Judge validates shooting drones "invading privacy"

[BlakPhoenix]

I am not form the US, but for those of flying there this sets a rather scary precedent. You can find out more details about it here: Judge says drone was invading the privacy of the man who shot it

And here: “Drone Slayer” cleared of charges: “I wish this had never happened”

 

[tcope]

This was 2 years ago.

 

[MarcObarlow]

Welcome to Kentucky; just don't bring no drones 'round heah!
God help us if intelligent life ever lands in the Commonwealth. The Intergalactic War will probably start when some redneck (and I use that term in the most endearing way; many of my friends and most of my relatives come toward town to hunt) ends a poor extraterrestrial's life with a 12 gauge.
Stories like this make me super-wary of rural property owners. I rarely fly anywhere but public spaces or State Parks. Old news but still a disappointing outcome.

 

[danman999]

This particular drone operator got what he deserved. He was purposefully harassing this family and invading their privacy.

 

[Abbo69]

How can anyone, especially a Federal Judge, make any kind of judgement without reviewing ALL the available evidence?

This particular drone operator got what he deserved. He was purposefully harassing this family and invading their privacy.

I'm guessing you were one of the eyewitnesses of this case.

 

[Chip]

How can anyone, especially a Federal Judge, make any kind of judgement without reviewing ALL the available evidence?

The drone operator argued that federal court had jurisdiction to decide whether the drone was flying in national airspace or over private property. But court said no that is not core issue and if there is no federal question then there is no jurisdiction and case must be dismissed with no review of evidence. Guy should have filed in local small claims court if he could not get restitution out of criminal case. Cant make a federal case out of everything.

 

[stratos]

This particular drone operator got what he deserved. He was purposefully harassing this family and invading their privacy.

Typical wanna be amateur pilots hate drones. They are typical scared the **** out while flying their single prop 70s old training airplanes. If it was for them, birds will be banned too

 

[Abbo69]

The drone operator argued that federal court had jurisdiction to decide whether the drone was flying in national airspace or over private property. But court said no that is not core issue and if there is no federal question then there is no jurisdiction and case must be dismissed with no review of evidence. Guy should have filed in local small claims court if he could not get restitution out of criminal case. Cant make a federal case out of everything.

Ah yes, very sorry for my ignorance of the US judicial system, I should have referred to District judge(?) (here in the UK we have High Court judges and Magistrates)

(From article linked by OP) 'On Monday, a judge presiding over a Bullitt County District Court hearing dismissed all charges against William Merideth without prejudice, which means the Bullitt County prosecutor could refile the charges before a grand jury. John Wooldridge, the County Attorney, did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment.

According to local television station WDRB, Judge Rebecca Ward found that because three witnesses said that they saw the drone "below the tree line," the drone flight was a violation of privacy. "

"He had a right to shoot at this drone, and I'm going to dismiss this charge," Judge Ward said.

The drone’s pilot, David Boggs, meanwhile, previously gave Ars footage showing that the drone was well over 200 feet in the air before it was shot down.

But according to Boggs, the judge didn't bother to look at all the evidence, preferring to rely solely on three witnesses who testified in support of Merideth.'

Hence my previous comment.

 

[Lapeer20m]

My opinion is that if a drone is flying in your backyard, especially a backyard that is not able to be viewed from the street and it is close enough to hit with a garden hose, it's fair game.

Firearms, garden hose, fishing line, etc. as long as it's done safely, I'm ok with it.

 

[bowens44]

This particular drone operator got what he deserved. He was purposefully harassing this family and invading their privacy.

Irrelevant. You done get to violate federal law because you feel harassed. This used to be a country of laws....

 

[Chip]

Ah yes, very sorry for my ignorance of the US judicial system, I should have referred to District judge(?) (here in the UK we have High Court judges and Magistrates)...

Actually you got the facts right. The confusion is that there were two court cases. I thought you were asking about the second case which was filed in federal court!

The criminal case was filed and dismissed in a KY state (Bullitt County) court. The drone owner then filed a civil case against the shooter in federal court for $1500 in damages. Earlier this year (March) the federal judge dismissed the case because there was no federal question.

I am surprised guy got away with shooting down drone with shotgun regardless of where it was in relation to property line. But, not surprised the federal judge would dismiss for lack of federal question. Claims for trespass, invasion of privacy, vandalism and so forth are classic issues for state courts and the judge was probably happy to avoid having to mess with whether there is any right to exclude drones in the airspace over private property.