In Baltimore and Elsewhere, Police Use Stingrays For Petty Crimes

USA Today reports on the widespread use of stingray technology by police to track down even petty criminals and witnesses, as well as their equally widespread reluctance to disclose that use. The article focuses mostly on the city of Baltimore; by cross-checking court records against a surveillance log from the city’s Advanced Technical Team, the USA Today reporters were able to determine at least several hundred cases in which phony ("simulated") cell phone towers were used to snoop traffic. In court, though, and even in the information that the police department provides to the city's prosecutors, the use of these devices is rarely disclosed, thanks to a non-disclosure agreement with the FBI and probably a general reluctance to make public how much the department is using them, especially without bothering to obtain search warrants. From the article: In at least one case, police and prosecutors appear to have gone further to hide the use of a stingray. After Kerron Andrews was charged with attempted murder last year, Baltimore's State's Attorney's Office said it had no information about whether a phone tracker had been used in the case, according to court filings. In May, prosecutors reversed course and said the police had used one to locate him. "It seems clear that misrepresentations and omissions pertaining to the government's use of stingrays are intentional," Andrews' attorney, Assistant Public Defender Deborah Levi, charged in a court filing.

Judge Kendra Ausby ruled last week that the police should not have used a stingray to track Andrews without a search warrant, and she said prosecutors could not use any of the evidence found at the time of his arrest.

Comments

Re:What's really shocking about this

[almechist]

What's really shocking is that the police invested any effort in tracking down a mobile phone thief. The victim must have been someone with influence.

Yep. In at least one case mentioned in TFA the phone was taken from a police facility parking lot. You know that phone had to belong to a cop. From the article:

In Baltimore, at least, it’s how the police tracked the man they suspected stole a phone from the back seat of a car parked outside the city’s central booking facility in 2009. Two days after the theft, an officer said in a court filing that detectives found Danell Freeman holding the phone in the doorway of an East Baltimore public housing complex. The court filing did not say how detectives knew to look for the phone there, but a police surveillance log indicates they used a stingray.

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't get that level of service if my phone was taken.

Re:The Wire

[inflamed]

Except those wiretaps were lawfully obtained with a search warrant approved by a judge.

Better watch more closely - or watch the whole thing :-)

Federal law (chap 206) says a court order is requi

[raymorris]

Under federal (U.S. Code â Title 18 â Part II â Chapter 206 â Â 3122 a), state and local law enforcement must get a court order before using a device which records which numbers are called.

Using such a device (called a pen register) without a court order is punishable by one year in jail.

So it's not necessarily unconstitutional, but it's absolutely illegal, by the plain text of chapter 206.

Re:I been wondering

[Known Nutter]

And here is an insightful write-up on Stingrays (IMSI catchers). A good plain-terms read on how they function with a small dose of theory.

http://communications.support/...

Re:If they're going to invade our privacy

[Trepidity]

Depends a lot on what kind of neighborhood you live in. Like airlines, police reserve their highest level of "customer service" for the wealthiest patrons.

Re:Time to hold the government accountable

[CaptQuark]

but using a stingray isn't a violation of anyone's rights, so good for them.

Wrong. It is illegal to use a Stingray to capture information without a warrant.

Judge Kendra Ausby ruled last week that the police should not have used a stingray to track Andrews without a search warrant, and she said prosecutors could not use any of the evidence found at the time of his arrest.

In this case the POLICE are the ones violating your rights by employing Stingrays without a warrant and the judges are telling them so. Just because you don't consider it a breach of your privacy doesn't mean the rest of us have to agree with you and give up our rights.

--

Re:The Wire

[Anonymous Coward]

Driving below the speed limit show guilt, as normal people don't drive under the limit. It is probable cause in some places, as a large percentage of people driving under the limit are intoxicated.

Re:The Wire

[Ol Olsoc]

Ever been driving in front of a police car? How does it feel?

Yes, and it felt fine. They didn't stop me, so I simply drove comfortably below the speed limit. A bit boring, but nothing to worry about. If you want to get rid of them, go even slower and they will pass.

I was once honest to gawd pulled over for going exactly the speed limit. It was in a neighborhood where most people speed through, so I guess the officer found someone obeying the speed limit mighty suspicious.