[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Hidden cameras to catch speeders




John Kennedy (johnk@secondsource.com) wrote:

>The presence of the sensor constitutes the surveillance used without
>just cause.  This argument is the reason that police officers must
>testify that they visually saw your car, had reason to believe that a
crime
>was being commited, then used radar to confirm it.  They cannot admit
that
>they blindly paint the highway with radar, even if that's what they do.
>There must be probably cause for the use of radar.

I fail to see any real difference between an officer using his sensory
abilities to determine just cause and a sensor doing the same thing.  Yes,
you can use semantics to differentiate the two situations, but the fact
remains that the evidence in both cases is collected by a mechanical
device, which is deemed to be as or more reliable than an officer guessing
at a vehicle's speed.  

>You wouldn't have to.  A lower court would recognize that your right to
face
>and question your accuser had been abridged.

Gee, you'd think someone might have tried this by now.  If your statement
were true, these devices would be useless and no force would employ them.



S. Pierre Paret
Washington, D.C.  "Through Reason, or By Force."
spierre@aol.com


References: