Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
When violating the Supreme Law of the Land means that none of the law-breakers involved get punished, it's clear that something has to be changed. Whether it takes an amendment or not, what needs to happen is that if you're so gung ho certain that you've got the right guy that you feel like you don't need to obey the law, well then go right ahead. That guy goes down for murder and you go down for violating the Constitution. Oh, you didn't have any guy so you went on a fishing expidition and you infringed the rights of 100 Americans looking for someone breaking the law? That's 100 counts.
They have a tool and they're going to use it.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
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.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
According to this study, America is an oligarchy. Here is a quote (as per the New Yorker):
Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then Americaâ(TM)s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.
When I hear about abuses of power, when I hear about the NSA spying on everyone, when I hear about militarization of police, when I hear about local police departments running roughshod over the Constitution as implied in the parent article, I start to think that something is deeply wrong in America. Then I remember that Americans still have the right to vote in those who rule them. And that is encouraging. But then I realize that most Americans have lost the ability to comprehend the systems of power that rule them. I remember that too many Americans vote based on shallow ignorant views, that they are persuaded by 30 second political TV commercials instead of actual rational argument, which is boring and long and tedious. And I remember that those 30 second TV commercials are expensive, and that politicians must go begging to those with large amounts of money in order to buy those 30 second commercials. And I remember that when politicians accept money from those very wealthy interests, that they become enslaved to them. And this makes me feel hopeless.
Then I remember that if Americans stopped listening to shallow arguments given in 30 second TV commercials, if they started to demand rational argument instead of the shallow blather that has so far persuaded them, then they could take back power from the corrupt wealthy interests who have driven the country into the ground over the last three and a half decades. And that makes me a little bit hopeful.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Huh? Thankfully that is not how it works, Police cannot throw a net randomly and see what they catch. When Otis argued "A man's house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle." He was saying what I do in my world is of no concern to you as long as I do not mess up and make it public. I can smoke a bong in my living room because the current law may be out of whack with reality and life can continue on underground until that shit straightens out as is slowly happening. If we could just kick the door down on anyone then people would not have the opportunity to make their own decisions on what is right. In Otis' time this had more to do with illegal smuggling because capalists felt it was in their own right to make their gains with strategic dealing supplying the demand better than their competitors without the King upsetting that advantage by collecting their gains but the concept extends to all aspects of life.
You don't do anything illegal? Including in the privacy of your home? Oh, that's swell.
You sure? I mean, especially considering all the out of whack laws concerning who may have sex with whom an how? But maybe you're chaste, or live in a country with more sanity when it comes to laws.
But are you sure it stays that way? Laws change, you know, and what you like doing today may well be illegal tomorrow. Like running around naked at home? Hope that none of the thinkofthechildren crowd fears that one of the little ones could see your naked tits (you know, tits sure ain't for little kids!) and demands that people have to be dressed all the time. Or do you smoke? In the current craze, don't expect it to stay legal. Will we believe you when you tell us you quit when it gets illegal? Smoking is such a hard to drop habit, ya know...
Ever been driving in front of a police car? How does it feel? No, you didn't do anything wrong, did you? But ... was it comfortable? Did you feel relaxed?
A crime should probably not be committed. But putting people under the stress of total surveillance, or only the feeling that it could be, will most certainly do more harm than good.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"In the end it all falls back to the fact that crimes shouldn't be committed."
Yep, and police use of stingrays is a crime. They are transmitting on radio frequencies for which they are not licensed. Any evidence which is illegally collected is of course properly thrown out by a court. The end does not justify the means.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law