|
|
|
|
|
|
by seniorivn
1251 days ago
|
|
|
in your analogy, plains-clothes officer breaks into the private property without leaving a trace, by using unknown vulnerabilities in security of the place, leaves with evidence without being noticed gives that evidence to a supposedly uninformed cop, and development of that case leads to prosecution of the property owner. And you are saying there is nothing sketchy about that? |
|
|
It all hinges on whether or not they had a warrant to surveill the ISIS site.
If the police have a warrant to plant a hidden camera at a crackhouse, I don't see why they would have to reveal its existence, when they later stop and search a car full of drugs at a perfectly legal search at a border checkpoint. If they didn't have a warrant... That's an ethical problem, and it runs afoul of the fruit of the poisoned tree.
Likewise, if there's an informant or a mole at the crackhouse, do you think the police are obliged to notify the world of his identity, every time they arrest someone he tips them off to?