|
|
|
|
|
by elasticventures
2458 days ago
|
|
It's not remotely that simple; (I think; IANAL) there's lots of exceptions to this rule: if the courthouse receives resources from the state; it has statewide terminals; etc. access points where criminal records can be modified or updated then it's still the states responsibility to verify the physical security. If Eve wants to issue an arrest warrant for bob and alice; or have them "SWATTED" and locked up; changing records in a court house is a straightforward way to do that. If this was done as part of a statewide voting system and the courthouse is a polling place then the state should have type of imminent domain; or other statewide drill then it would be included. If they participate in any of those systems then depending on the nature of the agreement, they're consent maybe implicit. Obviously; nobody loves the idea of breaking into a courthouse at night. I'd wager that could even extend to adjacent buildings; and I know federal investigators who request (and then intimidate & insist) that a business owner let them do xyz type operation .. but in a lot of cases; if there is a chance of collusion then they don't even ask for that permission. I suppose that requires a warrant; so perhaps #red_team warrants issued by a higher level judge; ultimately it's a future area of legislation. |
|