 |
Wilson v. Layne
May 24, 1999
The US Supreme Court ruled in Wilson
v. Layne that media entry into a home with the police during
the execution of a search warrant violates the Fourth Amendment.
In this case, a Washington Post reporter and photographer observed
the five police officers enter a home in search of a suspect.
The suspect turned out not to be there, but in the process of finding
that out the police pinned his underwear-clad father to the floor,
mistakenly believing him to be the suspect. The Post photographer
took pictures of that, as well as the reaction of the mother who
appeared dressed in her nightgown, though none of the pictures were
published. According to the summary of the court's decision:
"Taken in their entirety, the reasons advanced by respondents to
support the reporters’ presence – publicizing the government’s efforts
to combat crime, facilitating accurate reporting on law enforcement
activities, minimizing police abuses, and protecting suspects and
the officers–fall short of justifying media ride-alongs. Although
the presence of third parties during the execution of a warrant
may in some circumstances be constitutionally permissible, the presence
of these third parties was not."
A second decision on the same day, Hanlon
v. Berger, involved CNN's recording of a search on a ranch, though
not in the home. It was remanded for further proceedings consistent
with the decision in Wilson v. Layne. The closest Canadian decision
to this is R.
v. West, decided in December 1997 by the British Columbia Court
of Appeal. Leave to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court
of Canada was not sought.
|