Pubdate: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 Source: Kelowna Capital News (CN BC) Copyright: 2003, West Partners Publishing Ltd. Contact: http://www.kelownacapnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1294 Author: Marshall Jones INFRARED CAMERAS PUT TO TEST IN COURT CASE The ability of police forces to use infrared cameras to spot marijuana grow operations is being tested before a B.C. Supreme Court judge. A special constable with the Kelowna RCMP gave the court a demonstration Thursday of how police use Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) cameras to see "hot spots" on the roofs of homes. Special Const. Paul Koovisk said the cameras can see these tell-tale signs of the immense heat being created by 1,000 watt lights used to grow marijuana indoors as it's vented outdoors. It's expected that the case of Lawrence Federink could be a defining case before the courts on the subject. He is charged with growing and possessing a significant amount of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and theft of electricity to power the lights. The FLIR helped form a search warrant for police to enter the home and dismantle a grow operation. Federink's lawyer Kelly Christiansen, is arguing that using an infrared camera attached to a helicopter is an unreasonable search by the police, subject to protection of the charter. The Ontario Court of Appeal recently ruled that police cannot use the cameras without a search warrant. But other court rulings, mostly in B.C., have found there is no expectation of privacy from the heat being emitted from a home. Koovisk showed Justice Robert Metzger exactly how the cameras work. They detect surface heat only and cannot depict images like a typical camera. It cannot "see" inside windows or through walls. On this occasion, during a blitz of Lake Country marijuana growers in 2001, Koovisk used the camera through the RCMP helicopter to scan some half-dozen homes in the area to confirm the presence of grow operations. The still images from the camera show mostly darkness but for a bright light in the vague shape of a roof. Koovisk said the power line to the home was also visible because it was supplying so much more electricity to the home compared to other homes in the neighbourhood. He agreed with Christiansen that the camera could accidentally pick up legitimate heat emissions such as a hot tub or a pottery kiln, but only under certain conditions. The bulk of the trial has completed but arguments in the case had to be delayed due to a lack of court time. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake