Spy game: Local police tap cell phones
Spy game: Local police tap cell phones
By William Patrick
/ March 6, 2014
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — The National Security Agency
apparently isn’t the only government agency engaged in domestic spying.
Local law enforcement is playing the role of Big Brother,
too, but to what extent is still unknown.
Recent court documents reveal a troubling cell phone
surveillance program conducted by a Florida police department against
unsuspecting cell phone users.
Attempts to keep the practice secret, even from judges,
is raising questions as to just how prevalent police spying is within the
Sunshine State.
The controversy stems from the arrest of James L. Thomas,
a criminal suspect believed to be in possession of a stolen phone. Tallahassee
police located and arrested Thomas by tracking a cell phone signal, then
promptly searched his home.
It later became known that police didn’t seek a warrant
or admit to using a little-known surveillance device called a “Stingray.”
Stingrays are small mobile devices that trick cell phones
into connecting to them as if they were cell phone towers. The technology gives
police the ability to track phone movements and intercept both phone calls and
text messages of any cell phone within range.
In the court case, Thomas’ attorney asked police how they
determined the defendant had the cell phone in question. The police declined to
answer. A judge ordered a response, but only after clearing the courtroom and
sealing the official record.
Now on appeal, courtroom deliberations revealed last week
that the Tallahassee Police Department used a Stingray 200 times since 2010
without seeking a warrant.
“This record makes it very clear that (Tallahassee Police
Department) were not going to get a search warrant because they had never
gotten a search warrant for this technology,” an appeals court judge said.
Beyond the prospect of unconstitutional warrantless
police searches, government watchdogs have long warned against surveillance
tactics that broadly expose the personal information of countless innocent
people in attempts by law enforcement to identify individuals suspected of
crimes.
“When police use invasive surveillance equipment to
surreptitiously sweep up information about the locations and communications of
large numbers of people, court oversight and public debate are essential,”
states the American Civil Liberties Union.
The ACLU is now leading the effort to determine just how
widespread cell phone tracking is in Florida. The group announced a public
records submission Monday to nearly 30 police and sheriffs’ departments across
the state.
Court documents show the Tallahassee Police Department
didn’t seek a search warrant in the Thomas case because it “did not want to
reveal information about the technology they used to track the cell phone
signal.”
TPD also said the Stingray was loaned to the department
from a private manufacturer who in turn required a nondisclosure agreement.
“A nondisclosure agreement is typically a civil agreement
between two or more parties over a commercial contract,” Christopher Torres, a
Tallahassee defense lawyer, told Watchdog.org.
“They’re saying because it’s a cell phone they don’t have
to get a warrant, but it’s basically a wiretap,” Torres said. “You cannot say
something is protected by a trade agreement and that somehow trumps the U.S.
Constitution.”
According to ARS Technica, Stingrays are exclusively
manufactured by the Harris Corp., a Melbourne-based telecommunications company.
Earning $5 billion in annual revenue, Harris Corp. supplies electronic
equipment to government, defense and commercial sectors.
“Since 2004, Harris has earned more than $40 million from
spy technology contracts with city, state, and federal authorities in the US,
according to procurement records,” reports ARS Technica, an online information
technology periodical.
Comments
Post a Comment