Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"On Tuesday 4/29, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases testing the authority of police to conduct a warrantless search of an arrested person's cell phone.
For the most part, the justices' rulings in cases dealing with the Fourth Amendment go largely unnoticed by the public. Most citizens are not interested in these cases the way they are in issues like same-sex marriage or gun control. On the whole, Americans don't worry too much about search-and-seizure issues because they think these cases don't apply to them."
I'd have no problem letting them look at my phone record...I have nothing to hide.
... said the subject who has accepted his illegitimate master's dominion over him. Sad.
I am kinda dissapointed of in all the people going, "Not without a warrant!" ... uh... now days Judges are simply another player on the Police team. Conviction stats prove it. If you have woken up to the corruption of cops, but not the corruption of courts, you are still sleeping.
Even then, cops often get warrants for houses, go to the wrong house, and kill a pet or even a human. If they can't handle finding an address, I do not trust them with ANY more power to search Americans, regardless whether or not you inconvenience them and make them go get a piece of paper from their buddies.
We need a completely new system based on individual rights, which is what the founding fathers tried and failed to achieve... I am so sick of hearing that we have the best system in the world when people are wrongly convicted, beaten by police, and railroaded through the court system every day. We have the highest prison population per capita in the world.
The system sucks 100% and has been corrupted 100%.
So no, a piece of paper from their also corrupt buddies does not legitimize my rights as peaceful person being violated. The ONLY situation where a phone should be allowed to be searched is in the case of heinous, violent crimes. It will only be used to put more petty offenders behind bars who have not done harm to another individual, but have broken one of the states silly dictates.
When did "Give me liberty, or give me death!" turn into, "Give me liberty, or a piece of paper explaining why I can't have it... then I will shut up."?
Wow, incredible, a thread with some intelligent discourse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattywo85
"On Tuesday 4/29, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases testing the authority of police to conduct a warrantless search of an arrested person's cell phone.
If you are arrested should police have the right to look through your phone without a warrant?
.....and discuss!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit
I'd have no problem letting them look at my phone record...I have nothing to hide.
Well, almost intelligent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
Basically its just another test case of a new item.
Not really. The history of this goes back quite a bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
Like vehicle search it can be different under different situations.
That is absolutely 100% correct. Good for you.
With a vehicle and a traffic stop -- no felony at this point --- the police can search those parts of the vehicle which are in reach of the driver. The arm-rest/console can be opened, if not locked; the glove-box can be opened, if not locked; any containers that are reach of the drive may opened if not locked, and such containers would be a brief-case, strong-box, suitcase of sorts, tool box, and things like that.
Anything locked requires consent or a warrant.
With a vehicle and a traffic stop and a felony arrest, same thing applies, except the police can search the trunk without consent or a warrant, but they cannot open any locked containers in the trunk.
Again, anything locked requires consent or a warrant.
That stems from a Supreme Court case in 1984.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
I believe cell phones should be treated the same as a car or residence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
The question also comes up in that what appears on your phone might not actually be on the phone but stored elsewhere and only displayed on the phone's screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge
Whoa, whoa, whoa--the question is whether they can search the phone without a warrant when a person is arrested.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249
Moreover, this brings with it a host of technical issues. What if the phone is password locked and the person refuses to unlock it? What if the phone has remote-control capabilities and can be wiped clean in seconds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper1372
You're right, a smart phone is much like the file cabinet of old....but I'd hope the cops couldn't search my file cabinet without a warrant either.
Okay, those are good points.
A cell-phone is operating in one of two states: Locked or Un-Locked.
In a routine traffic stop -- no felony -- should police be able to order you to unlock your cell-phone so they can look through it?
I don't see where they can. If we follow the Court's initial decision, the police need consent or a warrant.
In a traffic stop with felony arrest, now what?
If the phone is unlocked, should be police be able to look through? It would appear so.
If the phone is locked? It would seem police need consent or a warrant to unlock the phone to review it.
Notice that I'm treating the cell-phone as a container -- no different than an armrest/console, the glove-box or any locked briefcase, suitcase or other box.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
At that point, the police are also searching other locations where you have that data stored. It could also be that the data is stored in a location that you do not own or is shared by another person or owned by a company. In that case the police are searching though the data owned by others in locations owned by others.
That is another technicality that needs to be addressed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terryj
Even if an officer arrest a person for a crime and then searches the cell phone the information gathered from the phone is not admissible as to justify the arrest, they can not retroactive evidence to justify an arrest.
All evidence is retroactive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devans0
I believe that the founding fathers overlooked one fundamental right. The right of privacy.
They didn't overlook anything. You have an expectation of privacy in your own home or any private place.
You have no expectation of privacy in a public place, regardless if the public place is privately owned or owned by the government.
