FBI busted tracking student, demands GPS spy gear return

LINK: FBI busted tracking student, demands GPS spy gear return
After Web uproar, feds reclaimed magnetic tracker found under car

LINK: Caught Spying on Student, FBI Demands GPS Tracker Back

Several days ago a 20-year-old student discovered a GPS tracking device hidden on his car. After his friend posted a picture of it online, speculating about its ties to a secret FBI investigation, the feds themselves came a-knockin', according to Wired.com. They wanted their toy back.

Talk about SLOPPY surveillance! And did you know this?!:

His discovery comes in the wake of a recent ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals saying it’s legal for law enforcement to secretly place a tracking device on a suspect’s car without getting a warrant, even if the car is parked in a private driveway.

Brian Alseth from the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington state contacted Afifi after seeing pictures of the tracking device posted online and told him the ACLU had been waiting for a case like this to challenge the ruling.

“This is the kind of thing we like to throw lawyers at,” Afifi said Alseth told him.

“It seems very frightening that the FBI have placed a surveillance-tracking device on the car of a 20-year-old American citizen who has done nothing more than being half-Egyptian,” Alseth told Wired.com.

LINK: Ninth Circuit Court: Secret GPS Tracking is Legal

How MANY more of these types of infringements upon our 'freedoms' are we going to accept?! I realize our freedom is a "False Freedom", but don't you think "they" could do a little bit more to make us believe we really have freedoms. Now this young man is guilty by association and never did anything to warrant suspicion.

What's next? Stealing a newborn child from it's mother's arms simply because they are a part of an organization that supports enforcement of the US Constitution instead of mutilation of it? Oh wait! They've done that too!

From what I understand about this case, the student has tons of red flags that tipped off the FBI. In this case, it's called surveillance, not spying.

my 2-cents

Like father hey?
They said activist, not terrorist.....
perhaps his dad was trying to help people not blow them up.....
In my opinion the time and money spent on investigating this kid is probably just more money down the phoney Homeland(read vaterland) Insecurity rathole.
This bloated organisation is drunk with its powers and produces little but terror alerts to keep us pliable.
I see the beginnings of an all powerful, incredibly paranoid, polizei there.
Watch as they meet with increasing levels of brutality all public dissent and protest.
Tremble, as they carry off the guy next door in the concealing darkness of the midnite watch.
Utter, a silent Scream of terror and rage as they herd the dissidents into the boxcars,
Wonder, just who Will be the next to go.handcuffed and staggering between burly black clad and masked polizei.
Yes my friends all this and more to come,as the great impossible dream dies.........

reply to post by Nivcharah


Dont get too much in a huff about this. If I remeber correctly the 2nd or 4th circuit ruled a warrant was needed in order for law enforcement to use these tracking devices. Which means at some point it will go to the USSC for a final determination on the legality of it.

The state I reside in (midwest) allows Law Enforcement to use non active GPS, meaning we put it on a car, and then we recover it a few days later and download it to see where people have been. Its not done in real time tracking.

As far as privacy in your driveway the USSC has already ruled on these areas being curtilage, and different jurisdictions have a varying degreee ofinterpretation in this area (driveway, sidewalk running through your land etc).

The farther along we move into the 21st century the more we are going to see these new technologies enter the criminal justice arena. We need to make sure we keep our government in check and hold our elected reps accountible.

Apathy of the voters is whats going to make or break some of these areas.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The state I reside in (midwest) allows Law Enforcement to use non active GPS, meaning we put it on a car, and then we recover it a few days later and download it to see where people have been. Its not done in real time tracking. [/quote)

Even though it's not done in real-time, I'm still not thrilled with the idea of these Law Abusers putting a tracking device on my vehicle w/o my knowledge and w/o a warrant.

As far as privacy in your driveway the USSC has already ruled on these areas being curtilage, and different jurisdictions have a varying degreee of interpretation in this area (driveway, sidewalk running through your land etc).

If I understand what you are saying, then I find it ironic that in Las Vegas a woman whose vehicle was damaged in her driveway by debris from a water main breaking in the street has to pay for the damages herself and the city is not responsible, yet if they want to put a GPS system on your vehicle w/o your knowledge or approval while it is parked IN your driveway . . . they can. Yeah. I'm in a huff about this no matter what is decided simply due to the fact "they" did this.

The farther along we move into the 21st century the more we are going to see these new technologies enter the criminal justice arena. We need to make sure we keep our government in check and hold our elected reps accountible.

