Pubdate: Sat, 11 Apr 2009
Source: StarPhoenix, The (CN SN)
Copyright: 2009 The StarPhoenix
Contact: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/letters.html
Website: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/400
Author: Les MacPherson
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?216 (CN Police)

SUPREME COURT TRASH DECISION SIMPLY RUBBISH

How would you like someone rooting through your garbage for damaging 
information to use against you?

Of course, you wouldn't like it at all. Your garbage reveals more 
about you than a naked snapshot. Carelessly stuffed into those cans 
is a record of what you do, where you go, what you buy, what you eat 
and drink, your health, your relationships, your finances . . . No 
one wants this stuff examined by strangers.

Too bad, says the Supreme Court of Canada. When you take your garbage 
to the curb, says the court, you abandon any expectation of privacy 
with respect to its contents.

It's a bad decision that invites malicious snooping.

The dubious ruling came this week in R. v. Patrick, a case involving 
a suspected ecstasy dealer in Calgary. Acting without a warrant, 
police in that city collected and searched through garbage bags that 
Russell Patrick had left for collection in cans at the back of his 
property. Based on what they found in his garbage, police got a 
warrant to search Patrick's residence. He then was charged and 
eventually convicted on the strength of evidence found in the home.

Patrick argued on appeal that police had no right to search his 
garbage, that this was a violation of his constitutional right to 
freedom from unreasonable search. Pooh said the trial judge. Pooh 
said the Alberta Appeal Court. Pooh said the Supreme Court.

Superficially, the reasoning in support of this regrettable judgment 
is not unconvincing. Patrick abandoned his privacy rights over his 
garbage when he left it at the curb for collection, the Supreme Court 
found: "The bags were unprotected and within easy reach of anyone 
walking by in the public alley way, including street people, bottle 
pickers, urban foragers, nosey neighbours and mischievous children, 
not to mention dogs and assorted wildlife, as well as the garbage 
collectors and the police."

For the court to lump police in with raccoons is a bit of a stretch. 
Even so, the court concluded there can be no expectation of privacy 
over garbage left within easy reach of anyone walking by. Appeal 
dismissed. Conviction upheld. Open season on garbage confirmed.

Not that it helps Patrick or any other champion of civil rights, but 
at least one justice had reservations. Justice Rosalie Abella, better 
known as a champion of minority and women's rights, was fine with 
Patrick's conviction, but she did stand up for private garbage, God bless her.

Our homes are the most private of places, she said. The trash that 
emerges from within our homes we abandon at the curb for only one 
purpose, that being collection and disposal. What we do not abandon, 
Abella found, is our right to privacy over personal information that 
might be contained in that garbage.

"Individuals do not intend that this information, such as medical or 
financial information, will be generally accessible to public 
scrutiny, let alone to the state."

That said, Abella nevertheless endorsed Patrick's conviction. Police 
were entitled to search his garbage without warrant because they had 
a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, she found. Also, 
Patrick's expectation of garbage privacy was diminished, if not 
abandoned, when he took it to the curb.

As a minority opinion, Abella's defence of private garbage does not 
count for much. What prevails in law will be the majority's more 
laissez faire view. The new rule seems to be that garbage dropped at 
the curb is left in the public domain. This is a body blow for 
privacy rights, if not necessarily for police, who now can look 
through our garbage unfettered by a warrant or even by reasonable suspicion.

This ruling would seem to open our garbage cans not just for police, 
but for anyone who wants to look and for any reason. A newspaper 
columnist, for instance, might find all kinds of juicy things to 
write about in garbage left at the curb by Supreme Court justices, 
say. Of course, I would never do something so tawdry, but others 
almost certainly will. The court invites it.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom