Leechers and WiFi
On Feb. 26, LiveConcept had a post titled 4th Amendment, Privacy Rights & Open WiFi which mentioned, among other things,
In a recent Oregon decision, United States v. Ahrndt, the Court held that a child pornography suspect had no constitutionally protected right to privacy for the files contained on his personal computer.
The Court further believed the Fourth Amendment was not violated when law enforcement used the defendant's unsecured WiFi to search the computer for child pornography.... WITHOUT A WARRANT.
LBE recalls a case which was discussed in our first year of law school at UChicago in our legal writing class, also involving child pornography. The facts were hard to believe. There was an Indiana dentist trading in child pornography. Naturally, he did not use his own name. HOWEVER, he did use the name of a person he disliked in high school. Guess what happened?
In a recent Oregon decision, United States v. Ahrndt, the Court held that a child pornography suspect had no constitutionally protected right to privacy for the files contained on his personal computer.
The Court further believed the Fourth Amendment was not violated when law enforcement used the defendant's unsecured WiFi to search the computer for child pornography.... WITHOUT A WARRANT.
LBE recalls a case which was discussed in our first year of law school at UChicago in our legal writing class, also involving child pornography. The facts were hard to believe. There was an Indiana dentist trading in child pornography. Naturally, he did not use his own name. HOWEVER, he did use the name of a person he disliked in high school. Guess what happened?
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 7:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home