You are here

law enforcement

U.S. Supreme Court Takes Up Cases That'll Determine Privacy in Our Cell Phones

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in two cases on whether police making an arrest must get a warrant before searching a suspect's mobile phone, Bloomberg reports. "More than 90 percent of American adults own mobile phones, giving the cases broad practical significance. The outcome also may hint at how the justices would view the National Security Agency’s telephone-data program, an issue likely bound for the high court," Bloomberg further writes.

Ct Justices Skeptical of Theory Letting Law Enforcement Control Criminal-Case Information

The Connecticut Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week on conflicting interpretations of that state's Freedom of Information Law. Law enforcement representatives are arguing that, once they have released the names and addresses of  people who've been arrested, as well as the dates, times and places of their arrests and the offenses with which they were charged, that they can decide what's exempt from disclosure until after criminal cases are done.But 'it appeared that the justices were skeptical of a legal theory that would give prosecutors and police departments complete discretion on how much information they have to release about a criminal case, once they have released the basic 'police blotter' facts of the arrest," The Connecticut Law Tribune reports.

Ct Justices Skeptical of Theory Letting Law Enforcement Control Criminal-Case Information

The Connecticut Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week on conflicting interpretations of that state's Freedom of Information Law. Law enforcement representatives are arguing that, once they have released the names and addresses of  people who've been arrested, as well as the dates, times and places of their arrests and the offenses with which they were charged, that they can decide what's exempt from disclosure until after criminal cases are done.But 'it appeared that the justices were skeptical of a legal theory that would give prosecutors and police departments complete discretion on how much information they have to release about a criminal case, once they have released the basic 'police blotter' facts of the arrest," The Connecticut Law Tribune reports.

Ct Justices Skeptical of Theory Letting Law Enforcement Control Criminal-Case Information

The Connecticut Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week on conflicting interpretations of that state's Freedom of Information Law. Law enforcement representatives are arguing that, once they have released the names and addresses of  people who've been arrested, as well as the dates, times and places of their arrests and the offenses with which they were charged, that they can decide what's exempt from disclosure until after criminal cases are done.But 'it appeared that the justices were skeptical of a legal theory that would give prosecutors and police departments complete discretion on how much information they have to release about a criminal case, once they have released the basic 'police blotter' facts of the arrest," The Connecticut Law Tribune reports.

Second Circuit Rules Warrantless GPS Tracking Was In Good Faith

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Jones the law enforcement's installation of GPS devices on suspects' vehicles  are searches under the Fourth Amendment, the Second Circuit has reasoned '"Jones left open the question of whether the warrantless use of GPS devices would be 'reasonable—and thus lawful—under the Fourth Amendment [where] officers ha[ve] reasonable suspicion, and indeed probable cause' to conduct a search,'" according to The New York Law Journal. The GPS tracking of the defendants in the case before the Second Circuit was not done with delibrate, reckless or gross disregard for their Fourth Amendment rights and was done with reasonable reliance on court precedent before the U.S. Supreme Court decided Jones, The Journal also reports. So the panel decided the evidence related to the search was in good faith and didn't need to be excluded.
 

It Takes More Than Taping Confessions to Stop Wrongful Convictions

The New York Times' Jim Dwyer makes the point that confessions, but not entire interrogiations, are recorded in New York. But it's documenting entire interrogations that could stop people being wrongfully convicted after they give false confessions. Dwyer writes: "They’ve been recording confessions for years — true confessions, false confessions, they pretty much all look the same. But after so many people who confessed were proven innocent with DNA tests, we now know that it’s not the confession part that tells you whether to believe someone — it’s that first 12 hours in custody, or whatever it was before the camera went on, that tells you how he or she got to 'I did it.'" Cops can feed details to innocent suspects that only the murderer would know. Then the innocent suspects feed it back to them.

Alleged Wrongful Convictions Get Renewed Look in Alaska, Texas

The family of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed by the state of Texas for allegedly killing his three children by setting his family home on fire, is seeking a post-death pardon for Willingham due to "outdated arson forensics and possible prosecutorial misconduct," the Austin Chronicle reports. In 2009, the New Yorker wrote an extensive and amazing piece on the Willingham case and whether an innocent man was executed. It is well worth a read: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann

In another Innocence Project development out of Alaska, the Alaska Department of Law has asked law enforcement in that state to ask for an independent review of a Fairbanks murder, the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reported. The Alaska Innocence Project asked for the exoneration of the four men convicted in that killing. The full report: http://www.newsminer.com/fairbanks_four/state-seeks-independent-review-o...

911 Records From Sandy Hook Shooting Ordered Released; Appeal Expected

The Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission ruled that the 911 phone calls related to the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., should be released, the Associated Press reported. The commission rejected a prosecutor's argument that there was still some law enforcement purpose for the records to remain undisclosed. An appeal is promised by law enforcement, the AP reported. The AP also said it requested the records, in part, to review the police response to the school shooting by Adam Lanza: "On the day of the shooting, the AP requested documents, including copies of 911 calls, as it does routinely in news gathering, in part to examine the police response to the massacre that sent officers from multiple agencies racing to the school."

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - law enforcement