So, Everton Brown shot up a few noisy neighbors who played kaoraoke EVERY Saturday, all day long, and who liked to fix up their house by banging on the walls too.
In fact, those posts are some of my most popular on this blog–I wonder who is peeking in to read them–and why? Hey, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear, right Baltimore gang stalkers? Rest well folks, no one is coming to take you to jail for your gang stalking event that got a few innocent people killed–yet.
Anyways, as it turns out, the smear that ran in the media was that Everton Brown was crazy, because he sued the FBI for documents that indicate that he was under surveillance. And the dilligent Baltimore newspaper reporter showed up and interviewed Mr. Brown about his “crazy claim” of being under surveillance.
Brown was in no way paranoid or making false claims about being under surveillance, because he was, and now, a court has ruled that surveillance unconstitutional.
After two court decisions declaring the Baltimore Police Department’s Persistent Surveillance Systems-provided aerial surveillance system wasn’t actually persistent surveillance, the en banc Fourth Circuit Appeals Court has reversed itself, finding that the system capable of capturing the movements of people and vehicles over an area of 32-square-miles violates the Fourth Amendment.
The 192-million megapixel camera system flew over the city for up to 12 hours a day, only shutting down when darkness or weather rendered the cameras useless. This footage was retained by the PD, which could review the footage
The city of Baltimore has been spying on people with a 192-million megapixel camera, that can see around a 32 mile radius. Including Everton Browns former home.