[KirinDave]

But if an agent with a telephoto lens on public property could have taken the shot, then the "put this camera on something nearby" would have been entirely fine.

The idea that the position is privileged because it's a utility pole and it's illegal for civilians to modify them is a pretty weak argument. I'm no even sure that's true; people post bills and such on utility poles all the time. I'm tempted to nail a gopro up and see what happens.

If they had just taken a metal pole or a low-altitude drone perching on a tree as a camera base, you'd be fine with it?

I mean, a convicted felon was walking around with a firearm in broad daylight outside, within eyeshot of the road. The idea that this can't be observed from external perspectives by law enforcement but a civilian could legally do it is pretty weird. Weirder than the idea that law enforcement could use surveillance drones, to me.

[binarycrusader]

As long as the general public is legally permitted to do it, then yes, I think it's fine.

I agree with the outcome of the case, just not necessarily how they arrived there.

As for attaching things to utility poles, etc. yes, most cities and local governments have rules/laws about that, they're just usually not strongly enforced. As an example:

"No one is allowed to attach to utility poles in the state of Pennsylvania without permission from the pole owner."

https://www.pplelectric.com/at-your-service/for-contractors-...

As long as the government had a warrant, or this was a private citizen exercising their legal rights, I have no problem with it.

What I would have a problem with is the government performing surveillance that only they could legally do without a warrant or evaluation by a judge of some kind.