Privacy intrusion or Justified crime fighting?

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by manifold, Jun 18, 2008.

  1. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,702
    Thanks Received:
    7,227
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,745
    It looks like Neil Entwistle is guilty as sin. But do you think it is acceptable to have one's internet surfing history admitted as evidence? That is, acceptable from the standpoint of your personal philosophical leanings, not according to your interpretation of the US Constitution, common law, or case law precedent.



    Entwistle defense team faces setbacks - The Boston Globe
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,329
    Thanks Received:
    12,695
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,776
    Why not if it's pertinent to the case?
     
  3. Shattered
    Online

    Shattered Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Sure. Why not? Don't do anything that can come b ack to haunt you later, and you won't have a problem.
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    How is that any different from getting a search warrant to go through your underwear drawer ? :lol:
     
  5. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Did you read the link? This dude is a done deal, computer or no, IMO.

    I wasn't aware this was a question. I thought law enforcement had been searching PCs for years for just such evidence.
     
  6. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    There are a couple of questions here. The first is the admissibility of evidence (no, I'm not taking a narrow legalistic view). My personal view is that all evidence should be admitted if it's relevant. Its probative value can be weighed up by the court later but if it's even remotely relevant it should be put in front of the jury.

    The second question is how far police should be able to go in terms of searching for evidence. Personally I have no problem with police being able to search his computer. The crime alleged is the most serious. I think the police should be allowed to search anything of his for evidence as soon as he becomes a suspect.

    If anyone is familiar with the differences between common law and European civil (ie derived from Roman Law) systems they'll see on which side I fall.
     
  7. AtlasShrieked
    Offline

    AtlasShrieked Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Messages:
    444
    Thanks Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +14
    I can't believe most everyone here got the question wrong. But there you are...saying how wonderful they all are.

    <*grin>

    my answer is "no" ... final answer
     
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    okie dokie
     
  9. indago
    Offline

    indago VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,049
    Thanks Received:
    98
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +180
    This evidence would have to declared inadmissable. He researched "how to kill with a knife", and he used a gun. If he had researched "how to kill with a gun", then I would say go for it.
     
  10. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Why inadmissible? I would think there's sufficient relevance to render it admissible due to relevance. What exclusionary rule would see it booted?
     

Share This Page