Slashdot Mirror


Police Busted When Tracking Device Found On Car

uh oh notes a story from Down Under where a police investigation came to a screeching halt as a man being investigated by the police found tracking devices in two of his cars, ripped them out, and listed them on an auction site. "Ralph Williams, of Cromwell, said he found the devices last week in his daughter's car, which he uses, and in his flatmate's car after the cars were seized by police and taken away for investigation."

367 comments

  1. Good going from the PR dept. by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Police have neither confirmed nor denied they placed the devices.

    ...followed shortly by...

    A Trade Me spokesman said the listing was removed yesterday afternoon "at the request of the New Zealand Police".

    --
    Beep beep.
    1. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Fenresulven · · Score: 1

      Keystone Cops indeed, but that seems to be the norm today.

    2. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by iabervon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's well-known that the police have and use tracking devices; they can get warrants for them and present the results as evidence in trials. And just because he has a couple of them doesn't mean that the police actually placed them where he says he found them. Maybe somebody at the police station where he picked up the cars was careless with inventory, and he swiped a couple.

    3. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by really? · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's exactly what I was going to write. But then, suddenly, monkeys flew out of my ass and while I was dealing with that, you beat me to the post. Oh well, one lives and learns; sleep with butt cheeks clenched tight from now on.

      --

      "Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
    4. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Yeah... A guy who is already under investigation is going to STEAL SOMETHING FROM THE POLICE???? Are you on crack?

      Especially something that has little to no value to anyone else. I can just see the look on the buyers face after he gets his new shipment from eBay, turns it on, and has cops at his door within an hour because, you know....it's a tracking device.

      AC

    5. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe somebody at the police station where he picked up the cars was careless with inventory, and he swiped a couple.
      Maybe:
      "A Cromwell man who found police surveillance gear in two cars they returned to him has been arrested for theft of property.".
    6. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Bazar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll point out for those of us who don't RTFA (in this case, the one linked above)

      "Police would not comment because it is an operational matter but in a statement they say the equipment was used according to a court order."

      If thats truly the case, then what they did was lawful, and nowhere near as bad as what i suspect happens in America with their patriot act.

      Saying that, I'd like to see such a court order before i take them at their word. And if no such order can be produced... peoples heads need to roll.

      --
      To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
    7. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      I'm highly dubious that even if the courts would allow tracking of his car, that they would allow the same for his daughters and flatmates car. Still, the proof is in the pudding, this still could be up front and legit even though it stinks of something very fishy going on.

    8. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by fractoid · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah... A guy who is already under investigation is going to STEAL SOMETHING FROM THE POLICE???? Are you on crack? He didn't steal it. They gave it to him. And I'd imagine that you can change the number it reports its location to by changing the SIM or something.
      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    9. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by MCraigW · · Score: 1
      Arrested for "theft of property"? Now that really doesn't seem right.

      It would have been funnier if he had removed the devices from his automobiles and put them on other random vehicles. Preferably ones that travel long distances. And then he could just keep quiet about it and see what happens. If they charged him with "theft", then he could claim that he knew nothing about the devices at all.

    10. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Preferably vehicles belonging to the NZ equivalent of the highway patrol. ;)

      Or better yet, a boat. See what they make of THAT tracking data!!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    11. Re:Good going from the PR dept. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arrested for "theft of property"? Now that really doesn't seem right.

      Indeed, unless NZ law is vastly different to here (AU), I can't see how it could run. The goods were not taken non-consensually (the opposite in fact) nor was there any asportation (since the police returned the cars). Surely they are not going to argue that removing the devices from the cars constituted larceny? Further they would have to show an intent permanently to deprive the owner of the chattels -which they would argue the offering up for sale does -but this occured after he made attempts to return it to the rightful owners and they had impliedly denied ownership (by denying they had left anything behind) and in any case this offering up for sale occured some time after the supposed theft would have.

      If he had successfully sold them he would have been liable for conversion, but that's a tort and wouldn't lead to arrest. Sounds like some red-neck copper is flying a kite with this one! Hopefully the magistrate will stomp on him for this one.

  2. Would've been hilarious if... by mmxsaro · · Score: 0

    ... you placed the tracking devices on your arch-nemesis' car.

    1. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by arivanov · · Score: 4, Funny

      Er... Why?

      Glue them to a bus. Best of all a long range one. Or a delivery van.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    2. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Tribbles · · Score: 5, Funny

      Or a police car.

    3. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by chicagotypewriter · · Score: 1

      This is what Frank does in the movie Thief. He takes off the tracking device and puts it on a Greyhound bus, which I think is on it's way to Des Moines, Iowa, if I remember correctly.

    4. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Glue your arch-nemesis to a bus? Remind me never to become your arch-nemesis...

    5. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Naw, glue 'em to a 747 and watch the cops go nuts when they see it moving at over 400 MPH...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    6. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by arivanov · · Score: 3, Funny

      Actually on a second though the most fun is a post van.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    7. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      Closer to home, this is what Alf Winters (Temuera Morrison) does when he finds a tracking device in his girlfriend's hair drier. Packages it up and sends it on a bus to Invercargill. "Never Say Die" (1988) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095721/

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    8. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by MeanE · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or to a different country. Roaming charges bitch!

    9. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Luthair · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Its probably safer to not be found planting a device on a police car if you're currently under investigation for torching a cruiser.

    10. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Eevee1 · · Score: 0

      He could have put them on a portaloo. That way it'll be a bit crappy for the police to retrieve them.

    11. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by IdleTime · · Score: 3, Funny

      Attach the device the police officers wifes car and watch him have to explain to his wife why there is a tracking device on her car that reports back to her husbands cellphone! :)

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    12. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better things he could have done

      1. Call the local police to report the possible car bomb he found on his car.
      2. Drive to the local bomb squad and report it (yeah, its that car, over by all of yours...).
      3. Leave them in an air port and alert the police to the posible bombs now in the bathroom.
      4. Mail it to NYC state house from Osama Bin Laden. Our police will eventualy track down your police

      What ever you do, make sure to alert the press.

    13. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by andreMA · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Re: (1)... Uh, no. They'd blow his car up to dispose of the "bomb". They don't try to disarm bombs unless it can't be removed from property they care about... which doesn't include the vehicle of someone already on their shit list.

    14. Re:Would've been hilarious if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget to transfer the SIM into an iPhone first.

  3. Can you legally sell them by ShooterNeo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the police leave something in your car like that, do you now legally own them? If a burglar breaks into your house and leaves his jacket, I'm pretty sure he can't ask for it back. If the police did not obtain a warrant, it seems like an analogous situation. I'm not sure what the rules are if the cops did obtain a warrant.

    1. Re:Can you legally sell them by Asmor · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, it is a very well-documented legal fact that possession is 9/10 of the law.

      Therefore, all the man has to do to be in the right is provide the police with 10% of the proceeds from the sale.

    2. Re:Can you legally sell them by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 4, Funny

      Reminds me of when my brother was arrested for siphoning gas from cars ... and after the judge found him to be innocent, he was allowed to collect his siphoning gear back from the evidence locker.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    3. Re:Can you legally sell them by sepluv · · Score: 5, Insightful
      In general, in common law jurisdictions, I think if someone leaves there property on your land (which is a similar sutuation), it is still owned by them. You are supposed to try to return it or, at least, keep it for so many years in case they ask for it back.

      Assuming the police are responsible though, and they aren't admitting it is theirs, I'd imagine it is fair game. They can hardly complain about him selling their property if they deny it belongs to them.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    4. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a burglar breaks into your house and leaves his jacket, I'm pretty sure he can't ask for it back.
      I this case it's more like the burglar deliberately hid his jacket in your house. And his jacket had a radio mic in it so he could hear what you were talking about. And he's a member of the mafia so it's not a good idea to try to make him look like an idiot.

      I think the point here is that the police can get magic pieces of paper (warrants) that allow them to break the law and get away with it, and you can't, so don't mess with them.
    5. Re:Can you legally sell them by daeg · · Score: 5, Funny

      The police won't admit or deny they placed them. The owner of the cars most certainly own them.

      I would've attached them to a police car, though. Or a public bus. Or some kid's tricycle.

    6. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And why wouldn't he? There are perfectly legitimate reasons to have plastic tubing and a squeeze ball with a one-way valve. Legitimate enough that they sell a kit at Benny's.

    7. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have started making 1-900 sex calls on the cop's SIM, bought lots of ringtones, and generally had a good old time. Or maybe report to the phone companies that the IMEIs of the tracking devices were stolen so they blacklist them.

    8. Re:Can you legally sell them by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Or call a late night quiz show the max number of times per day.

    9. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, TFA seems to indicate he asked the police before placing the equipment up for auction if they had left anything.

    10. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Same thing goes for pot (weed, marijuana) growers in British Columbia. You get a slap on the wrist for the offense and get to have your equipment back. How's that for a toothless system?

    11. Re:Can you legally sell them by empaler · · Score: 2, Funny

      Usually the lists are maintained by the police (in Denmark, at least), so that would be a moot point. Forking over a small amount of money to get a compatible cable, then blanking the IMEI and replacing it with one from an old phone that you then reported stolen, however... :)

    12. Re:Can you legally sell them by petermgreen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't belive it is illegal to posses such gear so giving it back is the right and proper thing to do if they can't show it was used in a crime.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    13. Re:Can you legally sell them by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Funny
      I would've attached them to a police car, though. Or a public bus. Or some kid's tricycle.

      Or flush it down a fast intercity train's toilet in a waterproof bag. Watch them try to chase it at 120 mph.

      -b.

    14. Re:Can you legally sell them by evilviper · · Score: 1

      and after the judge found him to be innocent, he was allowed to collect his siphoning gear back from the evidence locker.

      I use similar gear to occasionally transfer gas from my car's tank to smaller devices (lawn mower, generator, etc.). I'd be angry if I got accused of a crime just for having a hose and gas can, and even more angry if I didn't get it back.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    15. Re:Can you legally sell them by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      While you're being facetious, if you do find something securely attached to your car, (Not just sitting on it, which could have been set there temporarily, actually attached to the car.) it is in fact yours unless someone can step forward and claims it.

      Someone clearly intended for you to take possession of it, it's like if you open your front door and find a box sitting there without any text on it and a toaster inside. Unless you are informed otherwise, it is clearly some sort of gift, and you can operate on that assumption until then.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    16. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >How's that for a toothless system?
      Yes, it's pretty stupid. Why don't you stop wasting your time and money impounding their equipment and just let them grow? It's completely harmless.

    17. Re:Can you legally sell them by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If someone leaves something on the edge of your land, sure, just like if someone leaves something on top of your car.

      But that's not this situation. Someone clearly intended for him to take possession of it, it wasn't some accident or situation where they couldn't move it any further. It's like someone erecting a shed on your lawn or leaving an envelope full of money taped to your door. It was a deliberate attaching of their property to yours, and the safe assumption is that it was some sort of gift.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    18. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *ahem* BUT THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

      Also, pot turns people into vicious, frothing psychopaths who rape every man, woman, and dog they see on the street.

    19. Re:Can you legally sell them by Opportunist · · Score: 0, Troll

      If that's true, then the question is, who possesses the law?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    20. Re:Can you legally sell them by NMerriam · · Score: 1

      he was allowed to collect his siphoning gear back from the evidence locker.


      I should hope so. I have a siphon in with my tow straps and other gear in my Jeep. It's emergency equipment like anything else.
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    21. Re:Can you legally sell them by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In Germany, you're now accused of being a "hacker" if you own "hacking tools" (like nmap or other tools used to secure your own network). So I wouldn't feel too safe. Depending on where you are, of course.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:Can you legally sell them by RKBA · · Score: 4, Funny
      "If that's true, then the question is, who possesses the law?"

      We the people of the United States ... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Governmental authority, including the authority to create law, is granted by the people. Furthermore, if I may quote the Declaration of Independence:

      Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
    23. Re:Can you legally sell them by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      I use one to get the last of the water out of my heating boiler when flushing it.
       
      I have also used it to siphon water out of a clogged drain, and to start siphoning water out of a waterbed mattress.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    24. Re:Can you legally sell them by Hucko · · Score: 4, Funny

      you've met my brother then...

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    25. Re:Can you legally sell them by cp.tar · · Score: 5, Funny

      In Germany, you're now accused of being a "hacker" if you own "hacking tools" (like nmap or other tools used to secure your own network). So I wouldn't feel too safe. Depending on where you are, of course.

      OK, I'm never going to Germany.

      I could easily be accused of being a rapist, since I "own" certain "raping tools", i.e. a penis.

      And I carry it with me all the fscking time.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    26. Re:Can you legally sell them by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Therefore, all the man has to do to be in the right is provide the police with 10% of the proceeds from the sale. Taxes must be pretty low in New Zealand then?!
    27. Re:Can you legally sell them by Technician · · Score: 1

      If the police leave something in your car like that, do you now legally own them? If a burglar breaks into your house and leaves his jacket, I'm pretty sure he can't ask for it back. If the police did not obtain a warrant, it seems like an analogous situation. I'm not sure what the rules are if the cops did obtain a warrant.

      Funny you should mention that. Whan I lived in an apartment, I had a shortwave antenna on my balcony handrail. I heard a noise outside and peeked out the window with the lights off. Sure enough, someone was dis-connecting the antenna. I turned on the outside light and they beat it out of there. I stepped out to re-connect the antenna and picked up his wallet. ;-). He did come to ask for it back. We had a nice discussion on television interference causes and cures. I did return the wallet.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    28. Re:Can you legally sell them by arth1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While you're being facetious, if you do find something securely attached to your car, (Not just sitting on it, which could have been set there temporarily, actually attached to the car.) it is in fact yours unless someone can step forward and claims it.

      This is false. If a meter wench put clamps on your wheels, they do not then automatically belong to you. And if someone welds a can of caltraps under the rear bumper of your car (to be shook loose at random), you can not be held responsible for accidents that's caused by them.

      And no, if a burglar drops his wallet with $1,000 on your floor, that doesn't make the money yours. He may be guilty of a crime, but that doesn't give you any rights to what's not yours. Crime must not pay, neither for the perpetrator nor the victim (when it becomes profitable to be a victim, people will seek to become one, which increases crime instead of lowering it).

      Transference of ownership occurs when both parties agree to it. It's not enough that one person thinks it's an ownership transfer.
      What this guy did was theft. The police might or might not have broken a law by placing the devices on his car, but that's irrelevant to the ownership of the devices.
    29. Re:Can you legally sell them by wjsteele · · Score: 1

      The United States did that a while back with a Soviet Mig 15 that was flown from North Korea and landed in South Korea. After careful study at Wright Patterson AFB in Dayton, Ohio, we "offered" it back to it's "rightful owners."

