Wake-up Call

Resist the Corporate State

Judge refers to Orwell in GPS case

with one comment

BORDC January 2, 2011  by David Wilson

A superior court judge in Delaware has struck down evidence that was obtained via warrantless GPS tracking. In her ruling, Judge Jan R. Jurden stated,

(A)n Orwellian state is now technologically feasible…without adequate judicial preservation of privacy, there is nothing to protect our citizens from being tracked 24/7…

Police had stated that they had the defendant under surveillance for 20 days. He was arrested after being observed in what appeared to be a “cash-for-drugs exchange.”

Judge Jurden’s reasoning was,

…the same legal principle that allows officers to tail a suspect in traffic, without a warrant, doesn’t apply to GPS because the devices reveal far more about a person under surveillance than physical surveillance could—and more than police need.

“Prolonged GPS surveillance provides more information than one reasonably expects to ‘expose to the public,’” she wrote. “The whole of one’s movement over a prolonged period of time tells a vastly different story than movement over a day as may be completed by manned surveillance.”.

While “the ruling falls in line with judicial opinions in New York, Massachusetts and elsewhere,” the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals “issued a ruling last August effectively allowing the use of GPS tracking without a warrant.” The police agencies within the Court’s jurisdiction are allowed to use the GPS devices without a warrant.

Judge Jurden’s ruling is expected to be appealed.

Advertisements

Written by laudyms

January 3, 2011 at 10:58 am

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The last two sentences state: ‘The police agencies within the Court’s jurisdiction are allowed to use the GPS devices without a warrant.

    Judge Jurden’s ruling is expected to be appealed.’

    I do not recall a Constitutional Amendment repealing our right to privacy. I do recall several unconstitutional votes by Democratic and Republican traitors in Congress who spit on their oath to defend and uphold the Constitution.

    According to the Constitution, Judge Jurden is right because we have a right to privacy. Our government does not have a right to spy. Any other decision would be judicial activism. Now about the rest of the unconstitutional spying by our criminal government…

    Kevin Schmidt

    January 3, 2011 at 5:53 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: