Slashdot Mirror
In Florida, Secrecy Around Stingray Leads To Plea Bargain For a Robber
schwit1 writes The case against Tadrae McKenzie looked like an easy win for prosecutors. He and two buddies robbed a small-time pot dealer of $130 worth of weed using BB guns. Under Florida law, that was robbery with a deadly weapon, with a sentence of at least four years in prison. But before trial, his defense team detected investigators' use of a secret surveillance tool, one that raises significant privacy concerns. In an unprecedented move, a state judge ordered the police to show the device — a cell-tower simulator sometimes called a StingRay — to the attorneys. Rather than show the equipment, the state offered McKenzie a plea bargain. Today, 20-year-old McKenzie is serving six months' probation after pleading guilty to a second-degree misdemeanor. He got, as one civil liberties advocate said, the deal of the century.
so let me plea down and get out sooner to get back Jack and do it again.
6 months probation is about right for what he did anyway. I can't believe they're clogging prisons with petty criminals like this then turning violent criminals out because of over crowding. A BB gun as a deadly weapon? They're turning the legal system into a farce with that kind of bullshit.
Plea bargaining should be illegal as a circumvention of the judicial system.
Call your congressman and ask them why they're using illegal surveillance tools to let criminals get away.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
I'd still rather take the deal bankers got when they effectively stole billions and we gave them more money.
He could have pleaded "Not Guilty" and walk away...
So when I buy low quality weed can I demand a refund now? Where are we? The robbed dude was a criminal, and he shouldn't have got any protection by the law. Illegal goods can't be robbed -- they are illegal.
So the state prosecutor demands way overblown sentences and only when the defense sniffed out their use of methods so dodgy they want to keep them secret do they pipe down and offer a "deal" -- disregarding for the moment that plea deals are extortion, really.
For the sake of the justice system the defendant should've declined the offer, though I can't fault him for taking what apparently looks to him to be a good deal. It shouldn't be up to him to keep the prosecutor honest!
Why is the federal government (and its agencies) so scared to allow state and local law enforcement agencies to reveal the use of these devices?
also fucking bitch stupid defendant.
he just fucking caved, his defense team could have got to see this device and perhaps document it's abuse in the court of law..
the plea bargain has allowed their crooked shit to slip by for yet another case, they avoided exposure..
obamasweapon.com
He's a petty thief The police are violating the constitution, and completely ignoring the rule of law. For all intents and purposes the cops are the judge, jury and executioner, with a badge and gun.
The police were able to avoid a trial, which is one of the major ways that the legal system has been subverted. The penalties are so draconian that even innocent people plead guilty, because if they don't they will be held forever.
Here's a current example from Montana.
That's right. Life in jail for showing fake nipples three times. Of course they backed off on it, but the fact that this was even considered shows how corrupt the law has become.
Why is Snark Required?
Congratulations, you just reinvented the concept of "outlaw". The original idea was that law protected the law abiding. Those who broke the law had the aegis of the law removed and thus anyone could harm the outlaw in any way without legal repercussion.
Interestingly, originally courts required that defendants recognize their authority before the court could try them. Defendants who refused to do so were subjected to various coercions. The coercive method of choice was "pressing".
Here's one bad mother fucker who refused to submit to the state... read his last words: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giles_Corey
In other legal news from the great State of Florida, the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Office has been caught recording defendants' privileged conversations with their attorneys, and, on occasion, providing said recordings to prosecutors.
Hey, other countries get along fine without civil rights. Who needs 'em, amirite?
http://www.winknews.com/2015/0...
Of course you can demand a refund, but that doesn't mean you'll get it. Even for legal purchases in Florida.
What you're saying is that if you're even the least bit "illegal", say jaywalking, then any and all crime victimising you, say murder, is perfectly legal because any and all enforcement is null and void. That's typically not how justice works, not even in freedom-hugging bravery-drinking USA.
Actually - you can.
Sticking a gun to somebody's head and demanding things from him is robbery. If the things happen to be illegal that's a seperate crime of which he is guilty, but it doesn't make YOUR crime okay.