      For some reason, no one accepted it and it is now on permenant display at the United States Air Force Museum in Dayton, Ohio.

      Bill

      --
      It's my Sig and you can't have it. Mine! All Mine!
    30. Re:Can you legally sell them by sepluv · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've just read a chapter on accessio (Wikipedia link) in a book I have. That is the principle (originally of Roman law) by which the owner of a greater thing (e.g.: a car) can derive possession and possible ownership of a smaller thing (e.g.: a tracking device) that has been attached to that greater thing. This would occur if a house (lesser) was built on a piece of land (greater), or something was written on, painted or stuck to another object such as a parchment, statue, garment or building. Note that the owner of the less thing doesn't even need to have attached it themselves for their property to fall under this rule. IANAL, but going by the examples that I've seen this seems to be just the kind of situation this rule was designed for.

      (BTW, I'm talking about principles of Roman law that have been copied into the law of many modern jurisdictions--I don't know anything specifically about NZ law.) What is interesting is that, though the owner of the greater work usually has to indemnify/compensate the owner of the lesser work for their contribution, this is not the case if the owner of the lesser work was acting maliciously or in bad faith against the owner of the greater work (which would seem to be the case here).

      There is also a principle called usucapio or usucaption (Wikipedia link) by which physical possession of a chattel eventually leads to the ownership being transferred to the possessor after a certain time (a year in Roman law). This originally applied to all property, but in many modern jurisdictions principally only applies to movable property (e.g.: cars).

      In summary, I'd suggest the police really need to consult a lawyer before getting themselves any deeper.

      Also, I found this interesting blog entry on this case that alleges this is part of a dispute over access to his children with his ex-wife in which the police are taking his ex-wife's side.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    31. Re:Can you legally sell them by Speed+Pour · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Minor correction, the example you give of a burglar dropping his wallet is an example of accidentally leaving the object in somebody's care. In this instance, the police knowingly and willingly put the devices into his possession. And you're right, unless he willingly accepts the devices, then the rightful owner doesn't change...EXCEPT, when he found the devices, he clearly opted to take ownership, and proceeded to attempt a sale. Unless some law prohibits ownership of these devices, then he has every right to do with them as he chooses (as long as it remains within the confines of the law ;). The really interesting part is, if there is a law prohibiting ownership of these devices, it means the police department is an accessory to the crime, in addition to any other crime they committed in placing those nifty little toys in the first place.

      Of course, now this guy has just pissed on the police...even if he weasels out of whatever he's guilty of, they will bust this guy's balls for years to come.

      --
      - Nobody would know what RTFA meant if it didn't need to be said all the time
    32. Re:Can you legally sell them by gronofer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or flush it down a fast intercity train's toilet in a waterproof bag. Watch them try to chase it at 120 mph.
      Unfortunately, fast intercity trains don't exist in NZ. He'd be better off tying it to the back of a sheep.
    33. Re:Can you legally sell them by Jardine · · Score: 1

      I could easily be accused of being a rapist, since I "own" certain "raping tools", i.e. a penis.

      And I carry it with me all the fscking time.


      You should get a detachable one.

    34. Re:Can you legally sell them by DavidTC · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If a meter wench put clamps on your wheels, they do not then automatically belong to you.

      No shit, Sherlock. Did the big 'Property of The City' on it clue you in there? There's a reason they put that on there, you know.

      He found unlabeled boxes attached to his car. He called the police, he asked if the boxes were theirs. They were not. (At least, according to the police, and, obviously, they'd know.)

      And if someone welds a can of caltraps under the rear bumper of your car (to be shook loose at random), you can not be held responsible for accidents that's caused by them.

      You can't be held responsible for something you had no cause to know about, but that's entirely unrelated to whether or not it's your property. If they stole a box of nails out of your front seat and stuck them under your bumper, or just unattached your bumper and made it fall off, you aren't liable either. (Assuming the facts are not in question.)

      And no, if a burglar drops his wallet with $1,000 on your floor, that doesn't make the money yours. He may be guilty of a crime, but that doesn't give you any rights to what's not yours.

      Which is why I made the distinction between 'attached' and not attached. Sometimes things fall on or in your property. That does not make them yours. (Unless they are vegetation, which oddly enough is yours in most places.)

      And sometimes things are left on your property, for you, and they are in fact yours.

      It's all what a reasonable person would think. A reasonable person assumes a wallet laying on the ground is not for him (Even in his own house), whereas a reasonable person would assume an unlabeled envelope taped to his door full of cash is for him, even if he can think of no reason why this would be.(1) However, sitting in his front lawn, nope, not for him.

      Likewise, if you're parked in a parking lot and walk up and see a cooler full of soda sitting on your car, it's reasonable to assume some ass is just using your car as a table and that is not, in fact, a gift.

      And if you walk out and see something stuck under your wipers?(2) That is pretty clearly someone leaving you something on purpose.

      In other words, while something simply being on your property doesn't make it yours (And I didn't say it did.), it doesn't mean it's not yours. Transfer of ownership can be implied by leaving something for someone.

      It happens all the time with delivery people, or people leaving things in mailboxes. (According to postal regulations, things that enter the postal system are property of the recipient.) Or, like I said, things stuck under wipers.

      He checked to see if the police had left it, which would be the only people that reasonable would attach things to his car not as a gift, and it wasn't them.

      Now, if someone else shows up and claims it's theirs and the left it attached to his car by accident, he might be in trouble, but as it pretty obviously is the police's, only they would have grounds for complaint. And they can't because they said it wasn't theirs, leaving the obvious implication it was his.

      1) Well, it might be on the wrong house, but that doesn't really apply to this case.

      2) And that raises an interesting question. Are you honestly asserting that people can't legally claim ownership of pieces of paper stuck under their wipers? And before you say 'Paper is valueless', let's postulate it is an 85 dollar concert ticket.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    35. Re:Can you legally sell them by rhombic · · Score: 0, Troll

      Hahahahaha. Gawd, if I ever saw a post that deserves +5 funny, yours is it. Nice one, there.

      --
      1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
    36. Re:Can you legally sell them by arth1 · · Score: 1

      It's all what a reasonable person would think.

      The problem with that philosophy is who gets to classify someone as reasonable? If I don't find you reasonable, should your thoughts not count? Different people have different ideas of what's reasonable, which is why there are laws covering even what people in one culture and one specific time might find self-evident.

      2) And that raises an interesting question. Are you honestly asserting that people can't legally claim ownership of pieces of paper stuck under their wipers?

      Yes, I honestly claim that. Because you don't know whether the person who stuck it under your wipers owned it, or whether they meant it as a transferral of ownership. Imagine someone finding an envelope on the ground beside your car, and in order for it not to blow away, they stick it under your wipers. That does not make it yours.
      You can claim it at yours if you hand it over to the police (or other appointed authority), and they can not find an owner within a certain period of time, or you are certain that it was meant as a gift. If there's any doubt in your mind, you're not acting in good faith, and are a thief if you appropriate it.

      And before you say 'Paper is valueless',
      Strawman argumentation gets you nowhere. I would never say that, and to insinuate that I'd do so is disingenious.
    37. Re:Can you legally sell them by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 5, Funny

      O.J.: Radio interview quote from Marine Corps General Reinwald and a female radio host. He wants to host some boy scouts at the training center for some practise excercises. As follows
      FEMALE INTERVIEWER: So, General Reinwald, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?
      GENERAL REINWALD: We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting.
      FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?
      GENERAL REINWALD: I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the rifle range.
      FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?
      GENERAL REINWALD: I don't see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.
      FEMALE INTERVIEWER: But you're equipping them to become violent killers.
      GENERAL REINWALD: Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not one, are you?
      The radio went silent and the interview ended. You gotta love the Marines!


      -- bash.org

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    38. Re:Can you legally sell them by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      One could argue that an act is not much of a crime in the first place, if people are willingly becoming "victims".

    39. Re:Can you legally sell them by arth1 · · Score: 1

      No shit, Sherlock. Did the big 'Property of The City' on it clue you in there? There's a reason they put that on there, you know.


      Such signs are informative, and do not establish ownership. I had a printer with a sticker saying "Property of the government", which I legally bought from a government auction. The sticker did not invalidate my claim to it. The sticker on the parking clamps is likewise informative, and informs you (and the police who finds them in a dumpster on the highway) who owns it, but doesn't establish it. It makes it easier for you to trace the owner, but doesn't mean they have to be the property of who the sticker claims. Without the sticker, they would not have become yours -- you just might not have known who owns them, except that it wasn't you.
    40. Re:Can you legally sell them by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1
      He'd be better off tying it to the back of a sheep.

      Read TFA.

      He tried that, but the velcro kept sticking to his gloves instead.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    41. Re:Can you legally sell them by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I find something electronic that I don't own attached to my car, I call the bomb squad.

      And the papers, because they'll want to cover the argument between the military guy with the flack-jacket and the police guy with the red face.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    42. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More seriously, these days most innocent citizens not possessed of a PhD in electronics discovering suspicious devices attached to their cars are going to call the bomb squad. After the neighbourhood's been evacuated for five square miles or whatever and a controlled explosion of the suspect vehicles has been carried out in the local supermarket's car park or wherever, all that's left is for the police commissioner to explain to an angry public and their (our) political masters what the hell they were playing at in the first place.

    43. Re:Can you legally sell them by KORfan · · Score: 1

      Yes, but we had to return the Mig-29 that landed in Japan. The Chinese returned the favor after one of our EC aircraft "Lurched erratically and struck one of their innocent top-of-the-line fighters in spite of the pilot's best efforts to avoid a collision". Or maybe it was that our converted cargo aircraft "Engaged in air combat maneuvers and using it's superior maneuverability intentionally rammed the unsuspecting Chinese aircraft."

    44. Re:Can you legally sell them by Lord+Balto · · Score: 5, Funny

      In the minds of most police, they are not subject to the law. They ARE the law. Just ask the next one you see on the street (and hope he has a sense of humor). Personally, I would have driven to the officer's house on numerous occasions while sending him messages about "the operation" and finally telling him "the cheeseberger is ready to be fried."

    45. Re:Can you legally sell them by arth1 · · Score: 1

      One could argue that an act is not much of a crime in the first place, if people are willingly becoming "victims".

      One could argue anything, including that, but then one would also be arguing that it's not much of a crime to sell heroin to willing buyers, have sex with willing minors, and buy votes from willing voters.

    46. Re:Can you legally sell them by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      You could always try small aircraft.... a crop-duster would be particularly amusing.

      Or if you're looking for poetic justice, you could rig the device to only function properly while airborne, and place it on a police helicopter.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    47. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is New Zealand, remember, not the US or UK.

      Any New Zealander faced with an unknown box on their car is likely to do exactly what this bloke did - stick it on TradeMe (the NZ version of eBay) and try to make a buck off of it. Either that or dismantle it to see what's inside.

      Apart from an incredibly small number of (generally immigrant) loonies, New Zealanders are not paranoid, are not used to thinking "OMG it's a bomb!" whenever they see an unusual piece of electronics, and generally realise that no, the world is not trying to kill us every minute of every day.

    48. Re:Can you legally sell them by dmizer · · Score: 1

      That'd be "informative" if TFA was about US police instead of NZ police.

    49. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, pot turns people into vicious, frothing psychopaths who rape every man, woman, and dog they see on the street.

      No, but it does trigger schizophrenia in people who are already predisposed to the condition (which is up to 10% of the population).

    50. Re:Can you legally sell them by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      in NZ. He'd be better off tying it to the back of a sheep. It's always "to the back of a sheep" with you people, isn't it?
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    51. Re:Can you legally sell them by putaro · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem with that philosophy is who gets to classify someone as reasonable?

      Strangely enough, in the American system, the courts do. Many laws are based around what a "reasonable" person would do with the interpretation of reasonable being left up to the courts. It's impossible to write laws that take into account all possible situations. That's why we have a judicial system which as the job of interpreting the laws and applying them to real life situations.

    52. Re:Can you legally sell them by i_b_don · · Score: 1

      That's what NZ is famous for...

      d

      --
      all language nazi's will burne in heil!
    53. Re:Can you legally sell them by pakar · · Score: 1

      Ohh... Now i have to get myself a big truck and attach some nice sport-cars... ;)

    54. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In Australia you can be charged with "theft by finding"

      It has even been used in a recent high profile case of someone claiming to have found medical records and sold them to the media.
      Possession is clearly not 9/10th of the law here.

      Not sure if NZ is the same (I wouldnt be surprised if it had something similar)

    55. Re:Can you legally sell them by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure he had some training in unarmed combat and disarming an enemy.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    56. Re:Can you legally sell them by Sique · · Score: 1

      While it surely doesn't establish ownership, it surely informs you about an intention. So with this sticker the city informs you that by clamping your wheel they did not wanted to transfer ownership of the clamp to you.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    57. Re:Can you legally sell them by mpe · · Score: 1

      If the police leave something in your car like that, do you now legally own them?

      Since they deliberatly installed the device in your car you could probably consider it a gift. Even if legally it was "unsolicited goods" you could probably charge "rent" for it, especially if it was hooked up to the vehicle electrical system.

      If a burglar breaks into your house and leaves his jacket, I'm pretty sure he can't ask for it back.

      Their leaving if there could be "accidental" plus the police would probably want it as evidence. Whereas if you have possible evidence of police wrongdoing the last people you want to handle it are the main suspects.

    58. Re:Can you legally sell them by loosebra · · Score: 1

      I challenge you to find a train that goes faster than 60 mph in the South Island of New Zealand ...

    59. Re:Can you legally sell them by andreMA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My understanding is that he called the police and asked if they'd left anything in his car. They explicitly said "No", disclaiming any ownership. Perhaps the cop who told him that -- acting as an agent for the police department -- should be charged with theft, but the gentleman here was at worst guilty of receiving stolen property. Since he received it in good faith, I don't think any such charge should go anywhere.

    60. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      In the minds of most police, they are not subject to the law.
      This is precisely why I never came forward a number of years when I saw driver hit a cop during a traffic stop (how stupid do you have to be to stand in a highway at night in dark clothing, anyhow? especially with flashing lights that impair the vision of driver?). The cop suffered only minor injuries, I read later, and as far as I know they never caught the motorist (who in my opinion should have come forward and sued the police for any damage to his vehicle).

