I know that police need a search warrant to place a GPS tracker on a suspects vehicle (thanks to a recent SCOTUS ruling). But what’s the law say about putting trackers in items likely to be stolen, like bait vehicles, or (in this case) pill bottles?
Here’s a link to the full article that triggered this question: http://www.cnet.com/news/nypd-uses-gps-enabled-pill-bottle-to-catch-drugstore-robber/#ftag=CAD590a51e.
I can’t imagine any reason why one couldn’t put a tracker into anything one owns. I see no similarity between the two examples.
Car and laptops already often have GPS or other tracking devices. A warrant is only needed when an owner is unwilling to cooperate; no warrant is needed if the owner gives permission to place, or places the device himself.
Seems to me the smart thing to do would be for manufacturers or pharmacies to plant them ahead of time.
That way, IF they are stolen, they can just turn over their records to the police as part of the investigation, and I’m pretty sure they’d be instantly admissible in court.
… and it seems like that’s exactly what is going on, since the GPS-enabled dummy OxyContin bottles referred to by the article in the OP are made and provided by the manufacturer to help deter pharmacy robberies. The only problem I see is, there are apparently no pills in the tracking bottles; what if the smarter armed robbers open the bottle and figure out you tried to screw them over? Seems like it would be smarter to put a bunch of inert pills in there, so the criminals wouldn’t realize they hadn’t gotten away with a real bottle of OxyContin until the cops swoop down on them.
I can’t see how they wouldn’t be legal. Closest thing I could find as far as being close to this - and possibly disputable is:
http://www.rmtracking.com/blog/2012/11/27/another-gps-tracking-case-enters-appeals-court-in-denver/
Police used GPS tracker in bait money to track car to intersection and forced like 20 people out of their cars. Case is/was on appeal, but guy lost. The dispute seemed to be around whether it was reasonable to force 20 people out of their car - and if the police had just waited til the intersection cleared and they could figure out which car had the robbers - there wouldn’t have been much dispute.
Found other GPS bait money cases - and most didn’t even bother to argue use of technology was illegal, but that it was inaccurate or other things like it.
I don’t think you have much of a case when you steal something - don’t get what you wanted, but a counterfeit version of it that contains a tracker - and then the police catch you.
I can see cases like the intersection case being an issue, but if the police figure out it is most likely you - pull you over - they can also rely on other details to decide whether to conduct search or not - or better yet - try and get a warrant or whatever.
I don’t see how the use of bait money or ATMs (yeah bring one of those back to your house and they will find you too) or whatever is going to be held to be illegal.
Now putting a tracker in/on something I paid for and legally bought - that is a different story.
I too wondered about the fake pills - but they probably don’t want anyone to assume they MIGHT have fake medicine ANYWHERE. Employees could resell fake pills (while real ones are controlled) - etc.
Also - they have been doing this with bait money for probably close to a decade or more - and dye packs for long before that. Seems like the rush to get away is pretty important. Of course bank robbers don’t need a fix right that minute - but your average oxycodone/OxyContin thief also is probably not that bright.
Impressed that they’ve caught 111 people so far.
That is putting a tracker in stolen merchandise. Why wouldn’t I be for that?
That is not baiting.
The title reminded me of a time when I found some prescription meds on the street. I couldn’t locate the person named on the label so I ended up turning it into the pharmacy the next morning. If I had gotten busted in that situation it would have sucked because I’d have to of been a jerk to ignore it.
It’s the admissible in court part that I’m stuck on. The idea sounds perfectly reasonable, and the tracker is placed by the manufacturer.
However, there are quite a few instances in our laws that make no sense, or contradict reason - until you consider how it they’d work with edge cases.
I had the impression that while made by the drug companies, they were deployed at the behest of the NYPD. What I was saying is for the pharmacies to routinely do this outside of police investigations. That way, the cops aren’t involved until the pharmacy reports the theft. The GPS bottles would (I think… IANAL) be considered much the same as surveillance footage, Lojack, etc… and NOT like a police entrapment scheme.
I think the ownership is the key issue. I can make a reasonable argument that the government shouldn’t be able to put tracking devices in my property. But I can’t see any argument why other people, including the government, can’t choose to put tracking equipment in their property. If I steal somebody else’s property and it has tracking equipment in it that leads to my arrest, that’s on me for stealing it.
Pill bottles ordinarily cost pennies. GPS’s would significantly increase the cost, for very little benefit. For an elderly customer, it may also unnecessarily increase the weight of multiple containers.
I don’t believe GPS trackers are being installed in the prescription bottles that are handed out to individual patients; I think they are in the bulk containers shipped to the pharmacy (from which individual patient prescriptions are filled).
Given the quantity of bottles/trackers involved, these bottles could be sent back to the manufacturer for reuse
I think you’ve got it right there, Nemo. If the owner implants a tracking device in their a piece of their property, information derived from that device belongs to the property owner, not the person currently holding that piece of property. Thus, the privacy of a thief is not impinged by the tracker, since it’s not placed upon their person or effects (they are not the legal owner of the pill bottle, after all). This is legally the same as a company tracking it’s own vehicles (e.g. like some freight companies do), or reading email sent through it’s servers.
You’d probably be okay with medication you found on the streets. It’s a lot harder to create reasonable doubts when you take the medication out of the drugstore.
Ah