That logic is a recipe for rampant vigilantism. Sure I shot twenty people down in the past year your honour, but they were all criminals, teenagers smoking doobies !
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Because they are unwilling to disclose the use of these devices it is possible that
a very long list of prosecutions will be undone including this plea should the information
see the light of day.
There is some reason to believe that a court order to demand the police retain all records could be justified.
It is not clear if the records can be released but this and other actions with these tools implies the legal footing
is not clear and that the tool is astoundingly broad and effective in what it gathers.
I might note here that it has been recently disclosed that the keys to SIM card codes
have apparently been stolen by one or more TLA. http://www.ign.com/articles/20...
One article gave a four year window to this key theft perhaps more.
If these devices are sold and if these stolen keys are involved it gets interesting.
Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
Hopefully the guy's learned his lesson. Pulling a BB gun on a drug dealer seems like a pretty good way of getting yourself killed.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Because the uses are highly illegal, nearly certain to intercept the calls of law abiding citizens, and absolute proof that they intend to become big brother as soon as they can.
If you knew what it costs in taxpayer money to pay prison contractors to keep someone in prison for 6 years, you wouldn't be so mild in your criticism.
In the U.S., putting someone in prison is an opportunity for a corporation to make easy profit. The prices are very high and the customers (prisoners) can be abused.
Same thing with war. War is EXTREMELY profitable for those people secretly in control of the U.S. government. (When Saudis attack, invade Iraq.)
Because the uses are highly illegal, nearly certain to intercept the calls of law abiding citizens, and absolute proof that they intend to become big brother as soon as they can.
And you think they are not big brother?
Damn, their program is clearly working well. You're waiting for this new big brother to pop up and don't even have a fucking clue as to who the original big brother still is and always has been.
Apathy kills history.
Because they dont want to give anyone standing to force the issue into a court they cant withdraw from. You cant sue if you dont have standing. They want to keep the tool without allowing it to be vetted by the justice process.
Good-bye
Who calls the police to report their pot being stolen?
I don't think they're fully there yet but they're trying as hard as they can and that is in itself damning.
It's an ammendment. You know, where the fundamental article (the constitution) didn't have the right to bear arms, and someone AMMENDED IT.
And you know what can happen to ammendments? They can be ammended or even repealed (which kicks your "how do you suppose..." bollocks to the kerb).
So shut the fuck up about "fundamental right" and prove WITHOUT appeal to "It's the law we have" why you must have the right to have guns in your home and easily available in your daily lives?
Do you suppose Harris Corp can sell Stingray to anyone who comes along with $200,000. Cops carry cell phones. I'd be surprised if organized crime doesn't already own a bunch of these...
Do you suppose Harris Corp can sell Stingray to anyone who comes along with $200,000. Cops carry cell phones. I'd be surprised if organized crime doesn't already own a bunch of these...
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"-B.Franklin
As a defense attorney, I can tell you this is nothing out of the ordinary. The deal itself isn't that surprising, giving the facts of the case (drug dealer victim, BB guns instead of real guns, no one hurt, small amounts) and it happens all the time. You can squeeze better deals by forcing the State to reveal its CIs or undercover officers. It's one of the side effects of the so-called war on drugs. This is just an example of "I'm entitled to see your secrets." "I don't want to show you, so here's a good deal."
weed is legal is some areas now
I know, right. Next they'll want to prosecute me for all the jay-walkers I've been mowing down.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Robbery is still criminal.
For civil stuff, you can't come before the court with "unclean hands". I.e., if you were breaking the law when the offence occurred, the court won't hear the case.
Congrats to the defense team for spotting this hole in the prosecution. Public defenders are not as bad as the media portray.
I'm not sure why the cop tech was not hit with fines & jail for contempt of court. No private agreement (even with FBI) trumps civil let alone criminal discovery. The DA probably settled to avoid the FBI repo'ing the Stingray (it was likely on loan).
You didn't speak up when they came for the victims of theft of [substance A], perhaps nobody will speak up when they come for your [substance B].
