Police spying on citizens: Our surveillance powers are none of your business
NY - Erie County Sheriff Timothy B. Howard told legislators Thursday that it is solely up to the courts – not them – to determine how he may use cellphone surveillance equipment to track persons of interest.
Howard told the Legislature’s Public Safety Committee that the Stingray surveillance device the office has owned since 2008 is used only for tracking a person’s movements, not for snooping into the content of phone communications.
But beyond that, he was polite but defiant in refusing to answer questions about the equipment, telling legislators, in essence, that it’s not their business.
“With no disrespect to this honorable body … the specific use of the device should be left to the monitoring of the courts and not to the Legislature or to the media,” he said.
Dressed in an olive green suit instead of his usual sheriff’s uniform, Howard said, “Anything we do with the device is subject to review by the federal or state courts, including by our own County Court, and that’s where it should be reviewed.”
When Legislator Peter J. Savage III, D-Buffalo, asked how the tracking equipment was more expedient than asking cellphone providers for information on the location of a specific mobile device, Howard again demurred.
“I think to answer that question would probably be to educate the public, including the criminal members of the public, in how to avoid the use or the efficiency of the device, so I respectfully will not answer,” he replied.
Thursday’s forum ostensibly was called to determine the capabilities of the surveillance equipment and any safeguards in place to curb potential misuse. It was convened after concerns were raised last week by Democratic Legislator Patrick B. Burke of Buffalo that the equipment can, within a one-mile radius, capture data from targeted cellphones even when they’re not in use.
Yet lawmakers got few answers from Howard, who instead made his point by challenging them to prove that they don’t snoop on their neighbors.
http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/erie-county/sheriff-rejects-erie-county-legislature-oversight-on-cell-phone-monitoring-20140515
Police across the country are working with the NSA/DHS to spy on our cellphone calls:
Could a high-tech surveillance device now being used by some local authorities also be tricking your cellphone into giving up its secrets? Maybe even from the unmarked car on the road next to you?
The StingRay, a portable, boxy device that looks like a piece of '70s stereo equipment, is designed to fool cellphones so that cops can collect a suspect's location information — and maybe more.
Police in Florida deploy the tool to track down violent offenders and rescue victims of abduction. It intercepts a targeted cellphone's signal and then reveals to the user that phone's location, which then gives investigators a much greater chance of locating the suspect.
It's been around for more than a decade, but it's still shrouded in secrecy. How it works and the full scope of its capabilities are not being made public by its maker and the local law enforcement agencies that use it.
And nobody wants to talk about it.
In South Florida, it appears Sunrise police have a StingRay, according to available records. But other local departments may be using them too, when they request help from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. The state agency ponied up $3 million to buy StingRays — which can cost in the neighborhood of $150,000 each, according to records — and shares the equipment and the staff to operate it.
The ACLU released a report showing the unregulated use of Stingrays in California. They reported 'widespread' use of the devices by police departments. The devices are being purchased with federal DHS grant money.
Local police agencies, including the Broward Sheriff's Office, won't talk much about the technology. Some say doing so would compromise investigative techniques.
Sound familiar? If our Supreme Court won't review NSA/police spying of our cellphones where can the public turn for justice?
The NSA can listen to your old phone calls, would anyone like to bet the police are not doing the same?
Authorities are spying on apps like Angry Birds & social media, where does it end?
"Even the disclosure of the type of surveillance equipment police use would educate criminals on how to avoid police detection," said the Sunrise Police Department spokeswoman, officer Michelle Eddy.
Police are using the NSA/DHS response to domestic spying, claiming if they reveal details it would help the enemy oops., sorry I meant criminals or did I mean every citizen?
Ask yourself why do police view the American public as the enemy?
The device, also known generically as a cell-site simulator, mimics cellular phone towers; surrounding mobile phones respond to the simulator, bypassing the nearest tower and unloading location information into the hands of the StingRay operator. Some reports have indicated that it can also obtain emails and text messages.
Jim Burke, a spokesman for the product's manufacturer, Harris Corporation, based in Melbourne, said he can't answer any questions about the StingRay, which is not sold to the general public.
"We do not comment on technology that we may or may not provide for classified [Department of Defense] or law enforcement customers," Burke said in an email.
Do you need anymore proof private corporations & police consider themselves above the law?
"The questions we're asking are really about whether our law enforcement agencies are complying with the United States Constitution when they are conducting these invasive searches," said Nathan Freed Wessler, an ACLU staff attorney based in New York.
"We've seen a range of responses from police departments around the country, and in Florida, but none of them have been particularly forthcoming," he said.
In South Florida, "two most troublesome, obstreperous responses" to the ACLU came from Sunrise police and the Broward Sheriff's Office, he said.
