Slashdot Mirror
US Court Demands Documents On AT&T/Police Collaboration (eff.org)
"The federal government has not justified its excessive secrecy about the massive telephone surveillance program known as Hemisphere, a court ruled in an EFF Freedom of Information Act lawsuit on Thursday." schwit1 quotes the EFF announcement: As a result, the federal government must submit roughly 260 pages of previously withheld or heavily redacted records to the court so that it can review them and decide whether to make more information about Hemisphere public.
Hemisphere is a partnership between AT&T and federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies that allows police almost real-time access to telephone call detail records. The program is both extremely controversial -- AT&T requires police to hide its use from the public -- and appears to violate our First and Fourth Amendment rights.
Government lawyers had argued the disputed documents were restricted to use at the federal level, but the court remained unconvinced, especially "after EFF demonstrated that many of them appeared to have been given to state and local law enforcement."
Government lawyers had argued the disputed documents were restricted to use at the federal level, but the court remained unconvinced, especially "after EFF demonstrated that many of them appeared to have been given to state and local law enforcement."
Why am I getting spammed on my work email address for deals.slashdot.org since yesterday? It isn't even the address I have registered, so where did you purchase you spam list from? This is a new low for Slashdot, the new owners started well, but it's now clear what your real intentions for the site are.
... AT&T requires police to hide its use from the public ...
As does the contract Harris makes them sign to use Stingray and related devices - which investigative agencies have used as an excuse for perjury in court. As do the Executive Branch's National Security Letters - administrative subpoenas for communication or financial information with gag orders attached.
IMHO these provisions should all be blocked - struck down by courts as contempt and perjury in the first class (courtroom rules trump civil contracts when the info is relative to the case in a court of competent jurisdiction), unconstitutional prior restraint on free speech and the right to council in the second. Then this should be nailed down by legislation, as well, for belt-and-suspenders protection of civil rights.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Defence counsels should focus on the fact that these ruling allow police officers to lie in court to invite the jury to reject the police evidence and go not guilty. A few collapsed trials on that basis could be salutary
Defence Attorney: I understand that your police force may or may not have Stingrays, which you are allowed to lie about if you do have them? Is that correct?
Defence: So when you promise to tell the whole truth, you aren't really saying that, you're saying 'I'm telling as much of the truth as I think I should'. So why should we take ANYTHING you say as the truth?
Defence: I ask you again officer. Is it legal for your police department to mislead a court?
etc...
The courts are just upset that /they/ can't view them either.
Yeah, when the rubber meets the road, it's a deal between the corporation and the cops, not the courts. And because Hemisphere is secret, the courts can't decide if it violates the Constitution. Why is any of this even legal?