Secret warrants? No problem! No probable cause? No problem!

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
This from the ultra right wing rabidly conservative Washington Post. :D

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/22/AR2007112201444_pf.html

Cellphone Tracking Powers on Request
Secret Warrants Granted Without Probable Cause


By Ellen Nakashima
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 23, 2007; A01


Federal officials are routinely asking courts to order cellphone companies to furnish real-time tracking data so they can pinpoint the whereabouts of drug traffickers, fugitives and other criminal suspects, according to judges and industry lawyers.

In some cases, judges have granted the requests without requiring the government to demonstrate that there is probable cause to believe that a crime is taking place or that the inquiry will yield evidence of a crime. Privacy advocates fear such a practice may expose average Americans to a new level of government scrutiny of their daily lives.

Such requests run counter to the Justice Department's internal recommendation that federal prosecutors seek warrants based on probable cause to obtain precise location data in private areas. The requests and orders are sealed at the government's request, so it is difficult to know how often the orders are issued or denied.

...

"Most people don't realize it, but they're carrying a tracking device in their pocket," said Kevin Bankston of the privacy advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Cellphones can reveal very precise information about your location, and yet legal protections are very much up in the air."

In a stinging opinion this month, a federal judge in Texas denied a request by a Drug Enforcement Administration agent for data that would identify a drug trafficker's phone location by using the carrier's E911 tracking capability. E911 tracking systems read signals sent to satellites from a phone's Global Positioning System (GPS) chip or triangulated radio signals sent from phones to cell towers. Magistrate Judge Brian L. Owsley, of the Corpus Christi division of the Southern District of Texas, said the agent's affidavit failed to focus on "specifics necessary to establish probable cause, such as relevant dates, names and places."

Owsley decided to publish his opinion, which explained that the agent failed to provide "sufficient specific information to support the assertion" that the phone was being used in "criminal" activity. Instead, Owsley wrote, the agent simply alleged that the subject trafficked in narcotics and used the phone to do so. The agent stated that the DEA had " 'identified' or 'determined' certain matters," Owsley wrote, but "these identifications, determinations or revelations are not facts, but simply conclusions by the agency."

Instead of seeking warrants based on probable cause, some federal prosecutors are applying for orders based on a standard lower than probable cause derived from two statutes: the Stored Communications Act and the Pen Register Statute, according to judges and industry lawyers. The orders are typically issued by magistrate judges in U.S. district courts, who often handle applications for search warrants.

<more>
 
yep, this is the kind of authoritarian fantasy that the right wing fringees have been tossing off to for years. ashcroft is, er, rising again. and his boner has YER name on it.
 
Do you support warrantless wiretapping jim?

That echelonwatch link is about the most broken site I've seen in awhile. How exactly did you find it useful?
 
wire tapping Anyway doesn't bother me.
I expect it.
I treat the phone in the same manner I do the internet.
If I don't want it heard, I don't put it out, or say it as the case may be.

Edit: it's those xray satellites I don't like.
 
sometimes i think the gps thingy in phones is good because it can be used to find lost persons, especially lost children, then i realize that any smart kidnapper would get rid of the victim's phone pretty soon into the abscondance.
i do think it's creepy, though, that they can do this other stuff. i mean, i don't do anything bad; i generally find it a good personal policy to stay on the right side of the law, if for no other reason than i find it to be a lot less stressful than a life of crime, but even with that, i don't like being watched.
and i don't like the whole, "well, you wouldn't mind unless you were doing something bad!" argument. it's the principle of the whole thing! *harumph*
 
i don't like being watched.
and i don't like the whole, "well, you wouldn't mind unless you were doing something bad!" argument. it's the principle of the whole thing!

Exactly. It also makes it very easy for someone with less than noble intentions to abuse that system.
 
That echelonwatch link is about the most broken site I've seen in awhile. How exactly did you find it useful?

It was just a reference link. Make of it what you will. Thought it might have some info but it looks like it is shit.

http://echelonspoofer.com/ is more fun if you like to fuck with the government. Simply copy the words, paste them into an e-mail and send them to yourself. Makes the system go nuts.

There is an Echelon Day where everyone is encouraged to send the Echelon keywords in e-mails to spoof the system.
 
Do you support warrantless wiretapping jim?

The courts have found that warrantless wiretapping of FOREIGN GENERATED phone calls is legal.

Warrantless wiretapping WITHIN the United States has been ruled illegal.

Warrantless wiretapping of foreign calls GENERATED WITHIN the United States has been ruled illegal.

The fact is that people here try to apply our Constitution to foreign nationals who are outside of the U.S. and have no intention of coming here. We do not have a World Constitution. We have a Constitution of the United States. So I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with wiretapping of calls GENERATED OUTSIDE OF THE U.S.
 
There were about 280,000,000 Americans when The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building blew up. They had two suspects, in custody, in less than 24 hours.

You think we're not being watched?
 
There were about 280,000,000 Americans when The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building blew up. They had two suspects, in custody, in less than 24 hours.

You think we're not being watched?

The primary suspect was driving 90mph down a highway ands was puulled over. He was arrested for possession of a concealed weapon which was a large knife. He was wearing a 9mm pistol openly which was totally legal.

Suspect #2 was John Doe #2 which was never apprehended -- or ... was he?
 
The primary suspect was driving 90mph down a highway ands was puulled over. He was arrested for possession of a concealed weapon which was a large knife. He was wearing a 9mm pistol openly which was totally legal.

Yea. The check is in the mail.
 
Yea. The check is in the mail.

Hey, Terry Nichols wasn't implicated until days later. McVeigh was the only one caught within 24 hours. In fact, he was in custody within three hours of the blast.

You didn't comment on the uncanny resemblance of Jose Padilla and John Doe #2. Now if they were invloved in different acts, that would be one thing but they were both implicated in BOMBING plots? A bit coincidental, don't ya think -- the looks and the acts?
 
Back
Top