GPS Will Help To Protect From Drugs
Tuesday federal prosecutor USA said that the federal government too much discretion, which shall issue a warrant for the installation of tracking devices on vehicles of suspects. Peter Smith, an assistant prosecutor in the District of Columbia USA, said that the court does not need a warrant for the installation of tracking devices to monitor drug trafficking in Washington.
Agents installed GPS-device on the car of a suspect in the drug and after months of surveillance they have managed to prove his involvement. Guilty and his lawyer insisted that the GPS-surveillance without a warrant is illegal.
Position prosecutors provoked lively debate in the Court of Appeal, which lasted much more than organizers had planned. The judges discussed the ethics of this surveillance and the extent to which the secret is information on the movement of people on the private car on municipal roads. The first thing the judges worried about the lack of judicial oversight of surveillance.
The agents contend that a simple surveillance, for which no warrant is required, gives much more information than tracking by GPS. When personal surveillance can set the number of passengers and then who exactly is behind the wheel, GPS-surveillance such information does not, but it somehow requires a warrant. Only one Federal Court of Appeal of the 7th District of USA has decided that that the GPS-surveillance warrant is not required.
The Supreme Court has not yet raised the question of the need warrants for GPS-surveillance. But in 1983 he decided that the installation Beeper `a (another tracking device, not based on GPS) a warrant is not required. The court also highlighted that a person travelling on the road use by the public, can not claim to confidentiality of its own movement. This is not about technology for the monitoring and observation in general. But the lawyer who was arrested, convinced that his case differs from the standard and because of the GPS-surveillance have been infringed upon the constitutional rights of the client.