Be careful when using law. You should choose Natural Law instead. Richard Maybury's "Uncle Eric" series of books can help your education.
Why not use software radio and build your own? There must be enough cellular programmers out there to do the handshaking. I only wrote planning code, which only says Where to put a tower...
Whether or not the use of this technology is a violation of Constitutional Rights is really up to a Judge to determine. And as for "the people need to know", that's really pointless. The people are powerless to prevent the use of such technologies if their elected officials aren't doing anything to prevent the use of such technologies. The nature of globally connected communications in this era leaves open the avenue for exploitation of technology across vast distances. Cell phone intercepts, such as the ones in the article, firmware exploits such as the ones published last week, and any other manner of exploits are going to define the new normal. Unless laws are passed (and with the Patriot Act, I have sever doubts) that prohibit not only average citizens from engaging in these activities, but law enforcement as well, then we just need to suck it up and deal with it. For professionals in our field though, this does present us an opportunity to review our standards and identify logical risks associated with them and then to redefine them to take privacy and security in mind. Encryption designers need to up the bar and create stronger and more secure algorithms. Right now, there are only a small handful of manufacturers looking at this level (black phone?) but even they aren't digging deep enough.
Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
6 months probation is about right for what he did anyway. I can't believe they're clogging prisons with petty criminals like this then turning violent criminals out because of over crowding. A BB gun as a deadly weapon? They're turning the legal system into a farce with that kind of bullshit.
Actually a BB gun can seriously injure someone. I was hit with a BB once (accidental) mind you, hitting me on my knuckle. That dig itself in bad. I do not want to think what it could do to an eye.
== the following below are generalizations of what the law says, counting variations across different jurisdictions within and outside the US ==
By law, a "deadly weapon" is not just a weapon that can kill for certain, but that has the potential to cause a serious injury that can lead to death. A BB to the eyeball at short range can do that. So can a rock being thrown to someone's face. In some jurisdictions around the world, a professional boxer's hands can be considered deadly weapons given that, unlike other people within their respective weight classes, professional boxes can kill someone with a punch to the temple.
The fact that using a BB gun has the potential to seriously injure someone makes its use a 3rd degree assault (potential to injury + recklessness). Use it to commit a crime and that shit by default ups it up to 2nd or even 1st degree depending of the circumstance.
Moreover, the law (as it should be) takes into consideration the state of mind of a potential victim. If the victim seriously thinks he is in physical danger, that is enough to bring a 3rd degree assault charge, even if the assault never takes place. This is more so if the person is put into a state of being scared of his well being or life while being subjected of a crime (then it goes to 2nd or 1st degree).
The person would have to know pretty well that the weapon is a BB gun and not a real gun. It is unreasonable to expect a person in a state of fright to recognize the two. If this were the case, one could argue I could attempt robbery with a fake gun (or a gun without rounds in it) and then claim in my defense that I did not use a deadly weapon. I hope I don't think I have to explain this one any further.
I disagree with you that 6 months probation was enough. This wasn't a harmless crime, and this person is a criminal.
I agree that we put petty criminals to jail too often. But armed robbery is not petty crime.
Breaking into a house when no one is there, and stealing a TV is. Cutting a bicycle chain to steal it, that is petty crime. Shoplifting is a petty crime. Selling bootlegged DVDs or dope is.
Armed robbery, subjecting a victim to a state of being afraid of his physical well being, that is not a petty crime.
What I'm really curious, and what I'm really afraid, and the real question of importance is: what the hell were the authorities so afraid to disclosed that they opted to drop charges and offer a plea. There is something absolutely wrong going on here if they have to cover that shit like that. That is the stuff we should we worried about.
Because the uses are highly illegal
"Highly," huh. Tell me: how much trouble, exactly, would the cops be in if they got caught using this device? :p
Well, gee, if it is legal for the cops to use it without a warrant, then it is legal for a civilian like me to use it. Anyone want to build me one of these gadgets?
