Saturday, December 24, 2005
Supreme Court threw out a conviction based on a warrantless thermal monitoring of a suspect's house? Doesn't that just mean the government couldn't use the information at trial? As I understand things, the Supreme Court rules on the admissability of evidence, not whether the gathering of that evidence was in itself a crime. So the government can't use evidence at trial doesn't bother me... let the feds find the stuff, seize it and worry about what to do with the people later....