should garbage on your land be private?

guy just lost a case at the supreme court level because the garbage was still on his land but accesible to the public because it was within reach of the backlane
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/world/2009/04/09/9067301.html
“The bags were unprotected and within easy reach of anyone walking by in the public alleyway, including street people, bottle pickers, urban foragers, nosy neighbours and mischievous children, not to mention dogs and assorted wildlife, as well as the garbage collectors and the police,” Binnie wrote.

his defense was the cops illegally invaded his privacy by reaching into his property to take it.

Supreme court says no.... seems to me that the Supreme court has totally opened the case up that the warrant was obtained under false information because... If the garbage was accessible to everyone as they say, does that not mean that there is no way to say for sure it was in fact his garbage and that anyone could have put it there?

They would still have to prove that whatever was in 'your garbage' was, in fact, 'yours' and not tampered with....pretty much have to have a camera on you showing you taking it out and it being picked up as evidence methinks.

exactly.... and in this case... I dont see that information.. A smart lawyer would pick up on that.
The cops/prosecutor cant use the same arguement to say it was yours and to say it was not yours.

I seem to recall that this case was basically about expectation of privacy and ownership of garbage on private property and had nothing to do with proving whose garbage it was. That was a given in this case.

yeah but should it have been a given?

The prosecution admits and says in their application that ANYONE could have reached in and grabbed the garbage.. which means the police could do so as well.

BUT the defense must have missed the fact that they should have argued that since ANYONE could reach in that means that ANYONE could have tampered with it. And used that as the reason to toss the case.. instead of only relying on the privacy aspect.

Patrick had argued police violated his rights against unreasonable search and seizure when they rummaged through his trash in the middle of the night, gathering enough evidence to obtain a warrant, search his home and charge him with trafficking ecstasy.

I think they didn't have to prove it was his to obtain the warrant....just that there was evidence from/in the garbage...actually his garbage.

I recall watching the arguments before the Supreme Court on CPAC and that they were just about the single issue of privacy when discarding something.

exactly.. dumb move on the criminals lawyer...

The lawyer had nothing to do with it Dean. The cops reached onto his property and took his garbage, in which there was evidence of a meth lab. That evidence they took to a judge to get a search warrant, which was given.

The defence argued that they should have gotten a search warrant to retreive the garbage. The court disagreed.

The defence lawyer couldn't counter the dumbass client's actions of throwing out evidence.

the defense could argue that since the police had full access rights to the garbage.. so to did the criminal next door who could have placed it there...and since they had no evidence directly showing it was his garbage then they could not use that as evedince for the search warrant ...

The defence cannot argue anything for a search warrant.

they can argue that the search warrant was in fact illegal as it was obtained under false pretents..which is exactly what they are arguing.

They are saying the police illegally obtained evidence to obtain a search warrant for my premise..

They should be saying the evidence the police obtained was in fact not proven to be my clients garbage and therefor the original search warrant should not have been granted because the police never notified the judge that the evidence could have been tampered with..

Same result in that they want the search warrant tossed out becuase it was obtained under false pretense.

So a dirt bag ecstacy dealer gets what he had coming! And has the money to go to the supreme court. Any of you have $150,000 to argue a case?
If so, then you probably are a commie bastard or a drug dealer, or on welfare and the province is paying or living on a reserve somewhere!

I'm not sure of what was false that you speak of here. The dumbass put out very incriminating evidence. The police picked it up and got a warrant as a result. What is false?

According to the police and prosecutor them selves.. they did not need a search warrant becuase ANYONE could have easily grabbed it.
Fine.. go with that. BUT if anyone could have easily grabbed it.. ANYONE could have easily put it there. So unless they have evidence showing the accused put it there....their original excuse for the warrant should not have stood up to judicial review

Dean. That is not a reasonable explanation for the evidence being there.

But that is the exact arguement they are using to obtain the garbage right?

anyone could have taken it.....which means its just as reasonable that anyone could have dumped it there

I personally dont believe it is reasonable that the police can reach across a fence or whatever and grab something and use it as evidence.. if the dude put it in the back lane.. sure as sh1t they can use it. but not in his own yard

Deank wrote:But that is the exact arguement they are using to obtain the garbage right?

anyone could have taken it.....which means its just as reasonable that anyone could have dumped it there

That's where the reasonableness comes in...it not reasonable to believe that someone planted the evidence.

But the police think its perfectly reasonable that SOMEONE could... its their own argument.

however its also not reasonable to believe that something sitting on your land in a bag is not private.

In other words the evidence was in the garbage and they do not say whether he had been under surveillance or what not . He was probably known to police and this was the only way to get the goods on him . read my post about good column it sorta tells you why .

DeanK is pissed because it was his garbage!!

And he missed garbage day.

LOL...

no trust me I watch enough crime shows to not be stupid enough to throw evidence out in my own garbage.

ermmm.... not that i would ever be commiting a crime I needed to cover up anyway...

I saw you digging that hole in the lawn last summer .

it was a kitten that died.

Thats what they all say , till the police come to check it out .