Best Buy Geeksquad Informants for FBI?

[nilepez]

Well, I have been doing some more reading. Th author of that article left something out that we have been guessing about, "why did the accused take his computer to Best Buy and what was the Geek Squad tech doing that he found the file?"


http://www.ocweekly.com/news/best-b...has-fbi-on-defense-in-child-porn-case-7794252

So the accused took his computer to Best Buy to have Geek Squad recover all of his computer files. It does not say why he needed these files recovered, and I have yet to see a comment on whether this image is the only one that qualifies as Child Porn.

As for the claims of illegal searches;

When the tech found the Jenny file, he reported it to his company supervisor who reported this to the FBI. The FBI seized the hard drive.

http://www.ocweekly.com/news/best-b...has-fbi-on-defense-in-child-porn-case-7794252

Now the tech and Best Buy are required by law to report what they found and the image is illegal to possess. At question is whether the accused had knowledge that he possessed the file. But that is a question for the trial, not for investigators. Once they knew there was one or more illegal files on the hard drive that is sufficient to justify a search without a warrant of that drive.

The defense attorney,

It is important to understand exactly how the law views searches under the 4th Amendment;
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/legacy/2015/01/14/ssmanual2009.pdf


By this document, the definition of a search is; "a “‘search’ occurs when an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable is infringed.” furthermore, "If the government’s conduct does not violate a person’s “reasonable expectation of privacy,” then formally it does not constitute a Fourth Amendment “search” and no warrant is required."

So in simplest terms, because the accused asked Geek Squad to recover the files on the computer, he no longer has a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding the files he asked them to recover. No warrant is required for the FBI to seize the drive or to search any of the files recovered by Geek Squad. Now the question becomes, what about the rest of the contents of the drive. At this point I am going to back off playing forum lawyer. It looks like to me that all the files that the Geek Squad recovered are open to the FBI to look at without it even being a search according to the law. The part that gets fuzzy is, what about the rest of the drive's data because to prove that the accused knew the data was there, they will need to forensically identify that the accused knew it was there.


https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/legacy/2015/01/14/ssmanual2009.pdf

The fact that he wanted his files recovered gives us a reason for why the guy found the file. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm not sure about that exception to the 4th in this case (and honestly I think it's pretty fucking dumb not to get a warrant...why risk it?). I'm guessing that other files were found. I don't know that, but getting the search tossed would get him off no matter how many files there are. OTOH, if it's just the one file, I think it's going to be harder to successfully argue that he intentionally downloaded kiddie porn.

I'm moving towards the Fed's side, but I ain't there yet.

 

[nilepez]

And let's be real here, the 4th Amendment is pretty damn eroded at this point.

The Supreme Court a couple years ago ruled that a police officer's ignorance of a state law was "reasonable", thus his illegal search of a car was, in fact, legal. Seriously. 8-1 ruling, in fact, with the sole dissent being Sotomayor.

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/15/37099...affic-stop-ok-despite-misunderstanding-of-law

My ignorance is no excuse. Their alleged ignorance is. That's some fucked up shit.

 

[lcpiper]

And let's be real here, the 4th Amendment is pretty damn eroded at this point.

The Supreme Court a couple years ago ruled that a police officer's ignorance of a state law was "reasonable", thus his illegal search of a car was, in fact, legal. Seriously. 8-1 ruling, in fact, with the sole dissent being Sotomayor.

http://www.npr.org/2014/12/15/37099...affic-stop-ok-despite-misunderstanding-of-law

In a case like you brought forward I would agree. But I don't think it applies in this case. The only thing I see that applies in this case is a lawyer who is throwing up every bit of smoke he can to obscure the facts and lead people to wrong conclusions, a PR campaign, and news writers more then willing to add in their own mixture of ineptitude and misrepresentation cause it's all about the clicks.

Although, I will add again. I think in this kind of situation, the FBI should not be offering monetary rewards to people who have the opportunity to cause harm themselves for the personal gain. It's too tempting.

That being said, the closest I have seen to confirmation that the Geek Squad guys actually were paid were statements saying that court documents suggest they were paid. The lawyer keeps calling them paid informants and that is the story he is trying to build. I just haven't seen any confirmation that this is in fact the case.

 

[TwistedAegis]

Yeah, the info out there is solely that from the defense attorney, at least in this story (although how rare is that!).

From a standard ethics standpoint though, the payments, and the purported regularity of them, if true, muddies the water quite a bit. But, that's why they have courts to settle these things, not us

 

[rezerekted]

It is NOT illegal for a geek squad tech to actively search. It IS against Best Buy policy which at the most could get him fired. But it is not illegal.

Yes, it is, go read the constitution. Oh, the FBI said you could do it so that makes it legal. The fact the FBI pays $500 for you to "actively" search proves this is not being done to just find a virus.

And no one can guarantee that a computer is virus free so it is a scam anyway. You have to do a secure wipe of the complete HDD to do that.

 

[lcpiper]

Yes, it is, go read the constitution. Oh, the FBI said you could do it so that makes it legal. The fact the FBI pays $500 for you to "actively" search proves this is not being done to just find a virus.

And no one can guarantee that a computer is virus free so it is a scam anyway. You have to do a secure wipe of the complete HDD to do that.

So you say it's illegal for the Geek Squad tech to search the man's hard drive?

Who is going to arrest him?

What criminal charges should he face?

Please enlighten.

And although this isn't hypothetical it is beside the point cause the man took his computer to Best Buy because it wouldn't boot and the tech was recovering deleted files and other data so they could image his machine and restore the man's data.

