Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on mercantile law. In the event that evidence of this theft of intellectual property has been being found, Make stuff Company may seek to pursue crimin

Your assignment is to prepare and submit a paper on mercantile law. In the event that evidence of this theft of intellectual property has been being found, Make stuff Company may seek to pursue criminal prosecution. Indeed, Mr. Yourprops’ supervisor can direct local police investigators to search his personal vehicle which is parked on the Company parking lot after obtaining a search warrant first. It is procedural in the company for the employees to undergo routine searches and wherever there is cause for that exercise to take place, proper documentation such as a search warrant should be produced. The law says every person is innocent until found guilty by the court (Vilojein, 1998). In this case, the authorized search of Mr. Yourprops’ car does not mean that he is guilty of any offense but undergoing the normal procedure as required by law.

3. As stipulated by the 4th Amendment highlighted above, Mr. Yourprops’ supervisor has no right by law to search Yourprops assigned locker in the Company's on-site gym for digital evidence without his knowledge and consent. A full search can only be conducted when a search warrant has been produced and Mr. Yourprops has been informed about the intended move. When a lawful search warrant is produced, then Mr. Yourprops has to comply to prove his innocence which is procedural.

4. Again, Mr. Yourprops supervisor cannot use a master key to search Yourprops locked desk after he has left the premises for digital evidence. This would amount to a violation of Mr. Yourprops’ rights to privacy as well as the rights that protect him from unwarranted searches. As noted above, a valid search warrant should be produced in order for Mr. Yourprops’ desk to be searched and he must also have knowledge about the search.

5. There is a page in the Company’s Employee Handbook that states that anything brought onto the Company’s property, including the employees themselves, is subject to random search for items belonging to the Company. In this case, Mr. Yourprop has a copy of the handbook but never signed the page. He is liable to be searched since he deliberately ignored to read the section or sign it. In this case, it can be noted that ignorance is no defense in the event that the law has been violated (Gibson, 1988). Each employee has a duty to ask for any clarification regarding company policies and laws so as to be on the right side of the law.

6. The main purpose of this security checkpoint is to search for weapons and other items that are detrimental to the operations of the firm. It may be difficult to direct the security to open Mr. Yourprops briefcase and seize any potential digital evidence since they are not entitled to do so. This action would be out of their jurisdiction hence they cannot act as they wish without informing Mr. Yourprops about the intended search for digital evidence. Wrongful searches can result in a lawsuit being filed by Mr. Yourprops against the company which may damage its image.