- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
- cross-posted to:
- usa@midwest.social
Brown County Sheriff’s Department in Wisconsin used Flock cameras, which record the license plates of every vehicle that passes by them, to identify and arrest a resident of Wisconsin for purchasing marijuana. Per the report, the cops used Flock’s network of cameras to track the man as he drove from Wisconsin, where possession remains a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine for a first offense, to Michigan, where recreational weed purchase and possession are legal.
Per the report, the cops looked up his license plate and found that he “travels to Michigan frequently.” Of course, they couldn’t prove by the cameras alone that he was going to Michigan to buy weed. But apparently just going across state lines is enough to create suspicion. In a criminal complaint filed by the police against the man, they call Michigan a “known source state for marijuana as it is legal there.”



I’m not a US constitutional lawyer so I don’t know why you need a warrant to get information on people’s behaviour. Is a cop not allowed to follow a car for no articulable reason and notice a pattern of suspicious behaviour (a “profile”) (like, I dunno, them driving to the houses of a bunch of known drug users) and stopping them based on that?
If they were observed stopping at multiple known drug houses, that’s fine. Following someone around until you find something you can arrest them for is not.
But then, you can follow them for a bit, right? Just not indefinitely?
So you can build a profile on someone with direct observation - it sounds plausible to me (again, not a constitutional lawyer) that you could do that through technology, without a warrant or anything.
If you happen to be driving behind them for a bit, sure. But if they’re stopping somewhere, if you also stop there, then you’re not just driving behind them, you’re actively following them, which you can’t do without cause, and ideally a warrant, not in person and especially not through state surveillance.