      (What I saw of the incident wouldn't have been much help anyhow - it was in my rear-view mirror and I didn't have my license on me at the time. I might have stopped to render assistance, even risking being ticketed for backing up on a highway, but the bastards would have impounded my car. No good deed goes unpunished...)
    61. Re:Can you legally sell them by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and aspirin triggers liver failure in those already predisposed to the condition.

      Your point?

    62. Re:Can you legally sell them by NeoTerra · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the respect for these documents is fading just as fast, if not faster than the documents themselves.

    63. Re:Can you legally sell them by Hydian · · Score: 1

      I'd have shipped them to a friend in some other country. Let's see them figure that one out. :)

    64. Re:Can you legally sell them by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Imagine someone finding an envelope on the ground beside your car, and in order for it not to blow away, they stick it under your wipers. That does not make it yours.

      And imagine they found it on the ground and walked up to you, claiming it was theirs, and gave it to you.

      Something doesn't become theft on your part because someone gave something to you they didn't have the right to. It's stolen property, but unknowingly possessing or using stolen property is not a crime.

      You have to to give it back, but you can operate as if it's yours until them. Otherwise, all transfers of ownership would be impossible, because you'd have to go and check if they actually owned the property, and then if the person they got it from actually owned it, and so on back.

      More to the point, the legality of a property transfer has nothing to do with the method of one. Except where there are explicit laws about the transfer, like a house or a car.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    65. Re:Can you legally sell them by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      And no, if a burglar drops his wallet with $1,000 on your floor, that doesn't make the money yours.

      Yes it does, but it wasn't $1000, it was about $2700, and it wasn't a wallet, it was a pillowcase, and while he was in my house, I killed him, and while it was dark, I buried him in my back flower garden. The flowers have grown quite nicely there ever since.

    66. Re:Can you legally sell them by greginnj · · Score: 4, Funny

      And no, if a burglar drops his wallet with $1,000 on your floor, that doesn't make the money yours. He may be guilty of a crime, but that doesn't give you any rights to what's not yours. [...]

      And sometimes things are left on your property, for you, and they are in fact yours.
      Waitaminute, so if the neighbor walks his dog and it craps on my lawn, and while he's doing it the neighbor drops his wallet, the dog crap belongs to me, but the wallet does not? How unfair can life be?
      --
      Read the best of all of Slash: seenonslash.com
    67. Re:Can you legally sell them by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      Also, pot turns people into vicious, frothing psychopaths who rape every man, woman, and dog they see on the street.

      Hmmm.... really? I guess I'll be moving to British Colombia then -- but I'll leave my dog here.

    68. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but if you go to the police and they deny ownership, which is what the police did in this case, then you can stake a claim of ownership. If they deny ownership, then it would be considered abandoned.

    69. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a credit to society

    70. Re:Can you legally sell them by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Funny, yes, but false.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    71. Re:Can you legally sell them by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      New Zealanders are not paranoid, are not used to thinking "OMG it's a bomb!"

      What if the device has little lights that show a cartoon figure giving you the finger? Would you think that it was a bomb then? Not so smug now are ya?

    72. Re:Can you legally sell them by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

      Snopes says it isn't true, http://www.snopes.com/military/reinwald.asp, but it should be!

      --
      Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
    73. Re:Can you legally sell them by djasbestos · · Score: 1

      Counterpoint to America, where my then-mohawked friend, who was out of his home state at the time, in possession of *burglary* tools (for squatting), and having ducked into an alley, was let off on the spot by cops because they couldn't prove anything. Most people wouldn't be so lucky...

      Then again, except at the airport and a group following a Lebanon War protest last summer, the only time I've seen cops in Germany, they always look like they are going for a nice stroll. I'd rather deal w/ German cops than American cops...

    74. Re:Can you legally sell them by redd+robber · · Score: 1
    75. Re:Can you legally sell them by SpringRevolt · · Score: 1

      it's like if you open your front door and find a box sitting there without any text on it and a toaster inside. !?!?!

      Cylons come pre-boxed?

    76. Re:Can you legally sell them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's pretty pathetic. You don't know who that guy was. Could have been the nicest cop in town. You could have helped the guy out, then when asked for your license say that you've lost your wallet in all the commotion or something. Sure there are a lot of shitty cops out there, but someone getting hit by a car is still someone getting hit by a car.

    77. Re:Can you legally sell them by rtechie · · Score: 1

      And if someone welds a can of caltraps under the rear bumper of your car (to be shook loose at random), you can not be held responsible for accidents that's caused by them. In practice, I think it's going to be near-impossible to convince the police that SOMEONE ELSE attached such a device to your car.

      And no, if a burglar drops his wallet with $1,000 on your floor, that doesn't make the money yours. He may be guilty of a crime, but that doesn't give you any rights to what's not yours. Crime must not pay, neither for the perpetrator nor the victim (when it becomes profitable to be a victim, people will seek to become one, which increases crime instead of lowering it).

      Transference of ownership occurs when both parties agree to it. It's not enough that one person thinks it's an ownership transfer. What this guy did was theft. The police might or might not have broken a law by placing the devices on his car, but that's irrelevant to the ownership of the devices. In theory yes, in practice no. One must try to take reality into account when dealing with the law.

      In theory, it's illegal to rob drug dealers. IN PRACTICE, it's legal because there is no practical way the drug dealer can report his goods stolen or claim ownership. This is the biggest reason most drug dealers are armed, because they are very vulnerable targets for robbery. The same logic applies to the burglar that drops his wallet or the police doing illegal surveillance. If you are unwilling to claim ownership of something because it might get you in trouble, then it no longer belongs to you and it's a little perverse to charge someone with theft for taking something the owner has abandoned.

      And there *IS* the concept of "abandoned property". If something is "abandoned", like these surveillance devices were, it's fair game. If people fish through your garbage and take out valuable items you can't claim they were stealing from you because you implicitly abandoned the property.

      Basically, in theory there MAY have been a crime committed, but in actual practice what he's doing is perfectly legal.

    78. Re:Can you legally sell them by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Actually, most places if someone's dog craps on your lawn, the dog's owner is guilty of littering.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    79. Re:Can you legally sell them by dweller_below · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that one of the best ways to combat un-desired police behavior is via economic pressures. Going the PR route is a good one if the likely outcome is a reduction in the police budget. However, selling the devices is not likely to be effective, unless it is part of an effective PR campaign.

      If you don't wish to go the PR route, perhaps the best way to approach this is to attack the police tracking budget directly. Destroy the devices in a non-obvious way. Perhaps by opening them up and soaking them in salt water. Rinse well. Reattach. When police replace, repeat. It won't take long to run out the police budget.

    80. Re:Can you legally sell them by bazio · · Score: 1

      Ooh! A rare opportunity for a Judge Dredd quote!

      "I am the law!"

      --
      Set the bar high, then bring a tall ladder.
    81. Re:Can you legally sell them by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Upon a cursory examination of various criminal possession and/or use statutes, one will find boilerplate text at the tail end of the statute stating "The provisions of this statute shall not be construed to extend to persons duly authorized to engage in such regulated occupations (locksmiths, private investigators, etc.) or to law enforcment personnel engaged in official activity." It does seem to enshrine class distinctions on the basis of occupation.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    82. Re:Can you legally sell them by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

      Put the crap IN the wallet, then be the Good Samaritan and return the wallet to the fucker.

    83. Re:Can you legally sell them by sepluv · · Score: 1

      Ye...obviously...the attachment does need to be done someone who is in lawful possession of the chattel even if not necessarily the owner.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  4. Re:Frist Psot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obviously not you.

  5. Warrant? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Did they have a warrant to place the devices? TFA doesn't say.

    1. Re:Warrant? by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      TFA said the po-po would not "confirm or deny" they placed the devices, so I'd say that's probably a "no".

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    2. Re:Warrant? by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

      If they didn't have a warrant, and they just left the devices laying about willy nilly with no express intent, I'd say they were littering. A heinous crime committed by the gestapo!!!

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    3. Re:Warrant? by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      Warrants still have a meaning? I though we were in a 'anything goes, think of the terrorists / child molesters' kind of society nowadays.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
  6. Sue the police? by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

    At what point does it become viable to sue the police for their lies and denials on this case?

    And what kind of law requires a warrent to do something, except when the police are claiming they are in a hurry and don't need a warrent if they think the judge will be on their side? Sounds like their judges have balls even smaller than those of American judges when it comes to stricking down bad laws.

    I bet 90% of the time, the police intend to be in a hurry, and don't even consider asking for the warrent.

    --
    George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    1. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And what kind of law requires a warrent to do something, except when the police are claiming they are in a hurry and don't need a warrent if they think the judge will be on their side?

      You do realize that the US has very similar rules of evidence, right? That whole 'exigent circumstances' thing? There are similar rules for FISA wiretaps, even before this whole NSA scandal thing, in that DHS could have tapped someone's phone then gone and gotten a warrent retrospectively.

      It's more limited than the scope of this law seems to be, but the idea is by no means absent from the US legal system.

    2. Re:Sue the police? by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 0, Troll

      You do realize ... that I'm not an American! America ain't the center of the world, they and you just think they are!

      I live in Canada, where we have judges with balls that not only strike down unconstitutional laws promptly but anticipate constitutional problems that will require changes to laws before they are enacted. ... instead of pecking at small parts of a bad law years later like the judge did to the Patriot Act the other day.

      Now, why are you posting as an 'Anonymous Coward'? Are you scared your government isn't going to like how you are talking about their laws? Too embarassed that your judges and your god damn people haven't overthrown Bush as is your responsibility when he stripped away the rights your ancestors died for?

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    3. Re:Sue the police? by This_Is_My_Happening · · Score: 1, Insightful

      At what point does it become viable to sue the police for their lies and denials on this case? Uh, what? You can't sue someone just for lying to you, and even if you could why would you want to? The cops didn't slander him or ruin his name. In fact it was his own decision to make a spectacle out of the situation, not the police's. Would you have preferred the police be less discreet and just follow the guy everywhere in a marked cruiser?

      And what kind of law requires a warrent to do something, except when the police are claiming they are in a hurry and don't need a warrent if they think the judge will be on their side? Laws that understand that a judge isn't always available when there actually is an urgent sitation. Believe it or not police do have to be hurry every once in a while. For a larger city with plenty of judges it's not a problem to reach one 24/7, but what about smaller areas where a warrant at 3am means having to wrest an old man out of bed?

      I bet 90% of the time, the police intend to be in a hurry, and don't even consider asking for the warrent. And I bet 90% of such ridiculous statistics are made up without any grounding in reality whatsoever.
      --
      God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?
    4. Re:Sue the police? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      There's no need for "female" judges to admit inadmissible evidence.

      That's what "Police Psychics" are for. To give them an excuse to follow up leads they get from illegally gathered evidence.

      At least, that's what my scam would be if I were taking money from taxpayers under the pretense of spooky mystical crime-solving powers. I see no reason that no one else would've thought of such an obvious (and "plausibly deniable") scam.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:Sue the police? by nasor · · Score: 1

      What makes you think they didn't have a warrant? The fact that the police didn't tell the guy that they had installed the tracking devices when he asked? So far as I know, the police aren't required to answer honestly when you ask them whether or not they're spying on you.

    6. Re:Sue the police? by sedmonds · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You do realize that Canada has similar "exigent circumstances" laws, right? And that your rights with respect to the police are not absolute, in fact evidence tainted by violation of your rights may be used against you in court? And that constitutional challenges to laws may only be made if you have standing - you must have been wronged by the law to challenge its constitutionality (well, and Parliament may request the judiciary give an opinion on a bill or law).

    7. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America ain't the center of the world, they and you just think they are!

      I was responding to this statement: "Sounds like their judges have balls even smaller than those of American judges when it comes to stricking down bad laws."

      You're the one who brought up the US.

      Now, why are you posting as an 'Anonymous Coward'? Are you scared your government isn't going to like how you are talking about their laws? Too embarassed that your judges and your god damn people haven't overthrown Bush as is your responsibility when he stripped away the rights your ancestors died for?

      No, I'm posting AC because I moderated this discussion, and as silly as the moderation was (I was the first to mod this post funny), I'd prefer to see it not wiped out.

    8. Re:Sue the police? by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...it's like what McCain said about torture.

      Sometimes, the good guys need to break the rules in order to do the right thing. This
      doesn't mean that disrespect for the rules in general should be ensrined into the law
      or SOP. If the situation is really serious enough that you need to ignore the usual
      rules then you need to be prepared to take any of the consequences for breaking them.

      This is especially true for anyone that is supposed to be "setting an example".

      If you are a cop and aren't willing to take the consequences for breaking the rules,
      then it's pretty obvious that the situation doesn't warrant breaking them. Being too
      lazy to get a judge's signature is not a good excuse. Writting the law so that cops
      can be lazy as a matter of routine is not good.

      This is the part of "being Dirty Harry" that tends to get missed.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      " You being a Canadian and all it is really none of your business."

      Why didn't you say the same about Iran and Saddam Huessein? After all, you being an American and all it is really none of your business.

      Can you say "I am a hypocrite?" Truth hurts, doesn't it, hypocrite ...

      Fact is that bad US economic policy (the stock and housing bubbles) threatens global security, and that Bush is the #1 threat to world peace. Not the leaders of Iran or Iraq or North Korea.

    10. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "but what about smaller areas where a warrant at 3am means having to wrest an old man out of bed?"

      Then you wake them up. Or you do your job properly, and plan better, so you don't have to go and bother someone at 3am.

    11. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your leader becomes our business when he starts shitting all over the world and leaving chaos behind him in his wake.

      If you dont want your dog to be any of our business get it fucking neutered.

    12. Re:Sue the police? by TriezGamer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Newsflash: Not all Americans are in support of American foreign policy.

    13. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      "Police psychics" won't work in jurisdictions where its illegal to engage in fortune telling, etc. There's a guy who was conning one of my aunts, claiming he had worked as a psychic for the Toronto Police Department. I pointed out to her that it was illegal, and he was a liar:

      False Pretences

      Pretending to practise witchcraft, etc.

      365. Every one who fraudulently

      (a) pretends to exercise or to use any kind of witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment or conjuration,

      (b) undertakes, for a consideration, to tell fortunes, or

      (c)pretends from his skill in or knowledge of an occult or crafty science to discover where or in what manner anything that is supposed to have been stolen or lost may be found,

      is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

    14. Re:Sue the police? by vtcodger · · Score: 2, Insightful
      ***You being a Canadian and all it is really none of your business.***

      There was a time when a lot of Americans figured that we should mind our own damn business. No more -- perhaps regretably. Back then I'd have agreed with you I think.

      As long as George the Clueless, Dick Cheney and the 49 mental midgets in the senate who back those two clowns 98% of the time think it is perfectly OK to mind other country's business, we Americans really shouldn't complain about foreigners expressing a bit of distaste for our dear leader.

      I suppose that it would be OK for you to criticise the Canadian Prime Minister if you want to. I'll save you the trouble of looking his name up. It is Stephen Joseph Harper. (But Harper is actually a right winger by Canadian standards, so maybe you ought to settle for saying something nasty about the weather up there or curling or Celine Dion.)

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    15. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, that just says it's illegal to fraudulently pretend to be a psychic. What if I'm not pretending or pretending but not fradulently? hmmm?

    16. Re:Sue the police? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      ...it's like what McCain said about torture.

      If McCain endorsed torture, then he's worthless. Torture is never justified - it's a horrible abuse and not even reliable.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    17. Re:Sue the police? by MikShapi · · Score: 0

      Looks like you Canadians don't have it too right either:
      Fact: the fact that Bush is the #1 threat to world peace does NOT absolve opressive fundamentalist hate-mongering regimes of responsibility over their respective actions. These nations STILL ARE a significant threat to world peace, regardless of whether America is being headed by George Dubya , other republicans, democrats, or a stoned bunch of hippie carebears.

      --
      -
    18. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You ferners sure know how to construct straw man arguments.

    19. Re:Sue the police? by Vellmont · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Sometimes, the good guys need to break the rules in order to do the right thing.


      The problem with that statement is that the "bad guys" think they're the "good guys", and will do the same thing.

      I don't exactly know which statement you're talking about McCain and torture... but I guess I liked it better when he was saying (to paraphrase) that "we don't torture because we don't want our guys to be tortured." That was a few years ago, and he's become more wishy-washy since then.

      --
      AccountKiller
    20. Re:Sue the police? by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Kinda hard to believe of a guy who had an extended stay at the Hanoi Hilton.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    21. Re:Sue the police? by 808140 · · Score: 1

      Wasn't McCain tortured in Vietnam? He used to be quite outspokenly against torture, has he decided to toe the party line? I'm not fond of McCain's politics, but I always respected how he didn't take shit from anyone. If it's true that he's gone pro-torture that would definitely destroy any respect I had for him.

    22. Re:Sue the police? by Scudsucker · · Score: 0, Troll

      I always respected how he didn't take shit from anyone.

      Up until he decided to run for president again, started backing Bush, cozied up to guys like Jerry Falwell and began to flip flop more than a tank of goldfish dumped onto the floor.

    23. Re:Sue the police? by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      You do realize that not only are you wrong, and not only are you making yourself look like a major ass here, but you also talk funny and worship a fucking maple tree.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    24. Re:Sue the police? by Obyron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If the old man finds doing his job to be such an inconvenience, maybe it's time to retire and join the rest of the fogies in Shady Acres. Judges / Magistrates / Trial Commissioners / Whatever The Hell You Have In Jurisdiction X know very well that late night phone calls and police knocking on your door at 4am to get warrants or EPOs or what-have-you signed is part of the job. The stuff you see in police procedural dramas where the cops don't want to call Judge SoandSo because it would be a horror to wake him up is silly. To me, "not wanting to wake the judge" is a sign that the evidence for the warrant is paper thin, and they know he'll chew their ass for waking him up over nothing, when they SHOULD be waking him up over -something-.

      --
      --Obyron
    25. Re:Sue the police? by notthe9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with that statement is that the "bad guys" think they're the "good guys", and will do the same thing.


      It's no so much that the bad guys think they're good that's the problem. It's that this is how good guys become bad guys.
    26. Re:Sue the police? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      You can non-fraudulently pretend all you want. Actors, for example, do it all the time. You can even fool people if you want.

      You just can't, in any manner, charge for it.

      However, you're right, this doesn't alter the fact that a psychic could, indeed, work for the police in Canada if he was actually a psychic, which I'm sure this guy asserted he was. So I'm not sure what pointing out the law is supposed to accomplish except that if he was working with the police, he must be a real psychic.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    27. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't sue someone just for lying to you

      You can sue people for any reason you want. You'll lose, of course...

    28. Re:Sue the police? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      I dunno--if it's 3 AM and the police are knocking on MY door, I'd be willing to take a gamble that they'd just leave me well enough alone instead of calling the judge, assuming they're trying to enter my house for some minor and trivial offense.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    29. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      There has yet to be a single psychic who has proven their supposed abilities. He's a fraud.

      Latest example - he just had an accidend. How come he didn't see it coming?

      Another example - my aunt would call him to locate missing items - he never found them. Instead, I would go over and find them, sometimes within a minute - and I'm not psychic.

      He's a con artist. Also, since my aunt challenged me to prove he was a liar, I sent an email to the police in question, asking them if they ever heard of the guy ... funny how he didn't predict THAT one either ...

    30. Re:Sue the police? by zbuffered · · Score: 1

      If it's true that he's gone pro-torture
      Here's where we basically stand on McCain and torture: US Cites Exception on Torture Ban. The torture ban was his bill, but we're still allowed to torture people, just not on US soil (Guantanamo OK!). Of course, we can still do almost anything we want as long as we don't call it torture (like we did with Jose Padilla), so that's not much of a problem if we really, really want to torture someone.

      The torture took myriad forms, each designed to cause pain, anguish, depression and, ultimately, the loss of will to live. The base ingredient in Mr. Padilla's torture was stark isolation for a substantial portion of his captivity.

      • This sleep deprivation was achieved in a variety of ways. For a substantial period of his captivity, Mr. Padilla's cell contained only a steel bunk with no mattress.
      • He would be shackled and manacled, with a belly chain, for hours in his cell
      • The temperature of his cell would be manipulated, making his cell extremely cold for long stretches of time
      • In an effort to disorient Mr. Padilla, his captors would deceive him about his location and who his interrogators actually were. Mr. Padilla was threatened with being forcibly removed from the United States to another country, including U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he was threatened his fate would be even worse than in the Naval Brig.
      • ...was threatened with being cut with a knife and having alcohol poured on the wounds
      • ...was also threatened with imminent execution.
      • ...hooded and forced to stand in stress positions for long durations of time
      • ...was given drugs against his will, believed to be some form of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) or phencyclidine (PCP), to act as a sort of truth serum during his interrogations
      --
      Synergy is your friend
    31. Re:Sue the police? by cyberwench · · Score: 3, Funny

      False Pretences

      Pretending to practise witchcraft, etc.

      365. Every one who fraudulently

      (a) pretends to exercise or to use any kind of witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment or conjuration,


      So, if you legitimately practice witchcraft, that's ok? Looks like the sort of law that would need a bit more fleshing out.
      --
      ~ Leilah
    32. Re:Sue the police? by owlstead · · Score: 1

      I'm not a US citizen, but am I allowed to make some harsh statements about Celine Dion anyway?

    33. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, the US was enforcing a UN mandate, and we got shot at by Saddam's forces. I guess we should have fucking ignored the UN and not gotten shot at. Yes, shooting at Americans is an act of war, and it's also a bad idea. so yeah, there was a legitimate reason for the war, so go fuck yourself.

    34. Re:Sue the police? by billcopc · · Score: 1

      If I were Vietnamese, I'd probably have tortured Americans back then too!

      You know, the common thing with all American wars is they're never fought on American soil. Just think about that one for a moment.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    35. Re:Sue the police? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Seems like a lot of work to convict him of 'conspiracy to commit terrorism overseas', which probably won't stand up due to his treatment before the conviction.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    36. Re:Sue the police? by Carpe+PM · · Score: 1

      If I were Vietnamese, I'd probably have tortured Americans back then too!

      Now replace 'Vietnamese'and 'Americans' with any other identifiers, and you will begin to understand. Congratulations, you are just like all the other evil people in the world.

      You know, the common thing with all American wars is they're never fought on American soil. Just think about that one for a moment.

      Except, of course, the ones that weren't.

    37. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the situation is really serious enough that you need to ignore the usual
      rules then you need to be prepared to take any of the consequences for breaking them. I think the point is that if the situation is serious enough and people's lives and liberty are under direct threat and you can explain that to the satisfaction of the investigator, the police, the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, and/or the public after the fact then you aren't going to get into too much trouble. Punishments and rules applied to people are guidelines for behavior under normal circumstances and not computer code to be followed blindly.

      But lying about what you have done, covering it up, hurting/threatening people to cover it up, etc etc are usually pretty good signs that you don't expect people to think what you did was right. Yes, sometimes there is a need for operational secrecy, but that only holds true to a point.

      Even torture, just like homicide, is necessary sometimes. But unlike killing someone where we can define the circumstances under which it might go unpunished (self-defense, protecting others, war), the reasons that torture might be allowed are just too unclear to be codified.

      Going back to this story. I agree, I think this New Zealand Law that allows exceptions to the warrant requirement, explicitly hands over too much discretion to the police. An implied discretion would be enough and police would then only use it when there truly was an emergency situation rather than what it sounds in this case like trying to investigate some vandalism when you simply don't have enough evidence to get a warrant. But we are only hearing one side of this story.

    38. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 2

      FFS, read what the original post was about. It was some jerk-off saying that nobody should comment on Bush's leadership if they weren't American citizens.

      Also, the US did NOT have a mandate from the UN. Quite the contrary.So go f*ck yourself back. Oh, sorry, you already did. fortunately, China and Japan won't fund your Iran ambitions ... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&si d=aNgW4Fu_8.tI&refer=home

      Nobody asked you to go to Iraq - quite the contrary, world opinion was that sanctions and inspections were working. Iraqis want you out - NOW. And forget about Iran ... you haven't got the money to go to war - the US is broke, and the countries that hold half your debt (China, Japan) are slowly selling it off because your dollar is going down the tubes.

      Current statutory debt limit: 8.965 trillion. Current debt: 9,009,410,075,859.67. Source - the treasury department : http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?applicat ion=np The US government has been "more than broke" since August 13th. Then again,. its been morally bankrupt since before it first took office.

      We're not mad at the American people - its not like people actually voted Bush into office ....

      Is http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/ this worth it? These soldiers died because you have a criminal for a commander-in-chief. They deserved better leadership.

    39. Re:Sue the police? by ady1 · · Score: 1

      Avril Lavigne steals songs!!!!!11 There you go :)

    40. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      McCain caved and sold out on torture; he proved to have no moral fiber. This was little surprise. He is a successful (ie, morally weak) politician, and he is in the Grand Old Pedophiles and Corrupt Thieves and Draft Dodgers and Deserters Party, which has become little more than a machine of immoral cowardly thieves stealing as much as they can from the public tills. Sadly, the opposing party has little backbone to oppose them, and very dirty hands catching dregs from the same tills.

    41. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash: When America gets criticized, it's not a personal attack against you.

    42. Re:Sue the police? by Nazlfrag · · Score: 3, Funny

      he is in the Grand Old Pedophiles and Corrupt Thieves and Draft Dodgers and Deserters Party, which has become little more than a machine of immoral cowardly thieves stealing as much as they can from the public tills.

      You'll have to be more specific I'm afraid, I still can't tell which party that is.

    43. Re:Sue the police? by KORfan · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall that sleep deprivation is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions. Why are we doing this to our own citizens when we've agreed not to do it to foreign soldiers?

    44. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to New Zealand. It called being DOGEY. Backwater cops who do whatever they like. Ex Assistant Commissioner just got off pack rape charges that his cop buddys were already doing time for.

    45. Re:Sue the police? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Oh please. McCain is not the guy to be citing on torture. Regardless of what happened to him in the Hanoi Hilton, he's become VERY comfortable with Bush's new definition of torture.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    46. Re:Sue the police? by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      Gee, if you hadn't posted as an AC, I would have friended you!

    47. Re:Sue the police? by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      But Harper is actually a right winger by Canadian standards

      Yeah, but so is Rosie O'Donnell.

    48. Re:Sue the police? by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      You can non-fraudulently pretend all you want. Actors, for example, do it all the time. You can even fool people if you want. You just can't, in any manner, charge for it.

      So when Actors do it, they don't get paid?

    49. Re:Sue the police? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      There are two parts there. You can non-fraudulently pretend all you want, and charge for it.

      You can even fool people with the pretending, but if you do that, then you can't charge.

      I.e, you can pretend you have psychic powers, you can charge to demonstrate these psychic powers, and you can fool people into thinking you have psychic powers, you just can't do all three at the same time.(1)

      So if you're pretending you can fool people for free, or charge them with them understand it's a trick. (Charging them to see a magic act where you guess their card, for example.)

      I was just pointing out that, according to the law, if you're not pretending, if you are an actual psychic, you actually can charge people who believe you're a psychic, thus asserting that fake-psychicness is against the law in Canada is not that useful to demonstrating that someone is a fake.

      It doesn't mean they're a liar, it means they're either a liar or a real psychic, but considering they asserted they were a real psychic from the start, you already know they're a liar or a real psychic.

      1) Which also means that you can charge people who you've fooled into thinking you have psychic powers without you actually 'pretending', or least claiming, you actually have them. Which is how 'psychics' in the phone book get away with it. They are careful to never assert they can actually see the future or find lost objects, so if you go to them expecting that to happen, that's your problem.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    50. Re:Sue the police? by apt142 · · Score: 1

      I thought that was just a round about way of saying "Politician."

    51. Re:Sue the police? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A couple of minor corrections...

      world opinion was that sanctions and inspections were working.

      Much of world opinion was that the sanctions were causing serious damage to the vast majority of Iraqis but having only limited effect on the ruling bastards. Others thought that the sanctions were gradually being degraded by the indifference of a world that has the attention span of a squirrel. I can't think of anyone who thought they were really working, except for those who were getting rich from Iraqi oil kickbacks.

      On the US debt thing, our total debt to GDP ratio is about in the middle of the pack when compared to the universe of developed countries. Japan (175%), Italy (107%), Germany (66.8%), and Canada (65.4%) all have higher ratios. France is about the same as us (64.7%). Of the G7 countries only the UK (42.2%) has a lower debt to GDP ratio. Japan, China and most of the rest of the world are still happily accumulating our debt because their finance ministers understand that that if the US were to be described as broke, most of the rest of the world would have to be called broker.

