U.S. judge throws out cell phone 'stingray' evidence
I hesitate to comment on topics like this for fear of coming across as ignorant, but I find myself very conflicted over this subject.<p>I am a huge advocate for privacy and am strongly against unnecessary surveillance by governments and companies. On the other hand, if the evidence is compelling it seems a waste to discard it.<p>It&#x27;s a hard question - do you think about the bigger picture: protect human rights by setting a precedence
Or do you think think about the short term: convict a dangerous criminal.<p>In a more hypothetical scenario, if a dangerous serial killer was brought into court and there was only one compelling piece of evidence, but it was obtained in an extremely unlawful manner - what would a judge be expected to do?