CNN英语 学英语,练听力,上听力课堂! 注册 登录
> CNN > CNN news > 2017年03月CNN新闻听力 >  内容

CNN News: 窃听

所属教程:2017年03月CNN新闻听力

浏览:

2017年03月23日

手机版
扫描二维码方便学习和分享
https://online2.tingclass.net/lesson/shi0529/0009/9982/20170322cnn.mp3
https://image.tingclass.net/statics/js/2012

One thing you need to know about wiretapping is that if law enforcement does it without probable cause and a warrant, it`s probably unconstitutional.

关于窃听,需要知道一件事情,如果执法部门没有正当的理由,并获得批准,那么窃听行为是违宪的。

That`s from a 1967 Supreme Court case called Katz. Shortly after that, Congress enacted Title III, which governs procedures for wiretapping and electronic surveillance.

这是根据1967年一个叫做凯茨(Katz)的案子。不久之后,美国国会修改了美国宪法第四修正案,明确规定了窃听和电子监控的程序。

In an ordinary criminal investigation, Title III requires two things. First, a statement of probable cause. But in addition to that, a statement that this is probably the only way that this evidence can be obtained. But until Title III, those requirements don`t apply to national security type surveillance. The problem is, even after Title III, the executive branch continued to engage in electronic surveillance of Americans based on their political opinions, but under the guise of national security.

对于普通的刑事犯罪侦查,宪法第三章要求需要存在两个要素。第一,合理的声明。但是,除此之外,声明中表示这是唯一可以或者证据的办法。到但是直到宪法第四修正案第三章,这些要求并不适用于关乎国家安全的监测。但是问题是,尽管第三章做出了修改,但是,一些行政机关,仍然打着国家安全的幌子,而是出于自己的观点,对美国公民进行电子监视。

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 or FISA was actually intended to create more rigorous procedural requirements for this kind of surveillance. Originally under FISA, obtaining a warrant was something like the criminal process. The requests were individualized. You had to show necessity and you had to show either a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.

1978年外国情报监视法案(简称FISA),实际的目的旨制定更加严格的监控程序。最初根据FISA,犯罪过程等监控需要获得批准.之后,这些要求被个性化. 你必须展示进行监听的必然性,以及出示自己是否是外国势力或外国势力的代理人.

Now, after a series of amendments, when it comes to a non-U.S. person overseas, you don`t need any probable cause at all. And unlike the criminal courts, FISA courts are almost completely conducted in secret. Title III wiretaps in ordinary criminal cases are generally difficult to obtain, especially when compared to the law standard and secrecy in the FISA courts.

现在,经过一系列的修正,涉及到海外的非美国公民,则完全不需要任何合理根据. 不同于刑事法庭,FISA法院几乎完全在秘密进行.根与FISA法院的法律标准和保密程度,按照宪法第三章,普通的刑事案件通常很难达到标准.

One thing you need to know about wiretapping is that if law enforcement does it without probable cause and a warrant, it`s probably unconstitutional.

That`s from a 1967 Supreme Court case called Katz. Shortly after that, Congress enacted Title III, which governs procedures for wiretapping and electronic surveillance.

In an ordinary criminal investigation, Title III requires two things. First, a statement of probable cause. But in addition to that, a statement that this is probably the only way that this evidence can be obtained. But until Title III, those requirements don`t apply to national security type surveillance. The problem is, even after Title III, the executive branch continued to engage in electronic surveillance of Americans based on their political opinions, but under the guise of national security.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 or FISA was actually intended to create more rigorous procedural requirements for this kind of surveillance. Originally under FISA, obtaining a warrant was something like the criminal process. The requests were individualized. You had to show necessity and you had to show either a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.

Now, after a series of amendments, when it comes to a non-U.S. person overseas, you don`t need any probable cause at all. And unlike the criminal courts, FISA courts are almost completely conducted in secret. Title III wiretaps in ordinary criminal cases are generally difficult to obtain, especially when compared to the law standard and secrecy in the FISA courts.

用户搜索

疯狂英语 英语语法 新概念英语 走遍美国 四级听力 英语音标 英语入门 发音 美语 四级 新东方 七年级 赖世雄 zero是什么意思包头市朝阳小区(一区)英语学习交流群

  • 频道推荐
  • |
  • 全站推荐
  • 推荐下载
  • 网站推荐