Civil Liberties
The terms of service for this forum says posts should be about firearms or civili liberties. This topic was about civil liberties.
Contrary to what a lot of people here have posted, it seems to me that both the lady and deputy behaved legally.
The key issue is whether the areas she visited were protected by the Fourth Amendment --- in other words, whether the areas were curtilage for the home.
This issue is addressed in United States v. Dunn. The criterion is whether the area is associated with the intimate activities of home life, and should be evaluated using a combination of four factors. One is nearness of the area to the home. Here, it was very near. Another is whether a fence surrounds both the home and the area, and does not surround open fields. Here, no fence. Another is whether view of the area is blocked from unprotected areas. Here nothing is hidden. The fourth factor is whether the areas is used for the intimacies of home life. Here, no; digging holes in the ground is associated with construction, not home life. The areas she visited flunked three of four factors, so it is not even close to being protected.
Since this is not a Fourth Amendment issue, state law applies. Indiana Code 16-20-1-23 allows a health inspector to enter private property after due notice to investigate disease. From the video, it seems she may well have done so. So it appears she was entitled to enter the property.
The deputy, on the other hand, did not have any right to enter the propperty. I suspect he was there in case the videographer committed a crime, such as assault on the health inspector.
I believe the videographer was Ray Kirkus and that he was evicted for health code violations.