    52. Re:Sue the police? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Your figures for Canada's debt ratio are really out of date. http://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/bp/bpa2e.html

      On a total government, National Accounts basis:
      • o Canada was the only G7 country in surplus in 2006, according to OECD estimates.
      • o The OECD projects that Canada will be the only G7 country to record a surplus in both 2007 and 2008.
      • o Canada's total government net debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio, which has been the lowest in the G7 since 2004, is estimated at 27.6 per cent for 2006. The OECD expects Canada's debt burden to continue to decline in future years.
      • o Canada is on track to eliminate its net debt by 2021. By doing so, Canada will be able to count itself among the very few OECD countries that are in a net asset position.
      This annex also compares the fiscal situation of the federal governments in Canada and the United States:
      • o In 2005-06, the Canadian federal government posted a surplus of C$13.2 billion or 1.0 per cent of GDP, while the U.S. federal government incurred an on-budget deficit of US$434 billion or 3.3 per cent of GDP.
      • o For 2006-07, the Canadian federal government is forecasting a surplus of C$9.2 billion or 0.6 per cent of GDP, while the U.S. government is projecting an on-budget deficit of US$427 billion or 3.1 per cent of GDP.
      • o The federal market debt-to-GDP ratio in Canada has been below the U.S. figure since 2003-04, with the gap expected to widen further in 2006-07.

      27.6%, not 64.5%.

      That's what running surpluses for 10 years does.

      And unlike the US, which doesn't include the debts owed to Social Security, etc., this includes the Canada and Quebec pension plans, and universal medicaire.

      We'll be net asset positive in 2021 - 15 years. (In other words, the government will have more cash on hand than debt). Same as Australia, New Zealand, and Sweden.

      Sanctions had Saddam contained. 10 years, it worked, and eventually, he would have died or been offed, or Iran would have invaded, and that would have been the end of that. One of the reasons the US acted was because they didn't want Iran to become a regional superpower.

    53. Re:Sue the police? by billcopc · · Score: 1

      Replace "American" with any other identifier and most people will have a puzzled look on their faces.

      Seriously, does anyone have a beef with Denmark ? Didn't think so. NEXT!

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    54. Re:Sue the police? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That might be a good general criterion for the necessity of ANY warrant -- "Will the judge THANK me for waking him in the middle of the night to request this warrant??" If the answer is NO, then perhaps the warrant isn't justified.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  7. Why sell them? Then you admit they were there... by QuasiEvil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would have simply removed them, disabled them, taken them out on some back road, and run over them a few times, followed by a thorough beating with a sledgehammer. The police won't admit they were there, so why should you? Then they'd have to admit to them to get them back, and you could plausibly say you never knew they were there, and thus couldn't be held responsible for their disappearance.

    Now if you want to get really funny, leave them powered up and transmitting on aforementioned backroad for a few minutes, make sure they get at least one location transmission off, and then beat the crap out of them.

  8. Shaw's answering machine by MarsMartian · · Score: 0

    Move along, nothing to see here.

  9. Even better by kbob88 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Even better would have been if he could have somehow casually slipped it inside a local police car, or perhaps one of their personal cars.

    Perhaps the best would have been to slip it inside the car of a local judge, or newspaper reporter. Then sit back and watch the police try to explain that one.

    1. Re:Even better by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I like the reporter heaps better. Can you see the headline? "POLICE PUTS JOUNALIST UNDER SURVEILLANCE, no reasons given. "Someone made a terrible, terrible mistake", the spokesperson said".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  10. Two Words: Helium Balloons... by stoicfaux · · Score: 5, Funny

    He should have attached the devices to helium balloons and set them aloft.

  11. Give them away. by Secrity · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It would have been interesting to replace them onto somebody else's vehicle, perhaps a trash truck or long haul truck.

    1. Re:Give them away. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps that's what already had happened..

  12. they will become mandatory sometime too by wikinerd · · Score: 1

    I believe that at some point in the future tracking devices are going to be mandatory and embedded in all vehicles. This will probably be based on some security or safety concern, which may even be imaginary. Another one reason to be car-free.

    1. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

      ... or to help enforce speed laws.

      And that's fine, if the people agree to such laws being passed, and so long as it does not interfere with their constitution. Of course driving is not a right, no one seems to realize that it is a privilege that comes with responsibilities.

      Going down that road covertly is just going to create a lot of hate towards their government.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    2. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by etinin · · Score: 1

      If that crap is ever made, it won't be a a week that thing was released and someone will find a way of smashing it without damaging your vehicle, disabling it with micro-waves or perhaps deattaching it (and perhaps putting on another car?).

      --
      "I decided I could write something better than everything out there in two weeks. And I was right." - Linus Torvalds
    3. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by obarel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The insurance industry would love that as well.

      - We only cover your car if you drive according to the law. Three years ago you were going 2mph above the speed limit, hence you invalidated your policy and we are not obliged to pay.
      - Why didn't you notify me then?
      - According to the policy, we're not obliged to do that either.
      - Are you obliged to do anything?
      - Maybe, but we're not obliged to answer that question.

    4. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

      GPS based speed tracking does not the work that well and you can't get a cell phone to work on all roads in the usa right now.

    5. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Short+Circuit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The insurance industry would love that as well. When I bought a Progressive policy a few weeks ago, I was asked if I wanted to have one installed. Considering my total daily commute is 6 miles, it would certainly save me a lot of money...But I didn't like the privacy aspect. /I would love to ride a bike to work instead of a car, but that option vetoed by someone else.
    6. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by T5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you never heard of OnStar? That fits exactly what you describe - a perceived additional sense of security and safety by having a corporate entity (or a law enforcement or other governmental agency with or without a warrant) track your every move and even listen in on your conversations remotely. The courts have sided with disallowing OnStar's use for listening in on conversations inside the vehicle, but all it will take is one judge and that's out the window. OnStar's just one more good reason not to purchase a GM vehicle.

      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --attributed to Benjamin Franklin

    7. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by evilviper · · Score: 1

      The courts have sided with disallowing OnStar's use for listening in on conversations inside the vehicle,

      No, they only said it was illegal because doing so disabled the normal function of the system (nothing happens when you push the button). It takes only very simple technology on the police's part to allow the system to function, while spying, and I have no doubt that's exactly what they did... about a week after the lawsuit.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by nasor · · Score: 2, Informative

      And as I recall, the judge in that particular case only ruled against using OnStar to eavesdrop because it interfered with the proper operation of the OnStar communicator, so that if the drivers had experienced some sort of emergency they wouldn't have been able to use it to call for help - much like the police bugging your phone in a way that prevents you from being able to call 911. It didn't have anything to do with the eavesdropping being objectionable to the courts in principle.

    9. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by rishistar · · Score: 4, Funny

      OnStar is a useful system to have in case your vehicle gets stolen. Problem for GM is their cars are so bad that noone will even steal them.

      --
      Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
    10. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by batquux · · Score: 1

      Just don't pay the subscription fee.

    11. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      The insurance industry would love that as well.

      - We only cover your car if you drive according to the law. Three years ago you were going 2mph above the speed limit, hence you invalidated your policy and we are not obliged to pay.
      - Why didn't you notify me then?
      - According to the policy, we're not obliged to do that either.
      - Are you obliged to do anything?
      - Maybe, but we're not obliged to answer that question.

      Wouldn't happen that way. You can't have terms of a contract that, upon your breach of the contract, require you to continue acting as if the contract were still valid. If they continue collecting premiums after your breach, then they owe you all that money they collected on an invalid policy. Insurance isn't like credit cards. It's very heavily regulated and a company that pulls crap like that can find it self barred from conducting business in an entire state just like that.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    12. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by obarel · · Score: 1

      This actually happened to me.

      I filled the forms online, but wasn't sure about the year the house was built (it was home insurance).

      Later on I found out, and phoned them to update the details. They then informed me that actually they don't insure tenants, and that the insurance wasn't actually valid (it wasn't mentioned on the website - the form actually had a "tenant" option).

      I had no choice but to say thank you and cancel it, but I still got charged for the two days I was "insured".

      To be honest, I couldn't be bothered with chasing them (the phone calls would have cost me more), but of course I cancelled my other policies with them and will never be their customer (nor recommend them).

      At the time I thought it was extremely cheeky - had I not phoned them I could have experienced a disaster only to find that I wasn't insured!

      By the way, an insurance company rarely has a problem with giving you back the premiums when they don't want to pay. If I wanted to pay for insurance only to get the premiums back, I would have opened a bank account...

    13. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by teaX0r · · Score: 1

      "Another one reason to be car-free." If you are car-free, guess where they will put the tracking device? Hint: BOHICA

    14. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by toddestan · · Score: 1

      This will probably be based on some security or safety concern, which may even be imaginary.

      From the looks of things, if private insurance doesn't beat them to it - they will be for road fees/road tax/congestion charge purposes. Besides being able to track every vehicle, I seriously doubt they'll lower the fuel tax either.

    15. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Faluzeer · · Score: 1

      One of the UK's Government departments is considering making it compulsory for Motorcycles to have an embedded device in the number plates that can be read from road side devices. MCN

    16. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Aldric · · Score: 1

      Actually it does work pretty well most of the time, as long as you are taking frequent enough samples from GPS. Where you tend to get problems is when the unit has multipath (GPS reflection) and consequently reports a srupidly high speed, and even then you can smooth it out fairly easily.

    17. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Andraax · · Score: 1

      In Minnesota, they wait until the lakes freeze, drive out to the middle of a lake, then call OnStar. And listen to the person freaking when they think that you're stuck in the middle of a lake and calling for help.

    18. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by zolaar · · Score: 1

      The system works!

      --
      One man's constant is another man's variable.
    19. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Funny, our Congress has just proposed such law here at Brazil. It's for our safety.

      The press is going mad on that (thanks God we still have a press, I was doubting before that) and manufacturers don't like the proposal at all.

    20. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      /I would love to ride a bike to work instead of a car, but that option vetoed by someone else.
      You can safely wear the spandex, because if YOUR decision was vetoed by someone else and you let it go, there is obviously no balls to show through the tight bike shorts.
    21. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      GPS tracking good to a few feet has been mandatory in all cell phones sold in the US since 2005. You are already carrying a tracking device. As for the menu choice to disable it: oh, please.

    22. Re:they will become mandatory sometime too by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      You can safely wear the spandex, because if YOUR decision was vetoed by someone else and you let it go, there is obviously no balls to show through the tight bike shorts. She's old, her heart's frail, and I'd rather not lead her to a heart attack. You can talk about someone else's balls when you're willing to sacrifice a family member for the sake of your own.
  13. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by the_humeister · · Score: 1

    Why admit that you have them? So that you can tell the media of shady police shenanigans. Otherwise no one else would know these things occur. This should hopefully make the police more careful not to do such things next time. And it will alert regular citizens that such things can happen so beware when the police take your stuff.

  14. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or hide them somewhere near the police station and then re-activate them.

    Police:Dear god, he is in the building 24/7 and yet we haven't seen him. He must be an invisible, cop hating machine that requires no food or water! Lets not fuck with him!

  15. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Funny

    I would have tied them on to a long distance lorry.

    --
    Deleted
  16. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Barny · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or even better, put each of them into separate packages, mail one to China and one to America.

    Would love to see the police phone bill after that ^_^

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
  17. Legality? by nasor · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know the legality in the U.S. of selling, destroying, etc. police devices that have been deliberately left on your property like this?

    1. Re:Legality? by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Since when has 'legality' had anything to do with how the US treats their people?

      The Patriot Act has been around for how many years now, destroying most of their constitution, and only last week did one of their judges have the balls to strike down a small corner of it.

      --
      George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
    2. Re:Legality? by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      It seems a bit petty: you're considered dangerous enough that the police secretly put a GPS transmitter in your car, you remove it ("hey, what's this? I don't recognize it"), sell it ("oh, Fred down the way might know what to do with it")...and suddenly you're being arrested for selling an object that, as far as you know, was legal to sell. As far as you could possibly know. Because you were being tracked in connection with some other, significant crime.

      Even if you were charged, it'd be hard to get a jury to agree that you're at fault.

    3. Re:Legality? by lgarner · · Score: 1

      Since when does this article have anything to do with America? At least read the summary, please.

    4. Re:Legality? by lgarner · · Score: 1

      The U.S. wasn't involved here, but I'll take a shot at it, speaking generally.

      I wouldn't be surprised if it is illegal. However, I have no formal training in identifying police tracking devices, so I'd probably just think it's part of the car that I own, and therefore I'm entitled to remove it.

      Then again, maybe it's stamped "Property of New Zealand Police. Removal prohibited". One never knows.

    5. Re:Legality? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      Your posting has so many flaws you should be embarrassed. If legality had nothing to do with how the US treats its people, the Patriot act would not have been necessary, nor would there be any judge capable of reviewing it in any way.

    6. Re:Legality? by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then again, maybe it's stamped "Property of New Zealand Police. Removal prohibited". One never knows.

      Or more likely, based on the article: "Not Property of New Zealand Police, we don't even know about it. Removal prohibited by order of New Zealand Police" ;)

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    7. Re:Legality? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      How should I know they belong to the police? Are they marked "police property, do not remove"? I honestly thought it's my neighbor, who is constantly trying to spy on me, look, even now he's looking at us, just standing here! Of course I would have NEVER EVER removed them.

      Next time, just tell me when you put something like that in my cars, and I promise, I won't remove them. I'll sell the cars, allright, but I will make sure that they stay where they are!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Legality? by F4_W_weasel · · Score: 1

      HUmmm, your question is not only pertinent, but raises a lot of questioning on WHY DO YOU want to know that??

  18. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Running+Fool · · Score: 1

    Now if you want to get really funny, leave them powered up and transmitting on aforementioned backroad for a few minutes, make sure they get at least one location transmission off, and then beat the crap out of them.
    Or just tied them onto a kangaroo. They have those in New Zealand right?
  19. "Other operational matters"? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1
    FTA:

    When contacted by The Press, Shaw declined to comment other than to say: "Police use a variety of legitimate investigation techniques when investigating serious crime. However, it is not the policy of the police to comment on those techniques or other operational matters." Anyone else interpret that as "it is not the policy of the police to comment on those [legitimate] techniques or other [illegitimate] operational matters"?

    - RG>
    --
    Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  20. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by taniwha · · Score: 1

    no we only have wallabies

  21. you have to RTFA .... by taniwha · · Score: 1

    they've already indicated that they want them back .... personally I'd have just left them somewhere really really hard to get to .... but still transmitting

    1. Re:you have to RTFA .... by delvsional · · Score: 1

      you mean like halfway up el-cap?

      --
      Oh Crap, I'm an optimist.....
  22. Two devices two parties by BlueParrot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Guys forget about judges, buses, smashing them to pieces and whatnot. You have two tracking devices. The obvious thing to do with them is to glue them to the politicians cars. One to a democrat, the other to a republican. Bonus points if you get a friend to cross-file fake DMCA requests from the respective victims to one another. Jackpot if you can crack their wireless connections and download a gig or two of child porn, Disney movies and instructions for growing pot. Then file an anonymous tip or two... If things are to change it needs to have negative consequences for the people who make the rules...

    1. Re:Two devices two parties by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 0, Troll

      That would work very well if the devices were in America and not Australia.

      *golf clap*

    2. Re:Two devices two parties by mrs+clear+plastic · · Score: 1

      You don't even have to break their encryption.

      According to the article, they already have the SIM card. Use that in another cell
      phone to call in on a dialup and download the port, etc. and then re-install the sim card back into the unit before tacking it to the respective politican's car.

      --
      Cleara
    3. Re:Two devices two parties by taniwha · · Score: 1

      forget that - just load the sim card up in another phone and call China a lot ....

    4. Re:Two devices two parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your comment might make sense if this story happened in Australia. THIS IS NEW ZEALAND.

      Sheesh.

      It's actually disturbing for me - the NZ police of late have been really crud. (There's a case where a family stole a body from the wife of the deceased. The wife has a court order demanding the return. The police have stated they are refusing to enforce it.)

      It really shouldn't be this hard to find if there's a warrant or not.

    5. Re:Two devices two parties by Cussin_IT · · Score: 1

      Oddly, the NZ public probibly wouldn't give a dam about the Porn and would posibly elect them again just for the pot (especialy Northlanders). What would we would get up in arms about is 2Gigs of data on the publics Sihilling. We had a parlimetory inqiry over an MP buying underpants with public money, for #insert diety here#s sake.

      --
      Read my blog you know you want to
    6. Re:Two devices two parties by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 1

      e funniest thing bout this comment is that it is moderated "interesting"

      --
      www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
    7. Re:Two devices two parties by deniable · · Score: 1

      And even funnier than you mistaking Australia and New Zealand is that Australia has democrats and republicans. One is a lame minor party and the other wants to dump the Queen so they will feel better about themselves.

    8. Re:Two devices two parties by ignavus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Planet America? Planet America? Come in, Planet America.

      This is Planet Earth.

      E-A-R-T-H. Yes. Yes, some of us do speak American, only we call it English down here. No, most people here don't speak English or American, although the Canadians tell us that they can understand American. They usually find it funny, though. Quaint. They say the American words all sound normal enough, but the concepts behind them are totally divorced from reality.

      Anyway, we just wanted to let you know, if you ever want to rejoin the human race, find out about us, get to know us, you are always welcome to return to Earth and have a go at it.

      Keep in touch.

      If you can.

      That's E-A-R-T-H. Yes, write it down or you'll forget.

      America: 5% of the world's population that thinks it is 95% of the world.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    9. Re:Two devices two parties by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Only because 95% of the world seems to want to come over and live here, for some reason, whether we want them to or not.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  23. Ralph Williams arrested for 'Theft of Property' by isaac · · Score: 4, Informative

    The subject in this case, Ralph Williams, has been arrested for theft of property. See http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/1318360/1336811 for a more recent article.

    I suppose the police will argue that listing the items as police bugs on an auction site shows awareness that the bugs weren't his to sell. Thus, he'd "stolen" them by their logic.

    Mr. Williams' day in court promises to be interesting...

    -Isaac

    --
    I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
    1. Re:Ralph Williams arrested for 'Theft of Property' by darkmeridian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is this entrapment? The cops leave their property on your car. You're not supposed to be able to find them. When you find them, you get in trouble.

      I guess the cops weren't so hot on him selling them on eBay. I don't know what the difference would be, though. The cops literally gave it to him.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    2. Re:Ralph Williams arrested for 'Theft of Property' by sepluv · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why don't they just let it go instead of digging a deeper hole for themselves by arresting him and lying. This is almost as bad as the recent incident of the under-not-so-good-cover police agents provocateuse with the rocks trying to start a riot in Montebello, Quebec.

      As stated in the article, he asked the police officer whose mobile phone device was contacting if the police had left their property on his car. When they denied they were theirs, he concluded they were fair game to sell as they were on his property. I think the judge might take a dim view of this.

      --
      Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
      [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
    3. Re:Ralph Williams arrested for 'Theft of Property' by owlstead · · Score: 1

      "I suppose the police will argue that listing the items as police bugs on an auction site shows awareness that the bugs weren't his to sell."

      I just bought some farmers yogurt, but somehow I don't think I'll be arrested for that. Neither for grandma's cookies. I might get arrested for eating ma's cookies. But I doubt it since they were getting stale otherwise.

    4. Re:Ralph Williams arrested for 'Theft of Property' by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      A few years ago, a friend of mine forgot to put enough money in the parking meter, and came back to his car with a boot on it. Nevermind that getting the boot was a rather severe punishment for the most minor parking violation imaginable, when he examined it up close, he noticed that the boot never actually got attached to the wheel.

      Being only a block away from the police station, he simply lifted the boot off, and carried it down to the office, where he explained the situation, returned the boot, and offered to pay the fine up-front. The receptionist told him to wait a minute, and disappeared into the back room, and a few minutes later returned with a police officer who arrested him on the spot for stealing police property, and some other nonsense....

      The charges were dropped, but he did have to pay the parking fine in addition to the $50 "boot removal fee"

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  24. Re:Two Words: Helium Balloons... by dattaway · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would have mailed them to Nigeria or someplace where the roaming charges are quite high.

  25. Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Jeremy_Bee · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is a funny story and all, but isn't anyone worried by this part?

    The Summary Proceedings Act, which covers tracking devices, says a warrant should be obtained for a tracking device but an officer can install one without a warrant if there is not time and the officer believes a judge would issue a warrant. I mean that puts Australia more towards the Fascist end of the scale than even the US doesn't it?
    (and that's hard to do)

    Since when is surveillance ever an issue of immediacy? You usually engage in it over a protracted period in order to slowly gather evidence. Also a warrant hardly ever takes more than a day or even a few hours to get in any country I ever heard of. Anyhow, what Judge is going to refuse a warrant for a bugging device considered so important by the Police that they have already installed it?

    This seems to be a deliberate loop-hole in the law to allow for warrant-less surveillance. The very fact that a regular police force investigating a fairly low-level crime uses this tactic kind of implies that this is fairly widespread or typical behaviour as well.

    Yet another reason never to go to Australia. ;-)
    1. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should see what the Australians have done to an Indian Doctor, Mohammed Haneef. They don't even pretend to be playing by the rules.

    2. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      New Zealand is not in Australia, did you not notice the .co.nz rather than .com.au ?

    3. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's New Zealand! RTFA!

    4. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Lenbok · · Score: 5, Informative

      I mean that puts Australia more towards the Fascist end of the scale than even the US doesn't it?
      (and that's hard to do)


      FYI, the article is referring to New Zealand, which is not yet a state of Australia.
    5. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Jeremy_Bee · · Score: 2, Informative

      My apologies to Australia, I misread that part.

    6. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by DerekLyons · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I mean that puts Australia more towards the Fascist end of the scale than even the US doesn't it? (and that's hard to do)

      Actually, it's trivial to be more towards the Facist end of the scale than the US. (Since on that scale the US barely even twitches the meter.)
       
      This isn't a consequence of the current goverment of either state, but a consequence of political innocents repeating the propoganda they've swallowed - even when it contains words they don't know the meaning of. Like for instance, Facist.
    7. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by dbIII · · Score: 1

      My apologies to Australia, I misread that part.

      You should be. Our "fascists" have far more resources than that and get up to far more mischief. As soon as terrorism is mentioned they come out of the woodwork and push professional law enforcement and due process to the side - then play a variety of stupid games to cover mistakes. There are people desperately hoping to catch a real terrorist instead of the false alarms to date - and if they can't find them they blow the false alarms out of proportion or pick on schoolgirls that wear headscarves. NZ hasn't yet caught up to that level of stupidity and things are still in the hands of professional law enforcement - it's likely to be a localised problem and not a systemic failure.

    8. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by BlackSmithNZ · · Score: 1

      It's pretty hard to take this as too Orwellian, as it's Cromwell in Central Otago (New Zealand). It classic New Zealand (think LOTR landscapes) where the police & crims tend to know each other and pull a few tricks to keep life interesting. Growing in a small town not to far from Cromwell, the number plates & descriptions of unmarked police cars were often discussed in pubs. In this case, some crim took it too far by torching one of the local police mufti-cars. The couldn't get enough evidence on the guy, so they probably got a local geek to wire in a couple of off-the-shelf GPS aware cellphone modules (cheap & fun to play with by the way - easy to read current location via a serial interface and transmit via the GSM chipset). Unlikely for anyone other than the local police to have been involved & it's all a pick of a cock-up rather than a fascist conspiracy. The suspect in this case is taking the piss by selling the bugs on trademe - which guarantees him plenty of publicity. In the end, while I am aware that if I am a suspect, the police can (and probably will) bug me, read my emails etc, I still think NZ is in a far better place than Australia (or the UK/US). Look at Australia, where a doctor who leant his SIM card to a cousin, got named as a terrorist, imprisoned with high security and then thrown out of the country. World of difference between small country town pranks and governments spying on citizens (though the SIS have been caught ham-fisted breaking into houses).

    9. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by sexygirl.jpg.vbs · · Score: 1

      Good, the sheep can relax.

    10. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by ross.w · · Score: 1

      I mean that puts Australia more towards the Fascist end of the scale than even the US doesn't it?
      (and that's hard to do) You weren't here for APEC, were you?

      Anyway as someone else pointed out, this incident was in New Zealand.
      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
    11. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just to be clear here, New Zealand might have briefly considered sharing Australia's currency (and for good reason), but it won't be merging with Australia before Canada becomes the USA's 51st state.

    12. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Oh c'mon. Next you're going to try to tell me that Canada isn't part of the US!

      Ok, maybe it's a protectorate, not an actual state, but everyone knows that's just a convenient legal fiction so that manufacturers can run sweat-shops and still put a "Made in the USA" label on the results. (Australia is part of the US too, right? --If not, why does the PM act like they are?) :)

    13. Re:Fascist Police tactics not so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you Miss South Carolina ??????

  26. When pigs fly by The+-e**(i*pi) · · Score: 1

    I wonder if the first clue the police will get that they have been had is when the "cars" travel 300 mph at 30k feet on their monitoring screen.

    1. Re:When pigs fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      MPH? MILES Per Hour? Why would the New Zealand police have their tracking system set to that old thing?

    2. Re:When pigs fly by fyrewulff · · Score: 1

      Their tracking system is a UNIVAC?

      --
      "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
    3. Re:When pigs fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He meant Metres Per Hour. Duh.

  27. Well, the number was on the sim.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so if we put in on a lorry, balloon, or long distance flight to the US, the first thing you do is change the number to 1-999-CALL-SEX. (I wonder how many times a day it called?)

  28. Things you can do with a police tracking device by mux2000 · · Score: 1

    Of course, this is another abuse by the powers that be of the common man etc. etc., but this was labeled 'funny', so lets turn to the bright side of things.

    Things you can do with a police tracking device:

    1. Sell it on an auctioning site - that's what the guy did. Maybe he thought it would get him a few bucks. Didn't work that well, so let's try something else.
    2. Destroy it - the Right thing to do. Not much to say about that. Net loss for the police, no gain to you.
    3. Abandon it - Watch the cops surround a garbage bin, with hilarious consequences.
    4. Attach them to a moving target - this is my favourite. Forget it in a cab, tape it to a bus, throw it on some truck, send it in the mail, whatever. I'd like to see those coppers try to keep tabs on you after a nice portion of wild goose chase.

    To sum it up, this guy blew away a perfect chance to make stupid cops look even sillier.

    1. Re:Things you can do with a police tracking device by Swampash · · Score: 1

      Dude, the guy's from CROMWELL. I'm amazed he worked out what the devices were.

    2. Re:Things you can do with a police tracking device by dbIII · · Score: 1

      To sum it up, this guy blew away a perfect chance to make stupid cops look even sillier.

      Making cops that ignore due process look silly is a pretty extreme sport that I would not like to get involved in without a bullet proof vest and a Ned Kelly helmet.

    3. Re:Things you can do with a police tracking device by CYDVicious · · Score: 1

      5. Hide them in a well known donut shop...

      ~CYD

      --
      //Nothing to see here, please move along.
  29. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

    Heh - Very Office Space: "PC Load Tracker?!?! WTF is PC Load Tracker!??!" :)

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
  30. errr - context? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    fortunately here in NZ we have neither republicans or democrats ..... well actually we do have 'republicans' - they are in favor or doing away with the queen as head of state - not the same as the 'merkin republicans who at the moment seem to be rather enamoured of queens in public restrooms

    1. Re:errr - context? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      who at the moment seem to be rather enamoured of queens in public restrooms ROTFL because that guy had such a homophobic voting record. I wonder whether (in the unlikely event that he stays...) he will vote more sensibly from now on...
  31. He should have... by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Williams took apart one of the devices and found a sim card, which he put into a cellphone. He found the device was sending location text messages to Shaw's mobile number. He should taken out the sim cards, put them in his phone, and rang up a nice phone bill for the police department.
  32. Take Them To An Airport Men's Restroom by mrs+clear+plastic · · Score: 1

    Yeah:

    Let's take them to the nearest airport men's bathroom and past one in each of the stalls!

    Or tape them to the bottoms of seats in an adult movie theatre.

    Or, find out which church the chief judge goes to and tape them to the underside of the pews in that church.

    Peace

    --
    Cleara
    1. Re:Take Them To An Airport Men's Restroom by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      If you are going to do something like that you really need to pick a moving vehicle. A good choice would be an airplane, or a bus, or the local magistrate's car.

    2. Re:Take Them To An Airport Men's Restroom by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      If you can manage it, a senior NSA agent's car would be ideal. Or a federal judge could also be fun.

    3. Re:Take Them To An Airport Men's Restroom by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Reporter. Best thing would be a reporter. And two weeks after attaching it, call him and tell him.

      Then it's time to start reading the paper he writes for.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  33. Goddam Summary by dafing · · Score: 1

    Down Under is Australia people, this happened in New Zealand. There IS a difference, like Canada and America!

    --
    --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
    1. Re:Goddam Summary by taniwha · · Score: 1

      Traditionally 'down under' is relative to the UK and refers to both Australia and New Zealand. There is a difference but that's not it

    2. Re:Goddam Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New Zealand is more often known as "Godzone", although it is slowly becoming "anti-Godzone".

    3. Re:Goddam Summary by dafing · · Score: 1
      Good point, I see Wikipedia says that Down Under was first used to describe NZ! Did you edit the article just before I read it? :)

      However in my defence, :), things in popular culture, such as The Simpsons use "Down Under" as Australia and Australia alone!

      I've learned something for the day.

      --
      --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
    4. Re:Goddam Summary by Unnamed+Chickenheart · · Score: 1

      >> There IS a difference, like Canada and America! So... New Zealand is a country in the continent of Australia? =)

      --
      urd
    5. Re:Goddam Summary by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      There IS a difference, like Canada and America!

      I thought Canadians were Americans, only more sensible and less annoying than their southern counterparts.

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    6. Re:Goddam Summary by dbIII · · Score: 1

      New Zealand is a country in the continent of Australia?

      They have their own. It's two very large islands and a few little ones in the South Pacific a long way from Australia.

    7. Re:Goddam Summary by docwatson223 · · Score: 1

      Canada - America's Bitch since 1812! ;)

  34. New Zealand != Australia by Remusti · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Your post would work very well if the devices were in Australia and not New Zealand. *golf clap*

    1. Re:New Zealand != Australia by david.given · · Score: 1

      What the hell is a golf clap, anyway?

    2. Re:New Zealand != Australia by Bemopolis · · Score: 1

      It's what you get when you putt your ball into the wrong hole.

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
    3. Re:New Zealand != Australia by david.given · · Score: 1

      Thanks, but, uh, I don't do golf. So it's still not helping...

    4. Re:New Zealand != Australia by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golf_clap

      A golf clap is a quiet form of clapping performed by lightly and rapidly clapping the fingers of one hand against the palm of the other. It is patterned after the sound of distant clapping heard during televised golf tournaments, and is sometimes used as a sarcastic form of applause, used to show indifference or disdain.

    5. Re:New Zealand != Australia by david.given · · Score: 1

      Ah, Wikipedia --- is there any useless piece of pop culture trivia you don't know?

      Ta. Should have looked there in the first place.

    6. Re:New Zealand != Australia by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      The funniest part of your comment is that it's moderated Insightful. Australia has the same kind of republicans as New Zealand, I don't think they actually have a political party, if they do they don't register, and the Democrats are a minor party that only gets seats in the Upper House. Well done. *golf clap*

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    7. Re:New Zealand != Australia by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      I know! They'd never do a page about Goatse.. aww crap.

    8. Re:New Zealand != Australia by david.given · · Score: 1

      Tubgirl, too. And because they provide textual descriptions of what they are, you can satisfy your curiosity without actually having to gouge your brain out afterwards! It's great!

  35. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have just posted the to some far away place under a non-existent address, then put a return address in another far away place. That might confuse the police a bit.

  36. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by interiot · · Score: 1

    It's "PC Load Letter".

  37. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    So that's what happened to Hans Reiser's car seat!

    For anyone who's forgotten, Hans Reiser is the author of the popular journaling filesystem ReiserFS, and is under arrest for murdering his wife. Part of the evidence for his murder of the missing woman is the way his car seat very conveniently disappeared from his car before police could search it, but they still found blood in his house and car.

  38. Take them to a pig farm by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    and glue them to a pig or two. Maybe buy a already butchered pig, beat the crap out of it and leave the tracking devices next to it. Even better slip them onto somebodys luggage at the airport.

    I don't know about Australia but here in Canada you can turn in an item you found and I think if no one claims it in 30 days you can now claim it as yours. If so he shoudl have given it to the cops. If they claimed it then they just admitted to using the tracking devices. If no one claimed it then you own the devices and sell them all you want legally.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:Take them to a pig farm by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Australia but here in Canada you

      Isn't Canada that US state just north of Ohio?

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
  39. Why? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    If no warrent, then hire a lawyer. Heck, you might not even have to pay the lawyer. They would take it on contingency.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  40. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nope. You want to confuse the piss out of the cops. find where you can apply the trackers to that will be incredibly random. Taxicab is the best choice as they go all over with no real pattern. A large stray dog is also fun.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  41. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by (negative+video) · · Score: 1

    Nah. Connect the phone antenna to a motion-controlled directional antenna. Have it switch back and forth between distant cell towers. Laugh maniacally when the cops' next phone bill is delivered in a shoebox, with NZ$92,000 in roaming charges.

  42. Hmmm... good idea! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Next time the police seizes your cars for something trivial, list two bugs on EBay. Should the police get active, it's time to search your car for the bugs.

    Saves you the hassle to actually do it "just in case", they'll tell you if they did.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  43. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why so puny? Take an interstate delivery truck.

    Since I'm currently a wee bit pissed at McDonalds, I'd tack it to their trucks and let them explain to the cops why such a highly suspicious guy like me spends so much time driving to and from their depots.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  44. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Connect the phone antenna to a motion-controlled directional antenna in a country with insane roaming rates.

    Hey, it would be worth that plane ticket to the US for me. Not to mention the look on their face when they see my car rush across the big pond at insane speeds.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  45. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by couchslug · · Score: 1

    I'd not destroy them when leaving them live has more potential.
    Fun things to do could include attaching them to long-haul trucks, boats, or leaving them in railcars.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  46. Down Under? by dcam · · Score: 1

    Strictly speaking, this isn't a story for Down Under, it is a story from New Zealand (New Zuland if you prefer).

    While many "down under" residents view New Zealand as a minor state of Australia (a dimuitive Tasmania with more sheep), New Zealanders tend to take issue with this.

    --
    meh
    1. Re:Down Under? by dcam · · Score: 1

      Correnting myself, apparently down under refers to New Zealand too.

      --
      meh
    2. Re:Down Under? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop bugging me with the mundane details..

    3. Re:Down Under? by Velocir · · Score: 1

      Diminutive Tasmania? Tasmania is smaller than the North Island! But u were right, Down Under is pretty much always used to refer to Australia only.

    4. Re:Down Under? by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      "While many "down under" residents view New Zealand as a minor state of Australia (a dimuitive Tasmania with more sheep), New Zealanders tend to take issue with this."

      It's not that. It's that you took our velcro gloves and didn't wash them before giving them back!

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
    5. Re:Down Under? by dcam · · Score: 1

      Lol. Nice. Seen this?

      --
      meh
    6. Re:Down Under? by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      No, I hadn't. :)

      This was on a couple of weeks ago though.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
  47. exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RFID is in all new tires sold in the US now, built in tracking devices if they want them.

  48. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Digicrat · · Score: 1

    Or how about taking one of them to a bridge, and throw it out into the river/ocean/lake (in a watertight bag if you want so it'll keep transmitting a little longer). Then find a nice vantage point and see whether the police come to investigate why their suspect drove off a bridge :-)

    If they come, then they must admit that they were following you and may have a bit of explaining to do (particularly if you call the press when you see them arriving). If they don't, then would that be a case for attempted negligent homicide, or something to that effect, if it can be shown that they knew your "car" went over a bridge/cliff, and they did nothing?

  49. Re:Two Words: Helium Balloons... by mikelieman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) Find controversial local politician, and controversial local journalist.

    2) Transfer devices to their vehicles.

    3) CALL POLITICIAN AND JOURNALIST and tell them the cops have their cars bugged.

    4) Enjoy the subsequent stories of Police Corruption in the newspaper.

    --
    Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
  50. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even better - disassemble the bugs and use the parts for something else. It's a *free* GPS + GSM module combo / unit after all. The SIM card is a nice bonus... hack it to change content of the message (make it send fake data), put it in a old throwaway mobile phone and let it do its work.
    There you go - you get the hardware and cops get fake data -> WIN.

  51. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

    Or a police car. :-)

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  52. Statistics by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

    And I bet 90% of such ridiculous statistics are made up without any grounding in reality whatsoever.

    Actually, 86.43% of statistics are made up on the the spur of the moment.

  53. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Renraku · · Score: 1

    Why not just put them on someone else's car?

    Talk about a fucking monumental waste of time..imagine putting it on a semi.

    "He's running for it! He's heading for Texas! Stop him!"

    Ten hours later.

    "Nope..wasn't him..it was a fucking semi. We just wasted thousands and thousands of dollars and its our own fault. And we can't even bitch at him or he'll sue us."

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
  54. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or even better, put each of them into separate packages, mail one to China and one to America.

    And send it air mail. Let the scratch their heads as to how the cars are going over water at 500 miles an hour.

  55. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Technician · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Or even better, put each of them into separate packages, mail one to China and one to America.

    Would love to see the police phone bill after that ^_^
    --


    If the device is not subscribed to roaming service, it could be a waste of postage.

    I think it would be much more fun to wrap the GPS antenna in foil so it can't give the location. Then put it in a backpack and spend a few hours shopping near police parking and impound lots. Unwrap the antenna for a few minutes at each location before catching the city bus. Do this only when a large crowd is there.

    Cell tower triangulation is not near as accurate as GPS location and requires bugging the cell company for location information. That would introduce delays. After you are done with that, take it to the local post office and buy a parcel box and send it to a bad address cross country. They may be able to locate the post office where you dropped it off, but they would have a very hard time finding the right package. In most places the post office will not let the police rummage through the mail room. Be sure not to use your name on the return address. Wait for it to be returned to shipper, also to a bad address. Hopefully by that time the batteries will die and they lose the package.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  56. TV Interview by redkea · · Score: 1

    In a television interview taken just before he was arrested by Police (for possessing stolen police items) - he said that he had driven all over the South Island on a wild goose chase deliberately stopping outside known gang pads, brothels, and other amusing locations.

  57. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Technician · · Score: 1

    The SIM card is a nice bonus... hack it to change content of the message (make it send fake data), put it in a old throwaway mobile phone and let it do its work.

    I like that idea. NMEA data is easy to capture from almost any hand-held GPS. Playing back that data later would be great. The only give-away would the the real-time clock info. It could take a while to ignore the location information and notice the time stamp is wrong. Transmitting the prior day travel information of a buddy could mess with them. Spend a day riding the city bus with a handheld, Capture the track and replay it. Fun.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  58. He found them AFTER the cars were taken? by lullabud · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ralph Williams ... said he found the devices ... after the cars were seized by police and taken away ...


    How on earth did he find the devices after his cars were taken away?
  59. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Technician · · Score: 2, Informative

    "He's running for it! He's heading for Texas! Stop him!"

    From Google Maps;

    "We could not calculate driving directions between New Zealand and Dallas Texas."

    Maybe Mapquest could do better..

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  60. Better Use..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    He should have mailed it to Iraq.

    Or put it at the bottom of a 55-gallon drum of catfish bait and rotten meat, and then mailed it to the Police Dept.

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
  61. Wait until after you're married... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  62. SIM card? by phorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    OK, so it uses a SIM card,which apparently also works in a mobile phone. So, it might be fun to pick up a cheap cellular phone from ebay, then slap the card in and regularly make a few bothersome phone calls to various numbers that have a caller-ID, then slap the card back in the device(s) before attaching them to one of the vehicles mentioned in the previous post.

    Personally, though, I think it might be more fun to attach the thing to a sewer-sucker or garbage truck... something unpleasant at any rate. Perhaps the interface would allow one to reconfigure the number it calls out to, so you could make use of the device itself.

    Regardless, though,it seems that - legitimately or not - the police have it in for this guy, and doing anything of the like is just going to piss them off and provoke an unpleasant response. How about taking them to court for police harassment? If they don't have a warrant then you've got a good case (and who knows, you might be able to keep the things after, especially if it's denied they own them). If they do... well at least you get to see what the grounds of the warrant were.

    1. Re:SIM card? by JonathanR · · Score: 1

      OK, so it uses a SIM card,which apparently also works in a mobile phone. So, it might be fun to pick up a cheap cellular phone from ebay, then slap the card in and regularly make a few bothersome phone calls to various numbers that have a caller-ID, then slap the card back in the device(s) before attaching them to one of the vehicles mentioned in the previous post. Better still, put the SIM in a phone, change the dial-in number (it probably is listed in the SIM) to the Cromwell Police station reception number, and then replace the SIM into the tracker, and carry on as if nothing had happened...
  63. How this was found... by Technician · · Score: 5, Interesting

    a man being investigated by the police found tracking devices in two of his cars, ripped them out,

    The article was very sparse regarding what problem he had with the cars that led to the discovery. I will take a speculation stab at this. Cell phones are well known for causing RFI problems with poorly shielded electronics doing everything from causing keyboards on PC's to lock-up to putting a buzz into radio and stereo gear.

    The location of the device was on the passenger side footwell. This would place it close to the engine computer in many cars. It may be an easy to install location for the police and the GPS antenna can be located under the dashboard giving a good location for GPS reception through the plastic dash and windscreen, but the cell transmitter in that location could and probably did cause problems with both the stereo and engine computer. As he stated, it was a botched installation that led to the discovery. A proper install would have located the cell transmitter in the trunk away from sensitive electronics to transmit out the rear window. The car ran poorly, but it was probably the teltale radio noise that geve it away. Removing it fixed both the radio and engine computer.

    This interference issue is why most magnet mount tracking devices are mounted on the rear of the car away from the engine compartment. Inside the plastic rear bumper on a metal bracket is a favorite location. there is little chance of interference revealing it's presence, and good GPS and cell signals.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
    1. Re:How this was found... by lordlod · · Score: 1

      Or it could simply be the fact that the cops seized both of the cars and then returned them.

      I'm sufficiently paranoid that if that happened I would probably take off a few internal panels of my car and snoop around. (Plus the bonus chance of scoring yourself a tracking device).

      If I knew that I was being investigated for a crime I'd defiantly be looking around the car.

      The stuff in the article about the car running poorly was just him baiting the police. Trimble make GPS devices designed to be used indoors; it wouldn't have mattered where in the car the antenna was placed it still would have gotten enough signal for a reasonable lock.

    2. Re:How this was found... by Technician · · Score: 1

      Trimble make GPS devices designed to be used indoors; it wouldn't have mattered where in the car the antenna was placed it still would have gotten enough signal for a reasonable lock.

      Spoken by someone who has never used GPS.. Do some research on S/N ratio. A high gain antenna does wonders, but still does not pull in a signal where there is 100% attenuation.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  64. Picking nits and pointing out nuts. by Unnamed+Chickenheart · · Score: 1

    Just to make sure you/someone did not miss it:

    My previous post was a jab at people (like the author of my previous post's parent post) who use the misnomer 'America' for U.S.A.

    That being said. I must admit I was/am ignorant of what continent(s) NZ and Australia are part of. Well, I thought it was named 'Oceania' -- I blame the game Risk and/or other sloppy sources :) ...checking wikipedia...

    New Zealand is part of the continent Zealandia. Australia is part... uhm most(?) of the continent Australia.

    Thanx. I are now smarter! ...and this time I shall remember to select 'Plain Old Text'.

    --
    urd
  65. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by famewolf · · Score: 1

    Heck with that..I would have pulled the sim's....and had my own gps tracking devices...I can put another sim in it and be tracking the cops with their own equipment..let it send ME text messages.."uhh dufus is outside your house again."

  66. Why not mail them? by SirKron · · Score: 2

    I would have just mailed them to that nice Nigerian fellow who needs help raising funds. I would love for the police to follow the trail to recover them.

  67. Dumb crooks by Dzimas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The tracking devices were attached to collect evidence. The smart thing would have been to leave them attached and continue life in a nice, law abiding fashion. Instead, Mr. Dimwit rips the bloody things out of the cars and tries to sell 'em. Duh.

    1. Re:Dumb crooks by Domo-Sun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, that is exactly what he should have done. Leave them in, and live life normally. I think this is the best advice, this far in the thread. Though I did like the one about mailing it, but it's not wise.

    2. Re:Dumb crooks by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Absolutely stunning. Find a tracking device on your person or car, assume it's all for the best and continue life as a Good Citizen, for of course nothing wrong happens to innocent people in a criminal justice system. No one gets kidnapped and shipped to Syria to have their penis razored once a month, then stored in a 3x6 coffin hole for over a year at our government's request. No one gets accused of a capital crime because they were nearby when it occurred. Innocent people don't get plastic tubes shoved down their throats to be force fed when they try to suicide after a half decade of illegal imprisonment in solitary. Mistakes may happen, but that's the cost of living in a free, safe country. Screw those hippies.

      Of course, the tracking devices could be planted by a deranged cult like the Moonies, Hubbardism or LDS, or a non-regulated corporate agency, or a foreign spy service. But that's not possible, because... well, because.

      Where... where are you people coming from? Not the America I grew up in.

    3. Re:Dumb crooks by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Well, okay, I didn't mean that you should do nothing, literally, but that you should use that car for grocery shopping, and your other car for anything else. Or disable it when you want some privacy. My instinct would be to freak out about it, and trash it, but that might get one in trouble. I'm just saying don't panic and sell it on e-bay. If you did take it out, you should return it, but then maybe they'll find a more insidious way to track you?

      It seems to me that every time someone exposes the police over some kind of injustice, that person always ends up in jail for something trivial.

      What do you think should be done?

  68. mph in SI terms by gringer · · Score: 1

    It's a new method of measuring things, the metre-picohecto (at least, that's what I interpret mph as being in SI units (http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/units.html)). It's a way of recording inverted distances, useful when tracking things that aren't where you expect them to be.

    --
    Ask me about repetitive DNA
  69. This is where he should have put them by mombodog · · Score: 1

    He should have put them in Steve Fossett's plane. I know a bit tacky. I could not resist temptation.

    1. Re:This is where he should have put them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No way, that's the BEST reply here, good job!

  70. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    Um... to make money?

  71. In Soviet Amerika... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In the USA, if you've found such a device under your car and you remove it:

    1) you've interfered with a police investigation. One felony charge for that.

    2) you've destroyed or tampered with evidence. Add on another felony charge for that.

    3) you've removed police wiretapping or surveillance equipment add a third felony charge for that.

    Ooop, three strikes now. You're out.

  72. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by PPH · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Don't disable them. The cops will just do a better job hiding the next set.


    They expect you to be where the tracker says you are, so keep them in the car. When it comes time to engage in some activity of questionable legality, take it out. Maybe have a friend carry it in the opposite direction. When you are done, put it back in your car.


    This could turn out to be the best alibi you could have.


    OTOH, if you aren't doing anything worthy of suspicion, you can really have some
      fun with the cops.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  73. Misquotations R Us by Lord+Balto · · Score: 1, Informative

    RTFA????? Having just RTFA, I have determined that you pulled the second part of your quotation out of your bloody ass. The actual quote is:

    "When contacted by The Press, Shaw declined to comment other than to say: 'Police use a variety of legitimate investigation techniques when investigating serious crime. However, it is not the policy of the police to comment on those techniques or other operational matters.'

    "Shaw would not say whether a warrant had been obtained for the devices. The Summary Proceedings Act, which covers tracking devices, says a warrant should be obtained for a tracking device but an officer can install one without a warrant if there is not time and the officer believes a judge would issue a warrant."

    Busted!

    1. Re:Misquotations R Us by Bazar · · Score: 1

      Your reading the wrong link. I'd suggest you read peoples posts more carefully next time, but for your convenience, heres the link again:

      http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/1318360/1336811

      --
      To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
  74. think your cunning plan all the way through... by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    Personally, though, I think it might be more fun to attach the thing to a sewer-sucker or garbage truck... something unpleasant You think it would be fun to attach it to something unpleasant?? Eww.
    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  75. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Barny · · Score: 1

    Hrmm, article said the company make GPS trackers... at a guess it takes feed from a GPS and squirts it off in SMS at a pre-set time interval, wonder how these sorts of packages deal with incoming calls, I mean, I signed up with a new phone provider about a month ago, first day the sim was active I got 3 spam calls :/

    Other option is, drop the sim into a phone, and use it to make calls, free phone access 4tw :)

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
  76. Something related by terminal.dk · · Score: 1

    We had something related here in Denmark a few years ago. Two police officers put a tracking device in the car of a person suspected on starting forrest fires, but without getting a permission from court.
    This proved he was guilty, because in Denmark justice is above the individual, so all evidence can be admitted in court.

    But, the two policemen also had to go to court, for doing the illegal monitoring. But this was a completely unrelated case.

    In Denmark, selling the tracking would also be criminal, because they newer was the car owners.

    1. Re:Something related by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      In Denmark, selling the tracking would also be criminal, because they newer was the car owners.

      That's actually not entirely correct. Legally a device left in your car intentionally is considered a gift unless it is clearly marked as being owned by someone else. Unless a court order exists you'll have the right to remove the device and return it to the owner. You also have the right to publish the story and expose the police as violators of the constitution ("Grundloven") which mandates a court order either prior to placing the device or shortly afterwards if there wasn't time to obtain one before the device had to be put in place.

      So, if the device isn't marked and clearly was put there intentionally (not left by accident) and the police refuses to acknowledge the device being there, it's yours to do with as you please - which includes sending it around the world or simply destroying it.
      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
  77. LOL by dafing · · Score: 1
    New Zealand is not that far at all from Australia, we are alike in some ways, but very different in others. I like to think that there still is an ANZAC spirit, look it up on wikipedia.

    Australia is a country, and so large its actually its own continent! New Zealand is mostly two islands, North and South, with a few others around us. Most people live in the North which is smaller than the South in land size.

    --
    --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  78. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by clayne · · Score: 0

    Checked NZ cell rates lately?

  79. Fluoridate ur water til peoples eyes burn next 2 u by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    You two have been the only two really insightful posters. But in the end you two are not so smart after all because now you will receive special treatment.

  80. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Technician · · Score: 1

    at a guess it takes feed from a GPS and squirts it off in SMS at a pre-set time interval,

    Many lie dormant until the vehicle is started. Then they transmit only as the location changes. Some are programmed to remain silent until the car is shut off to hide the radio signal, then they transmit the trip log when the car is shut down. In that mode the cell phone module won't cause strange noise in the radio or cause glitches in the engine computer while driving.

    If you call it, most likely you will only get a modem for data retreival and re-programming parameters, or a silent audio monitor mode. The data may go out sms or batch mode, but the phone sometimes can still be called to monitor audio in real time. It all depends on the programming and what mode is used. Magnetic bumper ones have limited battery life so they rarely transmit constantly and live audio while driving is useless. They typicaly monitor their position and send a burst indicating they are on the move and then transmit the trip when they stop. For real time tracking for a bust, they can be called for real time persuit. This is used in abduction cases where the stop locations indicate something other than a short local trip.

    At the end of the day you have a full log of all the trips paths and the location of every stoplight, customer, and gas station visited. The trip data contains time stamps including position and speed. Look up NEMA data for the information contained in a GPS data string. Data strings are updated every second while the position changes.

    NEMA is the National Electronics Manufacturers' Association, the group that defines (among other things) levels of waterproofness for conduit fittings and wiring boxes.
    NMEA is the National Marine Electronics Association, who many years ago defined a set of signals and messages for marine instrumentation, including anemometers, automatic chartplotters, and satellite navigation receivers. NMEA 0183 is that standard.

    http://www.nmea.org/pub/0183/
    http://www.kh-gps.de/nmea-faq.htm

    Part of the data may contain the RMC string. It contains;
    $GPRMC,hhmmss.ss,A,llll.ll,a,yyyyy.yy,a,x.x,x.x,dd mmyy,x.x,a*hh

    RMC = Recommended Minimum Specific GPS/TRANSIT Data

    1 = UTC of position fix
    2 = Data status (V=navigation receiver warning)
    3 = Latitude of fix
    4 = N or S
    5 = Longitude of fix
    6 = E or W
    7 = Speed over ground in knots
    8 = Track made good in degrees True
    9 = UT date
    10 = Magnetic variation degrees (Easterly var. subtracts from true course)
    11 = E or W
    12 = Checksum

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  81. Re:Two Words: Helium Balloons... by RubberDogBone · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... So some cop watching the console suddenly sees the trackers heading out to sea, until it disappears when the cell signal fades out. hahaha

    Might even be a spit-take in the police station.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  82. You can rape someone with a pussy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All rape is is non-consentual sex.

    A mickey finn in the drink along with a viagra tablet is all it would take.

    And, given that if you were threatened with accusations of rape unless you did the bongo dance, that would also be rape.

  83. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by mpe · · Score: 1

    Or even better, put each of them into separate packages, mail one to China and one to America. Would love to see the police phone bill after that ^_^

    The US dosn't tend to have that much GSM and what does exist might not be on the right frequency.

  84. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

    Yes, I'm well aware of that. But as the story deals with tracking devices, and not printers, I went with Tracker. Although I'd like to thank you for not getting the joke ;)

    --
    Bark less. Wag more.
  85. A city bus! by swb · · Score: 2, Funny

    A city bus is another good choice; some might switch routes from day-day, making an apparently random set of non-random patterns, as well as driving the cops bonkers if they try to tail the car based on the location data -- "we couldn't catch up, this bus kept getting in the way.."

    I also like the idea of driving to the mall and putting them on someone else's car, as well as putting them on a neighbor's car, which might never get found since the car would keep returning "home".

  86. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by egburr · · Score: 1
    From Google Maps; "We could not calculate driving directions between New Zealand and Dallas Texas."

    Dang, they fixed it. For directions bewteen a US city and a European city, Google maps used to include a swim from Boston to Paris.

    --

    Edward Burr
    Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
  87. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by egburr · · Score: 1

    and before anyone calls me on it, yes I know NZ is not "a European city". I don't know if similar swimming instructions would have existed for going to a NZ city. They obviously don't now, though.

    --

    Edward Burr
    Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
  88. Smash the tracking device. by likes2comment · · Score: 0

    Here in northern Ohio, USA, a while ago the police were really pissed off because some mechanic pointed out to his customer the tracking devices under the car. The customer then smashed them to pieces with a hammer. The police attempted to charge him with destruction of goverment property of something like that. He should have attached it to a city bus or a train or a semi-truck to really give them something to investigate.

  89. I love when you people "take jabs" but are wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "My previous post was a jab at people (like the author of my previous post's parent post) who use the misnomer 'America' for U.S.A."

    Seeing that "America" is part of "United States of America", how is it a misnomer?

    Right, it isn't. Using "America" as an abbreviation of "United States of America" is perfectly acceptable, and in no way a misnomer, so why would you take jabs at people when you're wrong?

    Or are you one of those idiots who is convinced there is a continent named "America" despite the fact that their isn't, and they are actually named "North America" and "South America". That would be awesome, because then you'd be wrong about something else too.

  90. You're thinking too small by uarch · · Score: 1

    People are thinking too small when they say "put it on a bus!" or "Put it on a police car!"

    If you really want to confuse someone, stash it somewhere in a commercial plane.

  91. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by MCraigW · · Score: 1

    Why so puny? Take an interstate delivery truck.

    Do they have "interstates" in New Zealand?

  92. Slling An FBI tracking Device On E-Bay by MountainLogic · · Score: 1

    A great song about finding and selling an FBI tracking device by Darryl Cherney can be found at http://www.darrylcherney.com/realamericanlisten.htm There is even a line just like from the article, "We can neither confirmed nor deny..."

  93. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by apt142 · · Score: 1

    I think I would stick it on a cops' wife's car. One of the stay at home mother types. Let him think about why supposedly I'm spending so much time at his house.

  94. Re:Why sell them? Then you admit they were there.. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    I'm not so sure, it could actually be more dangerous than actually sleeping with his wife.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  95. Bitch? by dafing · · Score: 1

    Funny, when you look at the history books (wikipedia) it mentions how Americans ran across the border for a BETTER life during war recruiting! And how about when you get older and need healthcare? :)

    --
    --- ...or a new slashdot signature. Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  96. Old Joke by Chagatai · · Score: 1

    You may be familiar with Australia, as it is a small island located off of the coast of New Zealand.

    --
    --Chag
  97. NZ is becoming fascist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NZ would be a nice place to live, except that a few months ago they make it illegal to use any kind of physical punishment to discipline children. This means that if you spank your kids, you will be brought up on assault charges, and you can go to jail. That's about as fascist as you can get.

  98. Re: New Zealand not a state of Australia by neonsignal · · Score: 1

    I refer you to the Definitions (part 6) of the Australian Constitution:

    "The States" shall mean such of the colonies of New South Wales, New Zealand, Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia, and South Australia, including the northern territory of South Australia, as for the time being are parts of the Commonwealth, and such colonies or territories as may be admitted into or established by the Commonwealth as States; and each of such parts of the Commonwealth shall be called "a State."

    not yet...