Apathy of the voters is whats going to make or break some of these areas.

I totally agree! It's already been a factor in the Nevada Primaries (which is the reason we are stuck with choosing from Harry Ried or Sharon Angle and no 3rd party).

edit on 10/9/2010 by Nivcharah because: (no reason given)

If I found that kind of garbage on my vehicle I'd attach it to something fun. Like a cop's car or a wild animal. And if they came knockin' looking for it I'd tell them I have no clue what they are talking about. They are the real criminals..

reply to post by Redwookieaz


Better than that, how about putting it on a taxi cab? I bet that will drive the feds nuts as to why this
person is driving all over the place all of the time...

p.s. and make sure you dont leave any prints on it

reply to post by Redwookieaz


If it was a real-time GPS, they probably wouldn't even bother to knock on his door (initially). They'd just assume he was "on the lamb" and follow him.

I thought about what I'd do with it too. I definitely would not have given it back to them. I would have given it to an atty with the ACLU first. But I like your idea of messing with the FBI better. I'd attach mine to the bottom of a semi-truck hauling hazardous waste from Vegas to NY. At least it would keep them busy for a little while.

reply to post by Nivcharah


There is a difference between a water main break resulting in damge to your vehicle, and Law Enforcement placing a benign device on your vehicle that does no damage.

The water main break is civil, while the GPS tracking is criminal, so two totally different sets of standards apply.

Im not a fan of Law Enforcement being able to attach tracking devices based on the attempt to determine "if" a crime "might" be taking place, even if its there to see where the drug houses are. I am a firm believer in being required to submit the required paperwork to the PA's office, and then to a judge to have the warrant signed off on in order to use the device (which is how most states require search warrants to be correctly issued).

Bypassing this step to me is removing a checks and balance from a system designed to hold law enforcement to a strict standard in how we investigate crimes and collect evidence.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Nivcharah

 

There is a difference between a water main break resulting in damge to your vehicle, and Law Enforcement placing a benign device on your vehicle that does no damage.

The water main break is civil, while the GPS tracking is criminal, so two totally different sets of standards apply.

There should be no difference as to when the govt has access or responsibility to your private property whether it is civil or criminal (or trying to pin a crime on someone). I used this example because in one instance there is damage to a vehicle on private property and in the other instance they are trespassing on private property to vandalize private property without a warrant or permission. That is a violation of a person's rights (and we seem to agree on that point).

Originally posted by Nivcharah
There should be no difference as to when the govt has access or responsibility to your private property whether it is civil or criminal (or trying to pin a crime on someone).

There is a difference, and its there for a reason. If a water main breaks and damages your vehicle, you might have recourse through a civil action (forcing public works to pay for the damage to your vehicle). The water main break was not intended, so their is no intent - IE Criminal behavior.

Originally posted by Nivcharah
I used this example because in one instance there is damage to a vehicle on private property

which is civil

Originally posted by Nivcharah
and in the other instance they are trespassing on private property

check your state law / municipal ordinace on tresspassing. Some states you have to have knowledge you arent suppose to be their - IE its either posted as no tresspassing, or the rightful owner of the property tells you to leave. In some states you can unknowingly trespass, but its an infraction and not a criminal offense.

Originally posted by Nivcharah
to vandalize private property without a warrant or permission. That is a violation of a person's rights (and we seem to agree on that point).

Placing a device on a vehicle that does no damage is not vandalism (again check the statute for the state / city you live in for a more specific explanation to what constitutes vandalism). There is no intent to place the tracking device into the vehicle itself, so there is no tampering with a motor vehicle charge. The items are usually placed somewhere on the outside of the vehicle using various methods that prevents damage to the vehicle.

As far as private property goes, its private property that is open to the public (no gate access or other means to prevent anyone other than the property owners from entering the driveway. You do have a reasonable expectation of privacy in this area to the extent of your 4th amendment. However, nothing is being seized in this case, so you are now back to police coming into your driveway to place a device on your vehicle.

Don't get me wrong, I stand by what I said about Law Enforcement needing to obtain warrants for stuff like this. I am just presenting the thought process Law Enforcement uses in this area. As we already saw we have 2 conflicting appeal decisions, making it legal in the west and illegal in the east.

I would much rather take my time to do the investigation and submit the request for a search warrant to avoid any type of issues like the ones popping up now.

Thread is already here I believe.

reply to post by abrowning


Yes. And when I did a search for this topic before posting anything I found nothing. (?!)

I'll reply to the rest this evening because I need to leave.