Courts Okay Warrantless Cell Phone Tracking

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The courts have made it abundantly clear, if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't have anything to worry about. Besides, if you weren't a scumbag criminal, the cops wouldn't be tracking you in the first place. Duh.

When criminals use modern technological devices to carry out criminal acts and to reduce the possibility of detection, they can hardly complain when the police take advantage of the inherent characteristics of those very devices to catch them. This is not a case in which the government secretly placed a tracking device in someone’s car. The drug runners in this case used pay-as-you-go (and thus presumably more difficult to trace) cell phones to communicate during the crosscountry shipment of drugs. Unfortunately for the drug runners, the phones were trackable in a way they may not have suspected. The Constitution, however, does not protect their erroneous expectations regarding the undetectability of their modern tools.
Click to expand...
 
"The government used data emanating from Melvin Skinner’s pay-as-you-go cell
phone to determine its real-time location. This information was used to establish
Skinner’s location as he transported drugs along public thoroughfares between Arizona
and Tennessee.'

I guess my question is: Is this data just pulled from thin air, or did the government get data from the provider.

If the data was from the provider, a warrant should be needed imo, if it's data pushed out by the phone to the air then I can see warrant-less tracking.
 
"if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't have anything to worry about"

That is the most communist, anti-american statement spoken by man and it pisses me off to no end.
 
"The events leading up to Skinner’s arrest and conviction began in January 2006,
when Christopher S. Shearer, a participant in West’s marijuana-trafficking conspiracy,
was stopped in Flagstaff, Arizona with $362,000. Police stopped Shearer on his way to
deliver money to West’s marijuana supplier, Philip Apodaca, who lived in Tucson,
Arizona."

So it looks like they caught a guy with $300,000+ and he told them about the entire drug operation. Then they got full fledged wire tap warrants for the main guy's phones.

"In May and June 2006, authorities obtained orders authorizing the interception
of wire communications from two phones that were not pay-as-you-go, but rather phones
subscribed in West’s name."

Then with the info from those wire taps they figured out the numbers of some burner phones. With those numbers they got an order from a judge to get just about everything other than the conversations on the burner phones because they already knew how and when the drugs were going to be transported. They just used the GPS data to find the actual vehicle.

"Believing that Big Foot was carrying the 6447 phone, authorities obtained an order from
a federal magistrate judge on July 12, 2006, authorizing the phone company to release
subscriber information, cell site information, GPS real-time location, and “ping” data for
the 6447 phone in order to learn Big Foot’s location while he was en route to deliver the
drugs."

IMHO "warrantless" is a little misleading. I'm not a lawyer, but the police definitely had probable cause and operated within the intent and letter of the law with multiple judges agreeing with them.

If someone with a large amount of illegal money declares you to be part of a criminal conspiracy and in the investigation your name keeps coming up, I would expect the police to at least give you the once over.
 
What has happened to the public vote on shit like this? I mean, even if it wasn't public, aren't congressmen and senators supposed to represent us? How many here would have voted on something like this? I know I wouldn't have nor would anyone I know...so how exactly do things like this become law with no public/civilian feedback?

I mean, no one asked us and those in charge obviously aren't representing the people or else this wouldn't have been passed...so has democracy simply been flushed down the toilet for good in this country?
 
The data they are talking about is likely the phone logging into each cell tower as it passes by. You can triangulate the location from the precise timing of the phone contacting each tower in range as it moves across the countryside. Three towers gives you the exact position.

As opposed to hacking into a GPS enabled phone using a warrant to just ask the phone "where are you".

The judge is an idiot, the ACT of tracking a person, in secret, without a warrant is a violation of the 4th amendment.

Example: I beat a speeding ticket in NH years ago... 94 in a 55. How? The police clocked me with vascar from an airplane as I came over the border. They did it in secret, no one knew we were under surveillance AND they did not have a warrant with my name on it.

This is the reason they have to keep their parking lights on at night when the cops are hiding in the bushes, YOU the citizen have to know you are under surveillance OR they must have a warrant with your name on it. There are precedents for "john doe" warrants, of course for drug investigations, etc, but those still need a visit to a judge.

