Skip to comments.First Man Arrested With Drone Evidence Vows to Fight Case
Posted on 04/11/2012 4:46:27 AM PDT by jmcenanly
Bizarre case is forcing court to decide if police may take advantage of technology in making arrests
JewishWorldReview.com | (USNWR) The tiny town of Lakota, N.D., is quickly becoming a key testing ground for the legality of the use of unmanned drones by law enforcement after one of its residents became the first American citizen to be arrested with the help of a Predator surveillance drone. The bizarre case started when six cows wandered onto Rodney Brossart's 3,000 acre farm. Brossart, an alleged anti-government "sovereignist," believed he should have been able to keep the cows, so he and two family members chased police off his land with high powered rifles.
After a 16-hour standoff, the Grand Forks police department SWAT team, armed with a search warrant, used an agreement they've had with Homeland Security for about three years, and called in an unmanned aerial vehicle to pinpoint Brossart's location on the ranch. The SWAT team stormed in and arrested Brossart on charges of terrorizing a sheriff, theft, criminal mischief, and other charges, according to documents
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
The evidence of the crime was well established long before the drone was used to locate him.
No significant new legal issue here.
what do you mean, "I don't think that the case will take off."?
Why would someone NOT be able to keep cows on a 3000 acre tract?
Why would someone shoot at police????
-—in no jurisdiction with which I am famiiar does the trespass of cattle convey ownership to the owner of the land-—
The cows weren’t his to keep.
I don’t think it’s said he shot at police. But they did chase them off with guns.
how about "invasive" technology? How about "military" technology?
oh, idunno, cuz words matter?
Greaaaaaat. Now they've criminalized scaring your Sheriff.
I imagine he's going to claim this is a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. SCOTUS has held that 4A limits use of technology not in widespread use by the public. So, a cop walking by on your street who wears glasses and sees what appears to be a dead body through your front window, ok; extremely expensive thermal imagers to see that the roof over your third bedroom is way hotter than the rest of the house and you might be growing pot, no. But IMO he's going to have a hard time making that case because that's for warrantless, pre probable cause searches. If police have PC and a warrant, they can use pretty sophisticated tools looking for evidence. Plus in this case they'll probably claim officer safety as well, since he chased them off with guns.
Well, that plan worked.
From the article;
Currently, about 300 law enforcement agencies and research institutions—including the Grand Forks SWAT team—have “temporary licenses” from the FAA to use drones. Currently, drones are most commonly used by Homeland Security along America’s borders.
Did he think the cows were sent by the government? Were these cows USDA Grade A?
This story seems more comical than insidious. Use of a drone in this circumstance doesn't mean any more than if they used a helicopter. The event in question occurred before the use of surveillance, not vice versa.
i.e., if the drone spotted him collecting cows and, with only that information, sent the cops in, you'd have a case here.
To track illegals in distress and and help them get into the US safely......
We know they aren't [seriously] stopping illegals, so just what are the drones watching? Hmm?
Most of what DHS is doing is designed to watch legal American citizens more than anything else. Gotta wonder if this is any different.
The sherriff dept is using them in montgomery county in Texas.
We must turn the tide against liberalism before America
is swept away by their tsunami. Please do your part.
Support conservative candidates. Vote. Support Free Republic.
Deu 22:1 Thou shalt not see thy brother’s ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother.
In any case, it sure goes to prove that these folks will spend all the taxpayer money they like when someone resists their "awe-thar-i-taaaay".
Not so much anymore. Ten years ago $15k and up.
This SCOTUS decision does not address types of technology as such, merely how common it is. As certain types of tech get cheaper, the rationale for why they can't be used loses steam.
when six cows wandered onto Rodney Brossart's 3,000 acre farm. Brossart, an alleged anti-government "sovereignist," believed he should have been able to keep the cows, so he and two family members chased police off his land with high powered rifles.
Deu 22:2 And if thy brother be not nigh, or thou know him not: thou shalt bring them to thy house, and they shall be with thee until thy brother seek them, and receive them. Deu 22:3 Thou shalt do in like manner with his ass, and with his raiment, and with every thing that is thy brother's, which is lost: if thou find it, neglect it not as pertaining to another.
There is a USSC that already says police need a warrent to use infrared cameras on helicopters when searching for grow houses.
I suspect this is more sensationalism. There is a pre-us history regarding the law of wandering livestock.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.