Oddly enough, most of the court decisions for that come through the activities of private investigators, and not police.
And there's two standards of privacy, one private and one political.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodbye_hello
During an arrest, the officer "Noticed" a text while trying to turn it off and took photos of my Text Message
Looks like "plain sight" to me.
Sucks to be you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour
I'm ashamed of my fellow citizens who are so eager to give up privacy because they 'have nothing to hide'.
Me, too.
People like that would sell-out their mothers into prostitution for a Coupon Code to down-load a free iTune.
The solution for the individual, regardless of the circumstances is to lock the phone upon having any contact with law enforcement and configuring the phone so that unlocking it without authorization wipes the data.
The technology is available, most law enforcement will not have the technology available to defeat such a configuration and in the event they do, what you've been accused of isn't jay walking.
Regardless, unless you are suspected of engaging in criminal activities that are an immediate threat to the life of yourself or others, there is no reason why the police can't obtain a search warrant prior to searching your phone. There is no real imperative to search it immediately, even for most major crimes one might be suspected of committing because once done, the threat no longer exists, they are now just gathering evidence. The laws already provide for the collection of evidence and if the police can't obtain a search warrant, then that is a protection being provided by law to make sure witch hunts aren't new standard.
If only one piece of information displayed on the phone is stored elsewhere, they have effective searched that other location. If that is allowed, then searching your home because your next door neighbor or any other person, known or not know to you is suspected of a crime is enough justification. In other words, it is open season on anyone for any reason and that reason need not be disclosed to you.
If the decision is made to allow the police to search your phone without a warrant, expect a whole new set of apps that allow one to wipe their phones immediately (not like the relatively show process now) yet return it to fully functioning order after it is no longer in police custody.
I bet the apps are already in the works if they aren't out already.
I believe that the founding fathers overlooked one fundamental right. The right of privacy. I keep my phone password protected for a reason. To those who say "Why not let the police have the phone, unless someone has something to hide", look at some of the abuses in recent history.
For example, England, where journalists paid police informants for information. This not only essentially gave the journalists special police powers, but corrupted those same public servants.
As another example, J. Edgar Hoover surveilled congress and presidents to use as blackmail, to fund his bureau.
I also suggest that you consider the recently exonerated prisoners. Notice how even when evidence that proved innocence was suppressed, finally comes to light, too many prosecutors still argue to keep innocent men imprisoned.
Finally, look at what financially damaging information could be let loose. Cloud computing and syncing opens the door from phone data to every electronic device and Passwords to retirement, savings or investment accounts could be raided as drug money and easily confiscated by planting a little dope on an innocent and claiming their gains were ill-gotten. Cars are being confiscated with this same tactic along certain highways. Think that that only happens in Russia?
The problem is that the information in our phones are too invasive to the entire fabric of our lives and worth too much. That much concentrated wealth and power will be corrupted.
Very good points.
What about confidential business information? Private photos??
In small towns in America this could be very damaging. People act like Police are always trustworthy but who's to say they will do what's right with your information? We already know some of them work with gangs and criminals. Why give them more power?
The solution for the individual, regardless of the circumstances is to lock the phone upon having any contact with law enforcement and configuring the phone so that unlocking it without authorization wipes the data.
The technology is available, most law enforcement will not have the technology available to defeat such a configuration and in the event they do, what you've been accused of isn't jay walking.
Regardless, unless you are suspected of engaging in criminal activities that are an immediate threat to the life of yourself or others, there is no reason why the police can't obtain a search warrant prior to searching your phone. There is no real imperative to search it immediately, even for most major crimes one might be suspected of committing because once done, the threat no longer exists, they are now just gathering evidence. The laws already provide for the collection of evidence and if the police can't obtain a search warrant, then that is a protection being provided by law to make sure witch hunts aren't new standard.
If only one piece of information displayed on the phone is stored elsewhere, they have effective searched that other location. If that is allowed, then searching your home because your next door neighbor or any other person, known or not know to you is suspected of a crime is enough justification. In other words, it is open season on anyone for any reason and that reason need not be disclosed to you.
Sadly, when you are arrested, police can perform a "search incidental to a lawful arrest" that is not subject to a warrant. This search allows the police to search the arrestee and the arrestee's immediate area (on the primary theory that this search protects officer safety from the arrestee's use of a nearby weapon). Non-weapon evidence found in such a search is admissible against the arrestee, even for a totally separate crime (the most common such evidence is drugs). The car is a little different (there are Supreme Court cases about car searches, including car searches incidental to arrest). There is also a theory that these searches prevent the concealment or destruction of evidence.
I don't see how a phone search serves any legitimate officer protection interest. I do think that you could connect a phone search to the "concealment or destruction of evidence," but I don't think that connection overrides the privacy interest in one's phone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