The sign in NH informing people entering NH that they may be under surveillance by aircraft was located 2 miles INSIDE the state, after the speed trap zone. I fought the ticket on the grounds the arrest and the surveillance were unconstitutional and a violation of the 4th amendment.

I won, the judge turned to the prosecutor and asked if he REALLY wanted to pursue this matter (in a stern voice), and the prosecutor on the spot dropped the charges.

Two weeks later NH ended the aircraft program and sold off the planes. See, they had been violating the 4th amendment all along, and NH was wide open for a class action suit from all the people who'd ever been handed speeding tickets at the border.

Live free and die bitches. :cool:
 
This is an opinion from a court in a criminal case. There are no laws at issue other than the U.S. Constitution's 4th amendment. Contact your senators and representatives if you want them to pass a law reacting to this opinion.
 
Rabid Sloth is right, I was incorrect on this one, clearly they had warrants and the spirit of the actions were in line with the intent of the law. I'd delete/edit my post but it wont let me. :rolleyes::confused:

Good analysis Rabid Sloth. ;)
 
JoeUser said:
What has happened to the public vote on shit like this? I mean, even if it wasn't public, aren't congressmen and senators supposed to represent us? How many here would have voted on something like this? I know I wouldn't have nor would anyone I know...so how exactly do things like this become law with no public/civilian feedback?

I mean, no one asked us and those in charge obviously aren't representing the people or else this wouldn't have been passed...so has democracy simply been flushed down the toilet for good in this country?
Click to expand...

Knee jerk reaction. Warrant was obtained for his cell phones. He was being monitored and they discovered his "throwaway" or burner phones. Judge gave warrant for EVERYTHING except listening on the conversations, voila perp caught.
 
fenixv said:
This is an opinion from a court in a criminal case. There are no laws at issue other than the U.S. Constitution's 4th amendment. Contact your senators and representatives if you want them to pass a law reacting to this opinion.
Click to expand...

Or better yet, find out more about the case before you look like a fool.
 
TheWeazmeister said:
Knee jerk reaction. Warrant was obtained for his cell phones. He was being monitored and they discovered his "throwaway" or burner phones. Judge gave warrant for EVERYTHING except listening on the conversations, voila perp caught.
Click to expand...

Whoops! Blame it on Steve for his misleading inaccurate thread titles...
 
Curious where the line would be, I mean you're basically just continuously broadcast a radio signal and somehow you should think that means no-toucheze? If you broadcast a pirate radio station is the FCC not supposed to be able to make use of your signal to find you?
 
JoeUser said:
What has happened to the public vote on shit like this? I mean, even if it wasn't public, aren't congressmen and senators supposed to represent us? How many here would have voted on something like this? I know I wouldn't have nor would anyone I know...so how exactly do things like this become law with no public/civilian feedback?

I mean, no one asked us and those in charge obviously aren't representing the people or else this wouldn't have been passed...so has democracy simply been flushed down the toilet for good in this country?
Click to expand...

You do realize that when it comes to the FEDERAL government we are a republic (NOT A DEMOCRASY)<-- hate when I hear we are. We don't vote on that shit, we have reps that do that for us, which is why people protest about bills that the house or senate are thinking of passing that the people don't like. On the state and local level we do have a democrasy because we the people vote on state and local issues and initiatives.
 
JoeUser said:
Whoops! Blame it on Steve for his misleading inaccurate thread titles...
Click to expand...

No, we'll blame it on you for not RTFA. I swear, if Steve told some of yous that aliens live inside Apple PC's you would believe it while calling everyone else fanboys for disagreeing.

This seems to be actually decent police work from what I hear. I dunno how I'd be able to explain away $360K in cash though.
 
It has to do with the presumption of innocence before guilt. They don't care about that while they are investigating you and tracking you and spying on you, but when they catch you and arrest you, then you are innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the court. Not before. That's what this comes down to and frankly it's still wrong. Yeah, when you see someone blatantly committing a crime or doing something illicit and illegal, I still want my government and law enforcement officials to go through the proper channels, dot their I's and cross their T's and then drop the hammer. Probable cause being the exception.
 
The only thing the "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear" crowd fail to take into consideration is what happens when powers like these are subversively abused?

What if an incumbent Mayor gets his chief of police to use warrantless cellphone tracking to collect dirt on an opponent?

