Week4 Question2 2nd classmate) Raul Below this is what he/she answered from the question : The U.S. Bureau of the Mint, a federal agency, produces collectible items such as commemorative coins and medals. Due to prior incidents of theft, a video surveillance was conducted on the production line of the Mint. In what appears to be Herb, a line employee, dropping medals on the floor and later picking them up and putting them in his pocket while sweeping the workplace. Based on the tape, Mint officials search Herb's locker and find the stolen medals. Can Herb have the search invalidated on the grounds that it was unjustified? What is your reasoning? So you need to respond from his/her answer ( YOU DO NOT NEED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION) just respond and add YOUR THOUGHTS150-250 words remember to give thoughts and agree This is his/her answer: The search is valid and just. The privacy of Herb was not violated. The agency set up surveillance cameras to protect its assets from thieves. The locker may seem as a personal space but it is not because it is a space provided by the company. The agency did not search his pocket, even though the video shows him putting medals in his pocket, but are able to check the contents kept inside the locker. The video demonstrated Herb putting medals in his pocket so those are grounds to search. Now, since Herb was sweeping he probably noticed that he was sweeping medals and without thinking placed them in his pocket to put back in its proper location in a later time. Perhaps in the locker room he forgot he had them so stored them in the locker for safekeeping until he is able to put them back. No matter what, Herb put himself in a situation that looks like he was stealing. The agency must be careful to have a quick conclusion that can put Herb in a bad situation. But also Herb should have been careful what he was doing in the agency's time and space. FOR YOUR INFORMATION Below this is my answer: Herb has a right to decline warrantless investigations and arrests by the government as per the fourth amendment to the constitution of U.S. Incase unlawful search takes place; it is subject to containment as proof against a defendant (Newell & Tennis, 2014). Having surveillance cameras at the workplace is right since employees do not have a reasonable expectation of confidentiality. Using natural senses, surveillance does not show more than what law enforcement can observe hence it's lawful to have surveillance of Herb getting the coin. Nevertheless, the government articulately permits Herb to have a reasonable expectation of solitude in his locker. Although assuming Herb's locker may be having all stolen coins or some of them are reasonable, there is no unswerving connection linking Herb's alleged robbery and the locker. The locker should have been searched with Herb's consent. Since Herb's locker was located within Mint, the government has the right to argue that the coins in Herb's locker are predictable. This makes the evidence of the search be acceptable and basing on all the facts the judges are left to rule out (United States, 1991). Thus, the government can avoid suppression of the coins evidence found in the Herb's locker. Besides having the surveillance cameras, it's obvious that there was a tight security within the organization. If the security were keen on their duty, they could have noted that the alleged Herb was stealing coins and confront him straight to the face. It's also clear that Herb was storing all the coins he collected at workplace on his desk. To my best of knowledge, if he had an intention of stealing them he could have carried the coins to his house or far away from the workplace. Herb should be given a chance to explain himself and before passing any judgment his mental status should be well assessed. References: United States. (1991). U.S. Mint authorization, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing and the U.S. Secret Service Counterfeit Division: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs and Coinage of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, first session, April 23, 1991. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. Newell, B. C., & Tennis, J. T. (2014). Me, My Metadata, and the NSA: Privacy and Government Metadata Surveillance Programs. Proceedings of the 2014 iConference, 34555. Reply Quote