Didn’t I tell you? In my 1/20/06 posting Why fear surveillance cameras on streets and other public places? I questioned how anyone could justifiably oppose them as an invasion of privacy, pointing out that, among other things, they could record crimes in process of being committed and also provide evidence for use at trial of the criminals involved.

The following news item appeared in the 2/25/06 edition of the Baltimore Sun:

A 16-year-old who prosecutors said was recorded by a city police surveillance camera as he fled the scene of a fatal shooting last year pleaded guilty yesterday to second-degree murder and use of a handgun in the commission of a crime...If (the shooter) had gone to trial on a first-degree murder charge, prosecutors said they planned to use the camera’s images against him.

Assistant State’s Attorney Julius Silvestri said a pole camera at Curley and Monument streets showed (the shooter) with one hand in his pocket running shortly after the shooting.

Should we be concerned that this murderer’s privacy was invaded?