Or what if it is used to profile political opinions?

The warrant system is an important check and balance to keep society from spiraling downwards to the point where the fire department knocks on your door to burn politically unacceptable materials...

Whenever power is given to any branch of government, there must be an equally powerful check to that power, so that it is not abused.

This is a very scary development.
 
AliceCooper said:
You do realize that when it comes to the FEDERAL government we are a republic (NOT A DEMOCRASY)<-- hate when I hear we are. We don't vote on that shit, we have reps that do that for us, which is why people protest about bills that the house or senate are thinking of passing that the people don't like. On the state and local level we do have a democrasy because we the people vote on state and local issues and initiatives.
Click to expand...

Having a system of representatives does not mean that we are not a Democracy. We are a Democracy. We don't use the direct democratic approach like Switzerland does, but that doesn't make us any less of a democracy.

A Federal Republic is just one of many forms of democracy, closely related to the Parliamentary system, which also has representatives, and is also a democracy.
 
SkribbelKat said:
How'd you even do that? I'd have to like throw my car from a plane to get it to go that fast.
Click to expand...

Probably depends on the car.

I was caught doing 168mph in a 55mph zone once (don't ask).

These days I drive like a grandmother :D Learned my lesson.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039041191 said:
Probably depends on the car.

I was caught doing 168mph in a 55mph zone once (don't ask).

These days I drive like a grandmother :D Learned my lesson.
Click to expand...

Did you have rockets attached to that Yugo?! :p
 
VRMan said:
Did you have rockets attached to that Yugo?! :p
Click to expand...

Nope, it was my 2001 Saab 9-5 Aero 5-spd manual, with upgraded aftermarket turbo, intercooler, downpipe, cat-back exhaust and software, as well as various valves and hardware to make it all work.

275553526_84fb45ec04_o.jpg


That was taken with a shitty old digital camera (the type that accepts a floppy disk)

That thing really could move, as long as it wasn't too hot out.

But that was two cars ago. I drive more sedate (but still nice) vehicles these days.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039041356 said:
Nope, it was my 2001 Saab 9-5 Aero 5-spd manual, with upgraded aftermarket turbo, intercooler, downpipe, cat-back exhaust and software, as well as various valves and hardware to make it all work.

That was taken with a shitty old digital camera (the type that accepts a floppy disk)

That thing really could move, as long as it wasn't too hot out.

But that was two cars ago. I drive more sedate (but still nice) vehicles these days.
Click to expand...

Did you say something about cats?
 
JoeUser said:
What has happened to the public vote on shit like this? I mean, even if it wasn't public, aren't congressmen and senators supposed to represent us? How many here would have voted on something like this? I know I wouldn't have nor would anyone I know...so how exactly do things like this become law with no public/civilian feedback?

I mean, no one asked us and those in charge obviously aren't representing the people or else this wouldn't have been passed...so has democracy simply been flushed down the toilet for good in this country?
Click to expand...

You're weak on crime/national security, you evil communist/liberal!
 
Zarathustra[H];1039041164 said:
Having a system of representatives does not mean that we are not a Democracy. We are a Democracy. We don't use the direct democratic approach like Switzerland does, but that doesn't make us any less of a democracy.

A Federal Republic is just one of many forms of democracy, closely related to the Parliamentary system, which also has representatives, and is also a democracy.
Click to expand...

You could say that we are a democrasy on the state and local level and on the federal level only when it comes to electing reps. Otherwise the federal level is a republic. Listen to the pledge of allegiance. If we were a true democrasy, then I would be able to vote whether or not bills would be passed or not.
 
All I want to know is if it's possible to use some kind of technology that would tell you your mobile phone is being tampered with in anyway? I remember a long time ago home phones could be plugged into devices or you could dial specific phone numbers that would tell you. Are we past that possibility with smartphones?

Not that I do anything wrong to care, just wondering (looks over at 9 kilos) really.
 
AliceCooper said:
You could say that we are a democrasy on the state and local level and on the federal level only when it comes to electing reps. Otherwise the federal level is a republic. Listen to the pledge of allegiance. If we were a true democrasy, then I would be able to vote whether or not bills would be passed or not.
Click to expand...