 

[potency]

When your boss walks in and you're watching kitty porn:

 

[rezerekted]

So you say it's illegal for the Geek Squad tech to search the man's hard drive?

Who is going to arrest him?

What criminal charges should he face?

Please enlighten.

And although this isn't hypothetical it is beside the point cause the man took his computer to Best Buy because it wouldn't boot and the tech was recovering deleted files and other data so they could image his machine and restore the man's data.

It is illegal according to this section of the constitution. Also, they use programs to search for a virus and don't do it manually so have no good reason to be snooping through people's photographs and videos. Just because no one is going to arrest him does not make it legal.




U.S. Constitution - Amendment 4


Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
<<Back | Table of Contents | Next>>

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[nilepez]

It is illegal according to this section of the constitution. Also, they use programs to search for a virus and don't do it manually so have no good reason to be snooping through people's photographs and videos. Just because no one is going to arrest him does not make it legal.




U.S. Constitution - Amendment 4


Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
<<Back | Table of Contents | Next>>

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Far be it from me to go against the 4th amendment, but the 4th amendment doesn't preclude me from snooping around your HD if you bring give it to me. Now if the guy is actually an employee of the FBI, then you have a point. Maybe that applied (I initially thought it did, but I'm less sure now, based on news from articles that lcpiper posted earlier in this thread.

 

[lcpiper]

It is illegal according to this section of the constitution. Also, they use programs to search for a virus and don't do it manually so have no good reason to be snooping through people's photographs and videos. Just because no one is going to arrest him does not make it legal.




U.S. Constitution - Amendment 4


Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure
<<Back | Table of Contents | Next>>

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Do you just not understand that the Constitution is not a set of Laws, but instead are the rules on which our laws are based?

Therefore a Law can be unconstitutional, a legal action can be unconstitutional, but violating the constitution is not in and of itself a law.

So you can not go to jail for violating the Constitution, but you can for breaking the laws that are based on the Constitution.

 

[lcpiper]

........ Also, they use programs to search for a virus and don't do it manually so have no good reason to be snooping through people's photographs and videos. ............

Stop believing the lawyer and the click bait writer of this article just long enough to read the information posted here.

He took his computer to have to repaired by Best Buy. Best Buy sent the computer to their main repair facility. Best buy will pull all user data from the computer, including deleted files, prior to re-imaging the drive and then they will give the guy his computer and data back. If while they are doing this, they see something that looks illegal, they are required by the law to report it. This is not a search as described in the 4th Amemndment, this is a company performing a service under the service agreement purchased by the customer.

And we have a court and a judge to help decide what is legal and what isn't. They do not need our help to determine what is legal or not.

 

[Darunion]

Stop believing the lawyer and the click bait writer of this article just long enough to read the information posted here.

He took his computer to have to repaired by Best Buy. Best Buy sent the computer to their main repair facility. Best buy will pull all user data from the computer, including deleted files, prior to re-imaging the drive and then they will give the guy his computer and data back. If while they are doing this, they see something that looks illegal, they are required by the law to report it. This is not a search as described in the 4th Amemndment, this is a company performing a service under the service agreement purchased by the customer.

And we have a court and a judge to help decide what is legal and what isn't. They do not need our help to determine what is legal or not.

But but, I have constructed highly educated opinions on this based on what I read that a journalist wrote in hopes of getting advertisement revenue!

 

[nightfly]

First and most important, if you see anything which indicates another person is being hurt or held against their wishes, it should be investigated, whether it's an adult or a child. If it's not true, you've inconvenienced someone. If it IS, you could be saving someone's life. If you have the guts to check it out yourself, fine. If not, call a cop. It's their job. I know a lot of people don't like cops, but they are hired to protect us, and most of them will, if given the chance.

How stupid are people to freely give up their computer to a shop knowing they got child porn on there.

Stupid. VERY stupid. But we already know that. As per Carlin, think of how stupid the average person is, now half of them are dumber than that.

if even halfway intelligent people start getting into crime, we are screwed.

They are. THEY don't get caught. That's why most of the folks who do, are what you see on those cop shows. OTOH, you have Bernie Madoff, the 'smartest guys in the room' types, and all the other crooks that get caught because they think they've really put on over on all the other people who they think are stupid. Once in a while there's a smart person on the law enforcement side, there just aren't enough of them there.

because you won't hear about the criminals that don't get caught.

Right.

Also why is the employee digging so deeply for hidden porn files?

Same reason so many teens stay up all night searching the web for them. Horny bastards (hey, come on, I used to drive into Manhattan for my printed on paper/video porn way back in the 70's). I wouldn't think Best buy employees in the tech section are any more socially skilled than nerds were at any other point in history. Hence, the desire for porn. A quote I remember: 'You can never have too much porn'. I first heard that from a volunteer first aid squad captain. He was 20. I was 18. Seemed to make sense back then!

Might hear later that the employee has his own collection.

Which he now keeps a bit more securely, knowing that others will be going after HIS stuff, curious about what they might find there!

Well, if, as a plumber, you find a human finger in someone's pipes, you should probably report it.

Problem with that is, the next finger found in a drain pipe might be yours. Nobody likes a snitch, and if they think they can get rid of a witness in a murder crime, some folks might want to do just that.

The Police might get a call in from a payphone a few weeks later.

Again, the coincidence might implicate you as the 'leak'. Tread Carefully.

i'm actually surprised pedo's would be dumb enough to send the computer into Best buy.

Why? Their no smarter than anyone else. The spread of I.Q. of any given group will pretty much be the same as any other (unless you have a group of say, Princeton pedophiles).