|
|
|
|
|
|
by ubernostrum
5893 days ago
|
|
|
The point is, we can both construct hypothetical situations in which this law can protect the just and villainous alike. Except for the fact that police, by themselves, can't just go search someone. They need a warrant signed off by a judge, which provides the necessary check against police carrying out a vendetta against someone. The police were breaking the rules set upon them in accordance with the penal code Again, this appears to be highly debatable. The law's purpose is to protect sources of stories, and interpretation of the law must be done in that context. EFF wants it interpreted to declare anyone/anything involved with journalism immune to law enforcement. The police, meanwhile, seem to be acting on the presumption that the law only forbids them pressuring for sources, not investigating crimes committed by people who, in addition to suspected criminals, also happen to be journalists. |
|
|
No they don't. They're saying use subpoenas, not search warrants to obtain the information so the publication can filter out all items not specific to the case at hand.