Even on the state and local levels most bills are voted on by representatives (who are elected by the people). Only very few issues make it to referendums where everyone votes on the issue.

By your extremely narrow definition of the word Democacy, only very few examples of Democracy exist in the world.

Most democracies are representative democracies, in either federal or parliamentary form. This does not make them any less democracies than those with more direct democracies.

The word Democracy, comes from the Greek Demokratia, which literally means, rule of the people. Direct representation has proven to be a rather ineffective form of democracy, due to the sheer volume of laws and bills the population would need to be informed on, and vote on. That is why we have politicians who do this full time. That beinng said, all power still comes from the people. We elect those who vote on our behalf, and because the power - in the end - can be traced back to the people, we are - indeed - a Democracy.

Several variants of democracy exist, but there are two basic forms, both of which are closely related on how the whole body of citizens—the sovereign power in any variant of democracy—executes its will. One form of democracy is direct democracy, in which citizens have direct and active participation in the decision making of the government. In most modern democracies, the whole body of citizens remain the sovereign power but political power is exercised indirectly through elected representatives; this is called representative democracy. The concept of representative democracy arose largely from ideas and institutions that developed during the European Middle Ages and the Age of Enlightenment and in the American and French Revolutions
Click to expand...
 
AliceCooper said:
You could say that we are a democrasy on the state and local level and on the federal level only when it comes to electing reps. Otherwise the federal level is a republic. Listen to the pledge of allegiance. If we were a true democrasy, then I would be able to vote whether or not bills would be passed or not.
Click to expand...

I definitely believe this to be true as well. Even my boy Ben said it...

When asked what type of government the American people were going to participate in, by a well-meaning woman, a stern Benjamin Franklin warned that our new government was going to be "A republic, madam, if you can keep it."
Click to expand...
 
Zarathustra[H];1039041698 said:
Even on the state and local levels most bills are voted on by representatives (who are elected by the people). Only very few issues make it to referendums where everyone votes on the issue.

By your extremely narrow definition of the word Democacy, only very few examples of Democracy exist in the world.

Most democracies are representative democracies, in either federal or parliamentary form. This does not make them any less democracies than those with more direct democracies.

The word Democracy, comes from the Greek Demokratia, which literally means, rule of the people. Direct representation has proven to be a rather ineffective form of democracy, due to the sheer volume of laws and bills the population would need to be informed on, and vote on. That is why we have politicians who do this full time. That beinng said, all power still comes from the people. We elect those who vote on our behalf, and because the power - in the end - can be traced back to the people, we are - indeed - a Democracy.
Click to expand...

So our founding fathers who came up with our government system are wrong then. They were actually making a representative democrasy?

"The United States is, indeed, a republic, not a democracy. Accurately defined, a democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf."

So by both of our definitions, a republic and a representative democrasy are basically the same fucking thing with semantic differences.
 
WTH what happen to invasion of privacy? well if you can listen to my conversation let me see your tax return and bank statement

if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't have anything to worry about
 
I was driving my ...at the time.... brand new Corvette, on the first nice sunny day of the spring, and I literally didnt realize how fast I was going, there weren't any other cars around at the time.

The cop was nice and took me to an ATM before taking me in, so I could post bail and then he drove me back to my car so I could get to work.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039041164 said:
Having a system of representatives does not mean that we are not a Democracy. We are a Democracy. We don't use the direct democratic approach like Switzerland does, but that doesn't make us any less of a democracy.

A Federal Republic is just one of many forms of democracy, closely related to the Parliamentary system, which also has representatives, and is also a democracy.
Click to expand...

We are a constitutional representative republic that uses the processes of the democratic system of the right to vote as the backbone of that constitutional representative republic. We've never been a democracy, never started as one, don't pretend to be one. We use some of the the facilities and processes of democracy.
 
Methadras said:
We are a constitutional representative republic that uses the processes of the democratic system of the right to vote as the backbone of that constitutional representative republic. We've never been a democracy, never started as one, don't pretend to be one. We use some of the the facilities and processes of democracy.
Click to expand...

That distinction is really just a matter of semantics.

The power originates from the people, as such we are a democracy.

We are just in a different subgroup of democracy than those parliamentary or direct democracy types in other parts of the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top