◆ SpookStack

(ii). Application The whole of one's movements over the course of a month is not constructively exposed to the public because, like a rap sheet, that whole reveals far more than the individual iovements it comprises. The difference is not one of degree but of kind, for no single journey reveals the habits and patterns that mark the distinction between a day in the life and a way of life, nor the departure from a routine that, like the dog that did not bark in the Sherlock Holmes story, may reveal even more. As with the "mosaic theory" often invoked by the Government in cases involving national security information, "What may seem trivial to the uninformed, may appear of great moment to one who has a broad view of the scene." CIA v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159, 178 (1985) (internal quotation marks deleted); see J. Roderick MacArthur Found. v. F.B.I. 102 F.3d 600, 604 (D.C.Cir.1996). Prolonged surveillance reveals types of information not revealed by short-term surveillance, such as what a person does repeatedly, what he does not do, and what he does ensemble. These types of information can each reveal more about a person than does any individual trip viewed in isolation. Repeated visits to a church, a gym, a bar, or a bookie tell a story not told by any single visit, as does one's not visiting any of these places over the course of a month. The sequence of a person's movements can reveal still more; a single trip to a gynecologist's office tells little about a woman, but that trip followed a few weeks later by a visit to a baby supply store tells a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups-and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts. FN* This case itself illustrates how the sequence of a person's movements may reveal more than the individual movements of which it is composed. Having tracked Jones's movements for a month, the Government used the resulting pattern-not just the location of a particular "stash house"' or Jones's movements on any one trip or even day-as evidence of Jones's involvement in the cocaine trafficking business. The pattern the Government would document with the GPS data was central to its presentation of the case, as the prosecutor made clear in his opening statement: [T]he agents and investigators obtained an additional order and that was to install a GPS.... They had to figure out where is he going? When he says ten minutes, where is he going? Again, the pattern developed.... And I want to ... just show you an example of how the pattern worked... The meetings are short. But you will again notice the pattern you will see in the coming weeks over and .over again. Tr. 11/15/07. Other courts have recognized prolonged surveillance of a person's movements may reveal an intimate picture of his life. See Galella v. Onassis, 353 F.Supp. 196, 227-28 (S.D.N.Y.1972) (*Plaintiff's endless snooping constitutes tortious invasion of privacy ... [he] has insinuated himself into the very fabric of Mrs. Onassis' life') ( aff'd in relevant part 487 F.2d 986, 994 & n.12 (2nd Cir.1973) (if required to reach privacy issue "would 17 TTUOTD 007058