Slashdot Mirror


FBI Accused of Abusing Criminal Database

Peace protesters were unable to leave the country to speak in Canada because their names had been added to a database of criminals. There's a serious due-process violation here because a listing in this database is equivalent to an "infamous" conviction. "'The FBI's placing of peace activists on an international criminal database is blatant political intimidation of US citizens opposed to Bush administration policies,' says Colonel Wright, who was also Deputy US Ambassador in four countries. 'The Canadian government should certainly not accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country... The list is supposed to be for felony and serious misdemeanor offenses. We don't qualify — it's for sex offenders, foreign fugitives, gang violence and terrorist organizations, people who are on parole...'"

20 of 433 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wait one minute... by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you get arrested you got arrested. It might not have been a fair arrest and there should be a process to explain yourself and get past the authorities. BUT, and this is the big BUT how is the border person going to know the difference? There are peace activists that should not be put on the list and then there are some that should be on the list and then some.
    Bingo. It's up to Canada to decide whether or not to let you in. I noticed that they didn't deny having been arrested.

    As a sidenote, yes, Canada has recently been getting extremely picky about letting people with criminal records into the country, even petty crimes and decades old DUIs.

    From Article:

    "In the past, Canada has always welcomed peace activists with open arms. This new policy, obviously a creature of the Bush administration, is shocking and we in the US and Canada must insist that it be overturned. Four members of the Canadian Parliament--Peggy Nash, Libby Davies, Paul Dewar and Peter Julian-- expressed outrage that the peace activists were barred from Canada and vow to change this policy.
    Huh? What? When did we annex Canada? I'm sure there's some Canadians that this statement would piss off - they're quite capable of running their own country, they don't need Bush's help. Besides, why would Bush be working to make it more difficult for US Citizens to enter Canada?

    Wright asserted, "We will never be criminally rehabilitated since we intend to continue to engage in non-violent peaceful protest of Bush administration policies, particular the war on Iraq and we intend to peacefully and nonviolently protest all of these until they end. They can lead to arrests for civil disobedience, like refusing to move from the fence in front of the whitehouse or standing up and speaking at congressional hearings."
    IE you're troublemakers, therefore the border agents were quite right to deny you entry.

    Wright added, "The fact that the FBI has put us on this list. The National Crime Information Center Computerized Index is a form of political intimidation. The list is supposed to be for felony and serious misdemeanor offenses.
    It looks like it's proper for you to be listed:
    1. Individuals who have been fingerprinted and whose criminal history
        record information has been obtained.

    Any arrest is generally for at least a 'serious misdemeanor'. Minor misdemeanors get a ticket and a court date.
    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  2. These protesters may need to go an extra step... by The+Empiricist · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...if they want to have their names removed from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, which appears to be what the Canadian officials pulled. The NCIC "is provided by the FBI, federal, state, local and foreign criminal justice agencies, and authorized courts." Thus, the NCIC is made up of FBI data and data provided to the FBI by other government organizations. To correct a record in this database, "the subject of the requested record shall request the appropriate arresting agency, court, or correctional agency to initiate action necessary to correct any stated inaccuracy in subject's record or provide the information needed to make the record complete." Unfortunately, accessing the record in the first place can be a challenge; it looks like it requires being fingerprinted and making the request through a law enforcement agency that has access to the record. More information is available here.

    http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm
  3. Ahem. by Hemogoblin · · Score: 5, Informative

    I worked as an Immigration Officer with the Canada Border Services Agency. My duties included evaluating whether individuals were admissible to Canada based on the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The following is my personal opinion and I don't represent the Government of Canada. Also, this is not legal advice and I accept no liability.

    Yes, we do have access to NCIC the FBI criminal database and we do use it as supporting evidence when we're determining if someone is inadmissible to Canada based on criminality. However, I never seen anything in the database that is not: (a) an arrest record, (b) a record of court proceedings, or (c) a warrrent/lookout/restraining order.

    I can tell you that "listing in this database" is only equivalent to "a conviction" when it says exactly what you were charged and convicted of. For example, it will show you were arrested for Assault on such and such date. The next record will show that you appeared in court on such and such a date. It will then show the judge's opinion, followed by a sentence if you were found guilty.