He's got a goddamn good lawyer. I bet we'll start seeing this argument showing up from the defense a lot more:
Lawyer: "Show me the cell phone tracker."
Judge: "Yeah, cough it up, bucko."
DA: "Your honor, we'd like to drop the charges."
Myself and a friend came up with a solution slightly similar to outlaws - human rights points. When you are convicted of a crime a number of human (or constitutional) rights points are removed from (proportional to the crime) for a period. The criminal is required to decide which human rights they has to give up, and is therefore directly responsible for their sentence. Note that just because you've lost points, doesn't mean that people are free to attack your with repercussions.
A rapist might, for example, lose his right to being innocent unless proven guilty. He would have to prove that he was not guilty of rape. You don't lose the ability to defend yourself, just that the odds are now stacked against you.
Other losses:
* Right to free speech
* Right to bear arms (although I think that's already applied in some states)
* Right to travel (ditto)
* Right to bear children
* Right to a state appointed attorney
Why is the federal government (and its agencies) so scared to allow state and local law enforcement agencies to reveal the use of these devices?
Another question: How can it be legal to transmit on licensed frequencies owned by someone else? Perhaps the Feds have an exemption to the Radio Act but State and Local Governments? Not bloody likely. Why aren't the cellular carriers screaming bloody murder about this? They paid billions of dollars to license their spectrum. Modern digital networks are laid out very precisely, with a need to carefully account for the location of each transmitter and to control their output power to avoid interference with neighboring cells. There is no way that a device like Stingray can be used without causing interference to other users.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
about the usefulness of a tool so odious to civil liberties that the government is ashamed to reveal it to juries.
None, but that's because corrupt courts have exempted them from the law. It's the Citizens they fear in this.
After all, who's going to arrest the cops?
I wondered what happened to the small-time pot dealer
If I threaten you in any way while stealing from you, it's robbery. And against most Slashdotters, I don't need any weapons to successfully commit robbery.
P.S. Step away from your computers and get some exercise!
Of course the Judge could always refuse the plea bargin and force it to goto trial.
Why is the federal government (and its agencies) so scared to allow state and local law enforcement agencies to reveal the use of these devices?
Well, you could find out by assembling your own "stingray" piecemeal using some of the test equipment in the links below, and use it to monitor/record police/DHS/NSA and wait to see what charges they decide to prosecute you for if you're arrested, and then take the government to court for the same charges.
http://www.testequipmentdepot....
http://www.testequipmentdepot....
Although your chances of getting the same 'justice' system that is complicit in these criminal acts by those in government to turn around and prosecute these same criminals are slim at best.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
episode coming on...
That may be why they are being so secretive.
Cuz anyone can build one.
so it was "only a BB gun"? because that's all the robber had access to!
If it were a real gun but empty, it'd be less of a physical threat determined AFTER THE FACT but would you all be so lenient then?
But there's pot in the article, and everything with pot involved must be forgiven.
this guy didn't steal for weed. he didn't steal weed. he used a WEAPON to steal CASH. and used the most frightening weapon he could get his hands on.
I bet all you people talking the situation down, are "medical" users too. Way to bolster the anti legalization case.
Robber deserved a lot worse. the only conflict anyone should feel, is that the method of conviction was illegal. THAT is the only issue worth discussing on this case. Whomever authorized Stingray should serve time. Because it let this tool out, who WILL be emboldened to commit more crimes.
THAT it what causes recitivism. It is not the prisons, it's the crooks realizing that crime DOES pay off for the most part. They're not scared of prison anymore, and the benefits of crime well outweigh the penalty. But no one dares look at it that way, can't blame the crooks, gotta be "society", "the Man", or "Big Prison".
Keep spreading the word about this device so that every single person, no matter how stupid, will know this device exists and that it can be used both to locate a specific phone extremely accurately, to access logs and other contents on certain phones, to eavesdrop on conversations and so on. People will also know that it can be used without a warrant so it may be used against them no matter what. Morale? - Don't carry a cellphone to a crime and used encryption software on the phone to ensure that anyone with such a device cannot eavesdrop.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --