From: Barbara Lamar (barbaralamar@sanmarcos.net)
Date: Sun Aug 31 2003 - 12:31:46 MDT
Greg Burch wrote:
> First, presumably there
> *was* a warrant issued by a court.
I believe there was a warrant based on information previously obtained
without a warrant; and the warrant was worded very broadly -- no specific
crime mentioned. Section 203 (b)(1) authorizes sharing of information
between various federal employees or agents, including any attorney for the
U.S.; for example, information included in a federal income tax return could
be communicated from IRS to the FBI, which could then use this information
to apply for a warrant; my understanding is that the information on the tax
return could be something as innocent as an entry on Schedule B, Form 1040,
of interest received from a foreign bank account. Section 213 of the PA
authorizes what amounts to indefinite delay of notice.
> Did the CPA take the warrant to the
> lawyer he consulted?
Yes.
Did you see it?
No.
>Liberty isn't self-executing and never will
> be. If he
> felt it wasn't justified, how active was the CPA in challenging the
> investigation?
This is one reason I find the PA so troubling: see, it wasn't the CPA's
problem, beyond the need to cover his ass if the client later complained.
And the client was not given the opportunity to challenge the investigation,
because the CPA was not allowed to inform him (prohibition of communication
from CPA to client is authorized by Section 213 of the PA).
> Police forces are *always* going to bump up against the
> boundaries of their legal authority, even when they have only
> good motives.
Right. But if the police can act in secret, they can clean out the barn
before the farmer is even aware the door's been opened.
> My second point is to ask whether the specific items you mention
> at the end
> of your post are from the current law or the so-called "Patriot Act II."
They're in the Patriot Act that was signed into law in October, 2001.
>And I don't see any
> indication that the
> courts won't enforce the Constitution when push comes to shove --
As I mentioned in my last post, this is not the first time such problems
have arisen with laws passed in haste to address a crisis. There is no
reason to get hysterical. But I do think people need to be aware that
certain rights we tend to take for granted are being threatened.
Barbara
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 31 2003 - 13:43:01 MDT