Originally Posted by Jims5543 (Post 10665488)

A smart man would have put it on another random car.

Originally Posted by svandamme (Post 10665877)

I don't see how they can turn this around on the perp,
Warrant allows em to do something, but if they don't communicate their warrant to the perp, the warrant itself cannot be used against the perp for anything he did about the thing they did.

Let's say they have a warrant to search your house.
They come at night, in the dark, unmarked cars
They barge through your front gate, they break open the door
They do not yell "police , we have a warrant"

And the owner of the house dumps a 30 round mag of 556 out of his AR and kills 2 cops before they shout "police, we have a warrant"

And it's all on body cams.


There is NO way you can get convicted for that, you are defending your house against an unknown invader.

Same with this surveillance thing.
Perp was not informed of the warrant.
it was done covertly.


Any lawyer worth his salt should be able to squash that charge in court, appeals or higher.
Better Call Saul

Originally Posted by svandamme (Post 10665877)

I don't see how they can turn this around on the perp,
Warrant allows em to do something, but if they don't communicate their warrant to the perp, the warrant itself cannot be used against the perp for anything he did about the thing they did.

Let's say they have a warrant to search your house.
They come at night, in the dark, unmarked cars
They barge through your front gate, they break open the door
They do not yell "police , we have a warrant"

And the owner of the house dumps a 30 round mag of 556 out of his AR and kills 2 cops before they shout "police, we have a warrant"

And it's all on body cams.


There is NO way you can get convicted for that, you are defending your house against an unknown invader.

Same with this surveillance thing.
Perp was not informed of the warrant.
it was done covertly.


Any lawyer worth his salt should be able to squash that charge in court, appeals or higher.
Better Call Saul

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666208)

I haven't seen a comment here about the fact that the tracker was found in a locker on the suspect's parent's property in a locker, in a barn. Certainly an overt act. Does that change things? I mean there's no way he can say it fell off or it wasn't ever there. Those options were available until he took it off and placed it in the locker. Now he's tampered (removed) with a police owned device legally attached to his vehicle.

Originally Posted by svandamme (Post 10665877)

Let's say they have a warrant to search your house.
They come at night, in the dark, unmarked cars
They barge through your front gate, they break open the door
They do not yell "police , we have a warrant"

And the owner of the house dumps a 30 round mag of 556 out of his AR and kills 2 cops before they shout "police, we have a warrant"

And it's all on body cams.


There is NO way you can get convicted for that, you are defending your house against an unknown invader.

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666208)

I haven't seen a comment here about the fact that the tracker was found in a locker on the suspect's parent's property in a locker, in a barn. Certainly an overt act. Does that change things? I mean there's no way he can say it fell off or it wasn't ever there. Those options were available until he took it off and placed it in the locker. Now he's tampered (removed) with a police owned device legally attached to his vehicle.

BTW, this thread start as a topic on a tracker and discussion. Bringing the Houston affair into this with talk of murder and getting derailed is going to get this thread closed or cleaned up if you guys can't keep on track. I haven't decided. Your call.

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr (Post 10665850)

^^^ Interesting video.

If I found a GPS Tracker on my car I'd be calling a lawyer ASAP.

But I'm not a POS Drug dealer or criminal so...

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666302)

Since you didn't read the news article linked in post no. 1, I'll tell you that the police lost track of the signal, got a 2nd warrant to search 2 properties and found the tracker secured in a locker in a bathroom within a barn. I don't think it walked in there on its own. See, that's been my point. There are an infinite number of ways that this GPS tracker could have been removed and 'lost' but there was only one way it ended up off the vehicle and in a locker. There is nothing more deliberate as that.

I have no idea how the court(s) will see this but I can see how and why the police are treating this as a counter measure to their intended surveillance that was approved by the legal branch.

I know it's not quite the same, but rather than bring up some situation that has nothing legally in common with this, how about someone who has been ordered by the court to wear a tracking device? The difference, of course, is that the wearer is very aware of the order. But I don't see the covert action any differently than tapping a phone (covert) or an overt action such as the ankle bracelet.

This is tough one to keep apples to apples. And I'll admit I'm not even qualified to judge this. It's all opinion until the gavel hits the wood.

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666208)

I haven't seen a comment here about the fact that the tracker was found in a locker on the suspect's parent's property in a locker, in a barn. Certainly an overt act. Does that change things? I mean there's no way he can say it fell off or it wasn't ever there. Those options were available until he took it off and placed it in the locker. Now he's tampered (removed) with a police owned device legally attached to his vehicle.

Originally Posted by legion (Post 10666225)

I don't see how anyone is under obligation to keep something like this on their car, and subject to criminal sanctions if they don't. It just doesn't make sense. It's not like there is a law or court order commanding a person to keep a police tracker in place.

Originally Posted by doug_porsche (Post 10666253)

I have one question and one observation..

Question: What marking did the tracker have on it? Was there any markings that said, at the extreme lower end of excuses, if found, place in mailbox return postage guaranteed.

If I find a black box stuck to my car, with no markings, yep I would take it off.


Observation: they are charging him with theft of their tracker. Did they ask for it back? Can they, giggling as I type this, not locate it?

Originally Posted by Jim Richards (Post 10666299)

This was dumb. Taking it off and leaving it on the ground without fingerprints would’ve been the approach to take.

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666302)

Since you didn't read the news article linked in post no. 1, I'll tell you that the police lost track of the signal, got a 2nd warrant to search 2 properties and found the tracker secured in a locker in a bathroom within a barn. I don't think it walked in there on its own. See, that's been my point. There are an infinite number of ways that this GPS tracker could have been removed and 'lost' but there was only one way it ended up off the vehicle and in a locker. There is nothing more deliberate as that.

Originally Posted by madcorgi (Post 10666364)

I bet we have a bunch of those folks right here on Pelican!

Like most legal questions, there is no easy clear cut answer. I suspect this is a case of first impression. Notice none of the lawyers are jumping in with an opinion. I always get a kick out of the question: "is it constitutional?" The correct answer is generally the one everyone hates: it depends.

Originally Posted by Zeke (Post 10666302)

There are an infinite number of ways that this GPS tracker could have been removed and 'lost' but there was only one way it ended up off the vehicle and in a locker. There is nothing more deliberate as that....