    The only ambiguity arises when the offence is not a serious misdemeanor. The problem occurs because it is up to the individual state court's to file the necessary paperwork with NCIC to have the information put into the database. Sometimes these clerks are busy and backlogged and never get around to inputting the judgement of the court into the database. In that instance, it will show you were arrested for "driving while intoxicated" but will not show if you were found guilty or not guilty. In this case, the onus is on the individual entering Canada to prove that they are not inadmissible based on criminality. The reason is that we officers are making a decision on the balance of probabilities and having evidence of possible criminal activity usually outweighs the individual's word.

    I have never had someone's criminal record simply say "Peace Activist" or something equally silly. Unless you were convicted of a criminal offence, or it's reasonable for me to believe you have, then you are not going to be refused entry for criminality.

    The above may contain some errors or it may be unclear. I don't have time to proofread it before work.

    1. Re:Ahem. by Hemogoblin · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not a court of law. We are not privy to the events surrounding the criminal case, nor do we make findings of law on the case. The judge did that when you had your trial, where the crown had to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge found the person guilty, end of story.

      Anyone we refuse entry into Canada is not a Canadian citizen nor a permanent resident of Canada. They don't have a right to enter the country. If they're seeking entry into Canada, they must prove they're not inadmissible. If we didn't make decisions on the balance of probabilities, we would let a whole lot of questionable people into the country. The US government complains enough about how "slack" we are as it is. Offtopic, but that kinda pisses me off.

    2. Re:Ahem. by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Informative

      Peace activist is a misleading term. Often they are the exact opposite of "peace" in the name of peace.

      And you looking at different definitions of serious too. You have the state's definition and then you have the feds definition as well as the other countries definition. Crime statistics between two separate countries are never directly comparable for this reason alone. Take suicide for one, it is perfectly legal in most European countries but considered murder in America and get reported as one in the criminal data collections. Getting busted with pot can be a serious crime in the US but not even a minor misdemeanor in other countries. Canada seems to be a country that will not let you in for a drug conviction when it is practically legal to use the same stuff over there.

      Often the denial of entry lists look at your criminal records for two things. Have you committed a crime that they think is serious and have you committed a crime that your government thinks is serious. between these two, they have set up an arbitrary line consisting of the probability that you might be a liability of some sorts while in the foreign country.

    3. Re:Ahem. by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Informative

      Being convicted doesn't automatically mean you are denied entry. It means that you will have to secure entry rights before going across the border and probably have a decent reason for going in.

      The blanket denial is to keep trouble makers out. You can apply in several ways to get around this. It usually involves signing a statement to the effect that you won't commit a crime while in the country.

      So while I am not a Canadian, I have had to get this a couple of times to visit friends and an in-law from up there. I had a pretty serious conviction too. It was overturned on appeal and is no longer on my record but it still comes up when I check to see if I need the waiver or not.

  4. Re:Editorial, not News by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yeah, OpEdNews carries regular news stories in addition to OpEd pieces. The news articles are, of course, chosen for by those with a left-leaning bias, but they are still news articles nonetheless.

  5. An arrest gets you into the DB by EmagGeek · · Score: 1, Informative

    It doesn't take a conviction to get into the NCIC. All it takes is an arrest, and let's face it folks, most peace terrorists have been arrested in their lifetimes, usually for disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, vandalism, and other misdemeanor crimes.

    1. Re:An arrest gets you into the DB by Hemogoblin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Having used NCIC extensively (see my above posts)...

      Yes a single arrest can get you in the NCIC. That usually won't make you inadmissible to Canada on its own though.

    2. Re:An arrest gets you into the DB by EmagGeek · · Score: 2, Informative

      You've obviously never been to a peace "protest," nor do you know much about the Boston Tea Party. The BTP was certainly an act of Terrorism by a small army of smugglers who were making fortunes off of breaking the Law. It was certainly not an act of Patriotic protest, but rather an act of economic terrorism perpetuated by a band of common criminals who didn't take kindly to the disruption of their racket. The BTP was neither supported nor condoned by the government of the colonies, and extensive case studies have found that, while considered a tipping point in the course of human history, the revolution was imminent with or without the occurrence of the BTP.

