Court will decide if police need warrant for GPS 'tracking'

[Major Variola (ret)]

I read somewhere that the original wiretap laws were motivated when
police
bugged a phone booth (fishing), and snared someone placing a bet.  The
court
held that there was an expectation of privacy.  Interesting to see what
they say now.  Segues nicely with the CALEA/cellphone locator tech too.


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/121572_gps12.html

               Monday, May 12, 2003

                Court will decide if police need warrant for GPS
'tracking'

                By KATHY GEORGE
                SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

                William Bradley Jackson worried that he hadn't properly
concealed his victim's
                shallow grave. So he snuck away one quiet fall day to
finish the job, unaware
                that sheriff's deputies had secretly attached a
satellite tracking device to his
                truck.

                Police trickery triumphed over his treachery.

                Spokane County sheriff's investigators used the hidden
                device to retrace Jackson's path to the gravesite, where
they
                found crucial evidence that would lead to his murder
                conviction in 2000.

                But what if the same secret technology, called global
                positioning satellite tracking, could track anyone at
any
                time?

                The Washington Supreme Court will decide soon whether
police agencies
                throughout the state may use the device freely --
without a warrant. The
                Jackson case is the first in the state dealing with the
issue.

                "Do we really want the ability to track everybody all
the time, without any
                suspicion, or without probable cause?" asked Doug
Klunder, a Seattle
                attorney who wrote an amicus brief, or friend of the
court, in the case on
                behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of
Washington. "How close are
                we to Big Brother?"

                Many law enforcement agencies, including the King County
Sheriff's Office
                and King County Prosecutor's Office, believe no warrant
is needed for the
                tracking devices.

                That's because they simply record electronically what
anyone could see by
                following a vehicle on the public streets.

                "We'd be shocked if the court said otherwise," said King
County sheriff's
                spokesman Kevin Fagerstrom.

                In Jackson's case, the state Court of Appeals in Spokane
agreed no warrant
                was needed.

                The court's opinion last year said, "A law officer could
legally follow Mr.
                Jackson's vehicles on public thoroughfares .... The GPS
devices made Mr.
                Jackson's vehicles visible or identifiable as though the
officers had merely
                cleaned his license plates, or unobtrusively marked his
vehicles and made them
                plain to see."

                Critics of the Spokane court's opinion say there's a big
difference between
                following someone's real-time movements and recording
them for computer
                analysis later. "There's just something that feels more
underhanded about it,"
                said Klunder.

                It's not just government abuse the ACLU fears. Stalkers
could use GPS to
                find their victims, and jealous husbands could use it to
spy on their wives. "If
                the police can do it without a warrant, then presumably
a private citizen can,
                too," Klunder said.
<snip>