Comments on: The right to privacy while raping your property http://dailytroll.com/2008/09/14/the-right-to-privacy-while-raping-your-property/ Fri, 10 Sep 2010 11:03:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Terry http://dailytroll.com/2008/09/14/the-right-to-privacy-while-raping-your-property/comment-page-1/#comment-55287 Terry Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:53:08 +0000 http://dailytroll.com/?p=1924#comment-55287 The only hint that I see in the article is that "proof of the assault has not been admitted." I'm guessing they're saying that they needed to have proven that a rape happened (by medical exam, perhaps?) before they could plant cameras to see who did it. I don't buy that reasoning, though. I wish we had a lawyer in the crowd to explain it. The only hint that I see in the article is that “proof of the assault has not been admitted.” I’m guessing they’re saying that they needed to have proven that a rape happened (by medical exam, perhaps?) before they could plant cameras to see who did it. I don’t buy that reasoning, though. I wish we had a lawyer in the crowd to explain it.

]]> By: Ahistoricality http://dailytroll.com/2008/09/14/the-right-to-privacy-while-raping-your-property/comment-page-1/#comment-55213 Ahistoricality Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:42:28 +0000 http://dailytroll.com/?p=1924#comment-55213 You're right about rape, but that doesn't obviate the right to privacy. Reading the original article, it's clear that the police did obtain a warrant, and I'm not really sure on what basis it was deemed flawed: the whole <i>point</i> of a warrant is to violate some aspect of a suspect's right to privacy. Only if the warrant was somehow flawed -- given on the basis of insufficient or false information, or incorrectly describing the evidence gathering involved -- would it be invalid. I don't get it. I'm no lawyer, but I think a lawyer's going to need to explain it. You’re right about rape, but that doesn’t obviate the right to privacy. Reading the original article, it’s clear that the police did obtain a warrant, and I’m not really sure on what basis it was deemed flawed: the whole point of a warrant is to violate some aspect of a suspect’s right to privacy. Only if the warrant was somehow flawed — given on the basis of insufficient or false information, or incorrectly describing the evidence gathering involved — would it be invalid. I don’t get it.

I’m no lawyer, but I think a lawyer’s going to need to explain it.

]]>