      While one could certainly argue that The King's economic treatment of the colonies was certainly biased and unfair, committing acts of terrorism is not an effective way to discuss grievances. The Declaration of Independence had not been envisioned until June, the following year, so to draw some kind of causality between the BTP and the creation of the USA is strictly speculative. In fact, nowhere in the text of the DofI is the Tea Tax mentioned with specificity.

      There is a difference between peaceful assembly and non-peaceful assembly. The latter is an act of terrorism and the former is a constitutionally protected right. When you intentionally obstruct the rights of others during the course of your protest, you cross the line that distinguishes between "peaceably assembling" and "committing an overt act of terrorism."

      Examples: Obstructing rush hour traffic by laying down arm-in-arm across the street, spray painting fur coats, setting fire to a parking lot full of un-sold SUVs, breaking noise ordinances, throwing objects at people and police, disobeying the restrictions of your assembly permit... all of these throw you into the bin of common criminals as far as I am concerned. These people are the ones who destroy the process for the redress of grievances for everyone else who conducts themselves lawfully.

  6. Codepink clowns.. by EveryNickIsTaken · · Score: 1, Informative

    For those that haven't read TFA, this is CODEPINK we're talking about. Yes, the same CODEPINK chicks that sneak into the house of reps / state of the union / etc and then start going batshit crazy (because that's an effective method of communication). I'm pretty sure that "sneaking" into US government buildings and causing a ruckus would likely be enough to get yourself on certain lists.

  7. Re:Context of charges. by Hemogoblin · · Score: 2, Informative

    It would show where the arrests took place, which police department, and what year. That's about it. I would treat them as anyone else who had a criminal record. I can't make a new finding of facts or guilt right at the border, so I go with what the judge decided. If he thought he/she was guilty for offences committed while protesting, so be it.

  8. FBI = political secret police by br00tus · · Score: 3, Informative
    The Nixon library keeps releasing tapes of his conversations - recently they released tapes of him talking to J. Edgar Hoover where Hoover is not lambasting even out of the mainstream people but columnists from the New York Times and Washington Post and the newspapers themselves. The FBI had a massive campaign of political intimidation and involvement, not only monitoring people like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., but sending him blackmail letters if he didn't conform his political speeches to those of Hoover's liking. Not to mention the massive COINTELPRO campaign of harassment against organizers in the 1960s.

    Insofar as King, the memo regarding COINTELPRO against blacks said "The Counterintelligence Program is now being expanded to include 41 offices... For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, and to prevent wasted effort, long range goals are being set...Prevent the rise of a 'messiah' who could unify, and electrify, the militant black nationalist movement...King could be a very real contender for this position should he abandon his supposed 'obedience' to 'white, liberal doctrines'". This is simply a secret police, a political police, trying to undermine the democratic process in this country. I know old-timer activists from the 1960s who found out due to FOIAs that the FBI had tried to get them fired from their jobs by sending anonymous letters to their employers.

    Then on Fox News they whine how the liberals shackled the CIA and FBI in the 1970s - they neglect to mention how Nixon's White House staff, including old CIA hands like Hunt, were doing things like breaking into the Democratic Party campaign headquarters at the Watergate hotel however. The CIA was undermining democratic governments not only in places like Chile, but in Australia (Whitlam affair) and Italy (P2, Gladio). Even after the FBI was supposedly cleaned up in the 1970s, Reagan had them trying to seduce nuns (who were unhappy about nuns being raped and hacked up in El Salvador, as well as the archbishop being assassinated) involved in CISPES. Now with the Patriot Act etc., all of the constraints and watchdog functions over these organizations have disappeared.

  9. Re:That could explain... by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hell, even Henry Rollins ran into trouble in Australia. Some guy saw him reading the book Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam In Central Asia on a plane and turned him in as a terrorist. And you think AMERICANS are touchy.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  10. Re:Wait one minute... by Hemogoblin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Speaking as someone who has used NCIC extensively (See this thread http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=344011&cid=21169011 further down) ...

