The OP is probably getting at something along the lines of “interfering with a police investigation,” which is defintely a “no-no.”
It’s kind of like the “catch 22” if you make income illegallly and report it, they got you. If you don’t report it, you are sharing a cell with Al Capone, so to speak
So imagine that you grew paranoid and started sweeping your house for bugs. You find one. How do you know whether it’s the legitimate product of a police investigation with a warrant? It might be from some dude conducting corporate espionage. Or a drug ring might have bugged the wrong house. Or your mother-in-law is trying to find out how you really treat her baby…
For the purposes of this thread, the Feds or whoever have been around asking questions. You KNOW you’re doing something illegal and you’re worried that they might be on to you, so you check for bugs in your office and you find one or more.
And then start making assumptions about little electronic devices and who owns them? Or does that device have a “Property of…if found, drop in nearest mailbox or return in person to ‘name/address of owner’”?
Do the bug-owners need to inform a person that the device, if found, is not to be disturbed in any manner? I can see the disclaimer tag - “We cannot confirm, nor deny, the presence of electronic surveillance on your property, but should you find any device(s) in the future, it is indisputably ours and you will be financially responsible should the unit be damaged or altered in any manner”. And probably also - “Should this unit be inoperable, do not return to place of purchase for warranty repairs. Please send to …, but only after acquiring an RMA”.
Seriously, how does a person tell who owns the thing? And how does the owner/installer know. without ANY doubt, what happened to it? Can it be proven that the device was visibly marked and also in a place where it is obvious that it was not placed there ‘for entertainment purposes’ by someone non-law enforcement? Kind of ironic to try and claim damages, imho. Could be a media circus that far outweighs cost of cheapo electronics. Not many agencies want to look so foolish with their failure(s), I would imagine.
I can’t find a cite now, but I remember a story about some Mafia suspect that discovered some FBI bugs in his building. He destroyed the bugs and was charged with damaging federal property. The bugs were there under court order, so they had a legal right to be there.
Exactly. Like trying to convict a person of murder when there is no body (possibly good analogy). Plus, would a person be able to countersue for harassment (or whatever legal term is for ~baseless accusations). “Your honor, it is obvious that the ‘govt’ is just trying to make up things to harm/disparage my client since no evidence of anything is being given here. Please make all details of this so-called bug available (who placed it, who made it, technical schematics, etc) so that we may look further into this situation. We will also need to depose all the members of the organization to establish if there is a pattern to this behavior. Or just have the plaintiff pay all costs for such a ridiculous claim against an innocent person trying to lead an innocent life without being accused of silly debts for things that exist in plaintiff’s dreams.”
IANAL, so I am just making up the terms/phrases, but I would imagine that the owner would have to prove that the bug was not removed by them and then lost with the attempt to make another pay for it being a cover-their-ass action. It sure is possible that would be a plausible situation.
If it was a video bug, it is possible to destroy it without being in the video itself. And it would be showing a person saying “Oh, look, Joey left another of his play cameras in here. I’ll toss it into the trash just like all the others I find. He should really do better trying to secretly film me.” Darkness follows.
Now it might be different if there was a statement of ownership with detailed return-instructions printed in large-enough-for-visually impaired persons to be able to read. I really doubt there is such info on tiny bugs meant to be hidden, but there might be. If so, then…
I say firmly that it would not be in governments interest to take someone to court to show that they failed to be any good at electronic surveillance. It would certainly confirm that the finder was under surveillance and from that point forward any other gathered info would not be reliable. Anyone that knows they are being recorded will say things to obfuscate or misdirect the investigation (ie start talking about names of local police accepting sex favors from whores routinely, and pics available at any time, etc).
I bet there are a few websites that would make the defendant (or ghostwriter) rich for telling the story of being billed for removing a bug. Not to mention making them a folk hero most likely.
That’s while you’ll notice that I specified “**my ***invitation *or consent.” The bugs are there legally, but the people who left them there entered without my knowledge or consent.
That’s why *my *WAG is that while I can’t sue anyone for putting them there (because they’re there legally), I would *also *be able to dispose of them as I see fit, because they were left on my property without obtaining my permission.
I would also ‘think’ that the court’s permission for using the devices is more of a “any thing found by use of said device will be deemed admissable as evidence having found that probably cause exists to warrent use of said device, folks found planting said device will not be held criminally liable for entering premises” but has a lot less to do with what happens to said device if discovered by the person(s) being monitored.
As others have pretty well stated, the value of a device is lost after its discovered.