bomb squad do I get in trouble for

a) filing a false report
b) destruction of police property
c) interfering with an ongoing investigation
d) all of the above
 
2013-02-07 11:25:56 AM
cf.chucklesnetwork.agj.co
 
2013-02-07 11:27:35 AM
FTA: Police obtained a warrant from a Walworth County Circuit Court judge to "place an electronic tracking device" on the Pontiac, but the warrant did not specify the device's features in detail.

Brereton contended the police's warrant was invalid because the GPS provided "real-time" location tracking, which he said exceeded the warrant's scope.


So his argument that the warrant is invalid because it didn't specifically state that it was a GPS device that would record/transmit real time information?

Ok, which internet site did he learn about the law and what's his Fark handle?
 
2013-02-07 11:28:53 AM

wildcardjack: So, if I find an unidentified object attached to my vehicle and call in the bomb squad do I get in trouble for

a) filing a false report
b) destruction of police property
c) interfering with an ongoing investigation
d) all of the above


yes exactly none of that will happen.
 
2013-02-07 11:49:36 AM
Your laws are limiting my freedom!
 
2013-02-07 11:50:37 AM

Yogimus: wildcardjack: So, if I find an unidentified object attached to my vehicle and call in the bomb squad do I get in trouble for

a) filing a false report
b) destruction of police property
c) interfering with an ongoing investigation
d) all of the above

yes exactly none of that will happen.


You sure?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8881835/Suspicious-wife-sparks - bomb-scare-with-tracking-device-under-husbands-car.html
Ambulances and fire engines rushed to the usually quiet area braced for a possible explosion as police hastily cordoned off sidestreets to isolate a suspected bomb under a £40,000 sports car.

It therefore came as a relief - of sorts - when it emerged that the source of the panic was not a terror plot or a mafia hit - but a suspicious wife with a lively imagination.

Police were stunned to discover that the suspicious flashing object which sparked the alert was in fact a tracking device fitted by a local businessman's car by his wife to find out whether he was having an affair.



http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/fbi-tracking-device/all/
A California student got a visit from the FBI this week after he found a secret GPS tracking device on his car, and a friend posted photos of it online.
...
The agent who initially spoke with Afifi identified himself then as Vincent and told Afifi, "We're here to recover the device you found on your vehicle. It's federal property. It's an expensive piece, and we need it right now."..."We're going to make this much more difficult for you if you don't cooperate."
...
"We have all the information we needed," they told him. "You don't need to call your lawyer. Don't worry, you're boring. "


Which raises the question- if he was so boring, why were they tracking him to begin with?

Anyway, while neither of these has the person getting in trouble (although a case could be made regarding the FBI threatening you), it's certainly possible
 
2013-02-07 12:12:08 PM
thank you for posting links that prove that absolutely none of your scenarios happened.
 
2013-02-07 01:01:46 PM

Nana's Vibrator: RodneyToady: Police obtained a warrant from a Walworth County Circuit Court judge to "place an electronic tracking device" on the Pontiac, but the warrant did not specify the device's features in detail.

The cops had a warrant.  In my not-a-lawyer mind, that's sufficient.

But of course the article doesn't specify the probable cause for obtaining/signing the warrant to install the GPS device.  Just that the car had been impounded.  Could use a little more information than was given.


This. Don't be mad at the cops, they're only doing what they've been authorized to do. The only way I could see this as a problem is if the magistrate signed off on a warrant that was based off of normally-insufficient probable cause. If the probable cause is there, then you have nothing to argue against.
 
2013-02-07 01:45:09 PM
 
2013-02-07 02:23:12 PM

fredklein: Yogimus: wildcardjack: So, if I find an unidentified object attached to my vehicle and call in the bomb squad do I get in trouble for

a) filing a false report
b) destruction of police property
c) interfering with an ongoing investigation
d) all of the above

yes exactly none of that will happen.

You sure?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8881835/Suspicious-wife-sparks - bomb-scare-with-tracking-device-under-husbands-car.html
Ambulances and fire engines rushed to the usually quiet area braced for a possible explosion as police hastily cordoned off sidestreets to isolate a suspected bomb under a £40,000 sports car.

It therefore came as a relief - of sorts - when it emerged that the source of the panic was not a terror plot or a mafia hit - but a suspicious wife with a lively imagination.

Police were stunned to discover that the suspicious flashing object which sparked the alert was in fact a tracking device fitted by a local businessman's car by his wife to find out whether he was having an affair.


http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/fbi-tracking-device/all/
A California student got a visit from the FBI this week after he found a secret GPS tracking device on his car, and a friend posted photos of it online.
...
The agent who initially spoke with Afifi identified himself then as Vincent and told Afifi, "We're here to recover the device you found on your vehicle. It's federal property. It's an expensive piece, and we need it right now."..."We're going to make this much more difficult for you if you don't cooperate."
...
"We have all the information we needed," they told him. "You don't need to call your lawyer. Don't worry, you're boring. "

Which raises the question- if he was so boring, why were they tracking him to begin with?

Anyway, while neither of these has the person getting in trouble (although a case could be made regarding the FBI threatening you), it's certainly possible


A question: Why does the tracking device has to have a blinking light?  Why not make the thing looks like it belongs there, instead of a corny movie prop?
 
2013-02-07 02:31:16 PM

lack of warmth: A question: Why does the tracking device has to have a blinking light? Why not make the thing looks like it belongs there, instead of a corny movie prop?


It is a battery light.  The person who planted it can see if it needs to be recharged/removed.  Also, you can tell if it fell off.
 
2013-02-07 04:03:42 PM

fredklein: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/fbi-tracking-device/all/

...
"We have all the information we needed," they told him. "You don't need to call your lawyer. Don't worry, you're boring. "

Which raises the question- if he was so boring, why were they tracking him to begin with?


To find out if he was boring, obviously.
 
2013-02-08 02:26:03 AM
If the cops did not  have a warrant, I'd be on his side.  It would piss me off, because he's a thief and I want thieves to get caught.  But IMO cops need a warrant to do that.

But they had a warrant, he's just pissed that he got caught.  Throw the book at him.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report