Sunrise police, responding through a law firm to the ACLU, said the city wouldn't acknowledge if any records of the StingRay exist, according to documents provided by the ACLU. Wessler pointed out that the city's own website showed transaction records involving an upgrade to its cell-site simulator.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/fl-cell-site-simulator-surveillance-florida-20140507,0,2134853.story
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/25597191/police-use-cellphone-spying-device
Private corporations & police are profiting by spying on us:
A growing number of cameras — hundreds around Los Angeles, thousands nationwide — are engaged in a simple pursuit: Taking pictures of license plates.
The digital photos, automatically snapped by cameras mounted on cars and street poles and then tagged with time and location, are transmitted to massive databases running on remote computer servers. Cops can then search those databases to track the past whereabouts of drivers.
Law enforcement officials claim the data collection is invaluable for tracking down stolen cars and catching fugitives.
But such databases are also being built by private firms, which can sell access to anyone willing to pay, such as lenders, repo workers and private investigators. That is raising worries among privacy advocates and lawmakers, who say the fast-growing industry is not only ripe for conflicts of interest but downright invasive.
What they're doing crosses the line," saidSenator Jerry Hill.
He said he's worried that partnerships between police and for-profit data firms could result in cops doing the bidding of insurance companies and repo firms.
His legislation would ban public agencies from sharing data they collect with private entities, prohibit license plate scanners from coming onto private property without consent and make it easier for privacy lawsuits to be filed against data collectors.
A 2010 study showed a third of large police departments using plate readers. In 2012, the most recent data available, a survey found more than 70% of the nation's police departments had the scanners.
Vigilant in particular has seen its appeal among law enforcement officers grow because it can offer police departments access to a trove of more than 2 billion scans, maintained by an affiliated company, Digital Recognition Network. That database is fed by cameras attached to vehicles driven by repossession agents roving the nation's roadways.
The two companies have 160 employees. Vigilant reports having more than 3,500 law enforcement clients that either use the company's cameras or access its data. Digital Recognition Network has more than 250 customers. A Vigilant representative estimated that the entire industry brings in as much as $500 million a year.
Along with Vigilant, some of the other companies providing license plate scanning technology include Motorola, PlateSmart and PIPS Technology. Their law enforcement clients generally point to high-profile cases the technology helped solve.
Last year, Vigilant Solutions offered police in Tempe, Ariz., license plate scanners for free. But there was a catch, according to a copy of the offer obtained by The Times.
To keep the freebies, the Tempe department had to go after at least 25 outstanding "Vigilant provided" warrants each month. In general, such arrangements are paid for by private collection companies, which profit by going after warrants that result from people failing to pay municipal fines, said Brian Shockley, a vice president at Vigilant.
In the document, Vigilant assured the Tempe department that the offer was not an attempt to "unduly influence" its police work. But the company also warned that the free cameras would be taken away if the police department failed to meet its monthly quota.
"We look at a lot of different, creative ways to serve our clients," Shockley said. "Budgets and grant dollars are somewhat limited these days."
Shockley declined to answer questions about the Tempe proposal, calling it confidential. No agencies are currently working under this framework, Shockley said. He refused to provide a list of law enforcement departments that have hired his company.
He also declined to say whether the firm has made similar offers to other agencies.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-law-enforcement-contractors-20140518-story.html#page=1
Police reassure public they won’t be shot at from armored personnel vehicles:
WI - The fact that authorities even need to make such a statement underscores increasing concern over the militarization of domestic policing as police departments across the country obtain vehicles and equipment once used to occupy Afghanistan and Iraq under the Department of Defense’s excess property program. The Neenah Police Department recently acquired a mine-resistant Caiman multi-theatre vehicle, while the Outagamie County Sheriff’s Department and Appleton police are already using the same model of vehicle. According to the Associated Press, “Police are working to dispel negative public perception of the military look of the 37,000-pound rig,” by claiming its use is necessary to protect cops against high powered gunfire during violent confrontations. Neenah Police Chief Kevin Wilkinson admitted that the truck would “increase operational and maintenance costs for the area’s taxpayers.” Lt. Jeff Malcore, Neenah’s SWAT team leader, felt it necessary to relay the fact that the vehicle’s gun turret had been removed and that the truck wouldn’t be used to mow down the locals. “We have no ability to shoot out of it,” Malcore said. “All it does is allow us to get from one place to another so we can deploy our people, or if there’s firing coming in, we can back up to a window or something to get people out.”
Police agencies that have or will receive the trucks include Appleton-Outagamie County, Eau Claire, La Crosse, Neenah and Stevens Point, and four counties — Brown, Door, Portage and Waupaca. Fears that police have long since dispensed with “protect and serve” and now instead treat Americans in general as the enemy were again raised last week when Morgan County, Indiana Police Sergeant Dan Downing admitted that the militarization of domestic law enforcement was partly to deal with returning veterans who are now seen as a homegrown terror threat. A local Fox affiliate reported that the cops were now “armed for war” against such threats. Downing also related how residents would see the police department’s Mine Resistant Vehicle (MRAP) at gas stations and ask if it was going to be used for mass gun confiscation. http://www.thenorthwestern.com/viewart/20140512/OSH0101/305120245