    There are many people on the NCIC just because they have a single misdemeanor arrest. However, a record of an arrest usually won't make you inadmissible to Canada on it's own, though it certainly doesn't help. See the other thread for way more information.

  11. Re:Self Rightous BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    I absolutely agree that Canada has a right to administer its borders as it sees fit. Importantly, the US (be it the US government or US citizens) should not be able to change Canadian policy.

    That having been said, it would seem that in this current situation, Canada is being misled. They are using an FBI-published database, under the assumption that the names on the list are "criminals of significant danger." Thus, Canada is, in good faith, using this list as a filter for entry into the country.

    If the list contains a significant number of people arrested for peaceful protest, this is absolutely something that the Canadian border agency wants to know about, as it may affect their entrance policies. In particular, it may cause them to value less significantly that particular database. After all, the Canadian border policy is not to deny temporary entrance to peaceful protesters, only to deny entrance to credible threats.

    The Canadian border agency should absolutely look into this matter, since they are being duped just as much as the US citizens who have been illegitimately added to this list. In short, the FBI is misrepresenting the facts to US citizens, but also to the Canadian government.

    (Disclosure: Not that it matters, but I am a Canadian living temporarily in the US.)

  12. Education for your racist ass by SIIHP · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

    The Battle of Blair Mountain was the largest organized armed uprising in American labor history and led almost directly to the labor laws currently in effect in the United States of America. For nearly a week in late August and early September 1921, in Logan County, West Virginia, between 10,000 and 15,000 coal miners confronted state and federal troops in an effort to unionize the southwestern West Virginia mine counties. Unionization had succeeded elsewhere as part of a demographic boom that was triggered by the extension of the railroad and was characterized by unprecedented immigrant hiring and exploitation in the region. The battle was the final act in a series of violent clashes that have also been termed the Redneck War, from the color of bandannas worn by the miners around their necks for friend-or-foe identification, and the likely impetus of the common usage of the original Scottish term redneck in the vernacular of the United States.

    Yeah, I guess in your twisted racist world, people who fight for their rights and the rights of their fellow man are "Under-achieving White Trash".

    I hope you feel like an asshole, you certainly act like one.

    --
    I only go to buffets for the unlimited soft serve.
  13. More Information to Counter Bullshit. by Erris · · Score: 3, Informative

    But my point is, the NCIC isn't some secretive blacklist like the infamous no-fly list. The NCIC is detailed, you can view your record and correct it, if it's incorrect.

    Here's what I find when I look further, unvarnished outrage:

    The NCIC may not be as bad as no-fly lists but that makes it's abuse more shocking. The three arrests were for protesting and it is clear than the activists are not the violent felons the laws were designed to keep out of Canada. This is an evil political abuse that will keep these protesters legally out of Canada for five years.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  14. five years without trial. by Erris · · Score: 2, Informative

    Without changes in Canadian law, it will be five years before they can apply for entry.

    Thanks for the link, it shows they never should have been on this list which is supposed to be for:

    1. Wanted Persons
    2. Individuals who have been charged with serious and/or significant offenses
    3. Missing Persons
    4. Individuals designated by the U.S. Secret Service as posing a potential danger to the President and/or other authorized protectees.
    5. Members of Violent Criminal Gangs
    6. Members of Terrorist Organizations
    7. Unidentified Persons

    "Peace Protester" and "political adversary" don't seem to belong there. Use of this list for anything but it's purposes is a violation of law. The particular violation represents a violation of the victim's right to due process and a challenge to Canada's sovereignty.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  15. Re:Wait one minute... by budgenator · · Score: 2, Informative

    The thing is, not everyone who gets arrested normally gets put on that list.
    Wanna bet, do ya huh, not only is everyone who is arrested of a felony or a serious misdemeanor on the list, but even being fingerprinted gets you on the list, being kidnapped or even sometimes being missing gets you on the list; go check the website they list what's in the database and what isn't. These ladies are habitual, career criminals, of course they are on the list, I admire those ladies, they at least put their asses on the line for a cause they believe in, but that doesn't make them not what they are.

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds