It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A motion to dismiss charges based on the use of a Predator drone was denied Wednesday
A North Dakota court has preliminarily upheld the first-ever use of an unmanned drone to assist in the arrest of an American citizen.
A judge denied a request to dismiss charges Wednesday against Rodney Brossart, a man arrested last year after a 16-hour standoff with police at his Lakota, N.D., ranch. Brossart's lawyer argued that law enforcement's "warrantless use of [an] unmanned military-like surveillance aircraft" and "outrageous governmental conduct" warranted dismissal of the case, according to court documents obtained by U.S. News.
District Judge Joel Medd wrote that "there was no improper use of an unmanned aerial vehicle" and that the drone "appears to have had no bearing on these charges being contested here," according to the documents...[continues]
Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by xuenchen
so...how is this different from having a sheriff in a helicopter flying over? or lightweight spotter planes?...police and sheriffs have been doing that for decades...the age of robotics has been going on for some time...by the way, there are simple jamming devices available to public...or....don't steal crap and refuse to give it back, even when the sheriff comes out to your property...geez
Originally posted by xuenchen
Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by xuenchen
so...how is this different from having a sheriff in a helicopter flying over? or lightweight spotter planes?...police and sheriffs have been doing that for decades...the age of robotics has been going on for some time...by the way, there are simple jamming devices available to public...or....don't steal crap and refuse to give it back, even when the sheriff comes out to your property...geez
Well let's see.
The article states that this is a "first" drone use.
And the DHS was somehow involved.
And no warrant.
The point seems to be that this case is setting a precedent.
Helicopters have human eyes.
Drones use cameras and recordings.
Perhaps a drone camera is now an "eyewitness" ???
Originally posted by xuenchen
The article states that this is a "first" drone use.
And the DHS was somehow involved.
Perhaps a drone camera is now an "eyewitness" ???