US Marshals asking local LE to lie on warrants.

[hatt]

That isn't what is going on. Have you have any professional actual knowledge on the matter?

If the techniques and devices are so innocent and "legal" please explain why all the secrecy?

[Belmont31R]

There is a difference between a confidential source and a confidential informant.

A court order (of which a search warrant is a type of court order) is required to track, which is signed by a judge. Call logs as to in-going and out-going numbers requires a lesser grand jury subpoena to obtain. There is a hierarchy to it, which is spelled out in the ECPA among places. Content of messages and voice calls has always required a search warrant.

All of the language I've seen refers to "using a proven law enforcement technique..." nothing to do with CS or CI.

Bad guys know cell phones can be tracked. Every 12 year-old with an iCloud account knows this. I don't know what the big mystery is. There was a recent Florida case in which all this was brought up.

The Stingray can gather location and meta data on cell phones. This was used to obtain a warrant. If you read the emails the Marshal was complaining that information was used on the warrant request, and how that information was gleaned didn't need to be on a public document.

That says to me the Stingray was used BEFORE a warrant was obtained. There is no reference to a warrant being obtained to use the Stingray which, as mentioned, obtains location and meta data.

Am I wrong?

Also, the various definitions I found make CI and CS sound to be the same thing. What legal precedent is there at the Federal level that makes a clear distinction between CI being a person and CS being electronic devices?


The DEA refers to them interchangeably: http://www.justice.gov/oig/reports/DEA/a05/final.pdf

[HD1911]

Federal lawmen practicing free tyranny again. Seems like the same story over and over again with these people. All they do is Lie, steal, threaten, deny then wash rinse and repeat.

Sadly.

[Renegade]

When your phone connects to a StingRay, do the calls and data pass through? Or does it just connect, exchange data, and then the StingRay disconnects you?

[hatt]

When your phone connects to a StingRay, do the calls and data pass through? Or does it just connect, exchange data, and then the StingRay disconnects you?

They're a "man in the middle" of you and the real tower. Eavesdropping on your conversions and texts. There's a reason they're so interested in keeping details a secret.

[jpmuscle]

So more of its for our safety, we have the public's best interests in mind, and because we we're only targeting bad people so its ok nothing to see here stuff? Basically?



Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[montanadave]

Seems like there are several layers to the "Stingray" issue. First, and perhaps foremost, is the legality of using these devices period, as they are designed to obtain cell phone data from every phone within range with no discrimination and no warrant. This issue appears to be working its way through the federal courts in a number of cases filed by fourth amendment advocacy and civil liberties groups.

The second issue, highlighted in the OP, is the deliberate efforts on the part of some law enforcement agencies to conceal the use of potentially illegal information obtained from "Stingray" devices when petitioning the court for search and arrest warrants.

As is so often the case, our technology is outpacing the ability of our judicial system and regulatory agencies to effectively monitor and control the manner in which that technology is being used . . . and abused.

[hatt]

Looks even worst than I thought. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell me to loosen the tinfoil.

Not only that, the two men told the staffers, the digital eavesdropping equipment was capable of sucking all the data from their phones—emails, contact files, music, videos—whatever was on them.

http://www.newsweek.com/your-phone-j...-sucked-255790

[TAZ]

...As is so often the case, our technology is outpacing the ability of our judicial system and regulatory agencies to effectively monitor and control the manner in which that technology is being used . . . and abused.

I'm more worried about the apparent lack of character displayed by the people we put in charge.

There is no amount of regulation that will overcome that shortfall.

[Javelin]

Seems like there are several layers to the "Stingray" issue. First, and perhaps foremost, is the legality of using these devices period, as they are designed to obtain cell phone data from every phone within range with no discrimination and no warrant. This issue appears to be working its way through the federal courts in a number of cases filed by fourth amendment advocacy and civil liberties groups.

The second issue, highlighted in the OP, is the deliberate efforts on the part of some law enforcement agencies to conceal the use of potentially illegal information obtained from "Stingray" devices when petitioning the court for search and arrest warrants.

As is so often the case, our technology is outpacing the ability of our judicial system and regulatory agencies to effectively monitor and control the manner in which that technology is being used . . . and abused.

I don't think it's just because the judiciary system can't keep up due to the technological age. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it has been against the law to lie, deceive, and bare false witness testimony in court since the times predating even Roman law. Which is exactly what these federal tyrants are doing on a daily basis apparently.