A real talk about privacy

I just wrote a thread about the stingray surveillance device, which is a device used to intercept cell phone text messages and calls. It is routinely used without a warrant on a suspect. The first thing to notice. It seems that once someone is suspected of something, it becomes okay to do surveillance on them without a warrant.

How would someone get suspected of something? Since cops can scan the information on nearby cell phones, they can use this technology to scan the cell phones of druggies entering a known dealer's house and then later on intercept the druggie's cell phone text messages in order to get the evidence they need to convict them.

But there is a second problem that comes up here. The police need to make it look like they got the evidence through conventional means in order to convince the court that there is a solid case. The case could get thrown out if it was discovered that surveillance was used without a warrant. This extra step is required because the police skipped getting the warrant (which they might not have had probable cause for). There is also the option here, if the police want a warrant, they can make it seem like they have incriminating evidence (and use the evidence acquired by said surveillance device).

I think the moral of the story here is that the police departments are corrupt and aren't following their own rules. The court still seems to be doing what they can to prevent privacy. However, the law enforcement agencies are not being investigated for this. It seems like they are getting a free pass.

A lot of people will say they don't care that they are being spied on. It often seems like they are just being spiteful, but could it be true? Could people these days expect everything they say to be free game for eavesdropping government officials? Could a case be made that there should be no expectation of privacy, that crimes one does are criminal acts and can be investigated even without probable cause and a warrant?

Why should a warrant be needed to investigate someone whom surveillance has already picked up as doing criminal acts?

A third point here is roaming surveillance. This is when the government will survey millions of people at once in order to find the ones that are doing criminal acts through filtering. This effectively allows the government officials to know who the criminals in a certain geographical area are by intercepting patterns in their text messages or phone calls.

As long as criminal uses a cell phone or computer (although I only know the details of the cell phone surveillance) have they forfeited their right to privacy? This is a serious question. What do you think? I think so.

a reply to: darkbake

The easy way:

Assume everything you say on a phone and type in a computer is logged, categorized, and will be used against you in a court of law.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: darkbake

The easy way:

Assume everything you say on a phone and type in a computer is logged, categorized, and will be used against you in a court of law.

This is on point. I always assume my conversations, even in the privacy of my own home, are being recorded by a smart TV, computer, phone or other device. Nothing we do is safe anymore.

a reply to: darkbake

You're right about computers, in the mid 90's it was called carnivore I think it's now called narusinsight. Mid 90's FBI tied the system into the isp's.

a reply to: darkbake

They usually find a person buying the drugs they can turn to get the eventual warrent. This is done through simple surveilence after they've homed in on potential dealers using these systems.

These 'Charlie's' then become narcs which usually do it to get out of trouble, since most are busted leaving with drugs, quietly. Now they have a witness and an undercover informant to go in, buy and present evidence to the cops. All that's left is the official operation, with marked bills, given by detectives, before the big bust to buy the drugs with, sealing the deal and their fates.

In court the initial telephone stuff isn't even presented. This is one way to circumvent the system. . .

I guess I'd be troubled by this if I was a drug dealer or criminal, but I'm not so who cares!

Privacy is a thing of the past and every measure you develop to defeat them is called Obstruction

Only way you can win is to be one of them and not have something they want that you have, like top slot...Lol

a reply to: AnteBellum

You don't see where this can extend beyond drug dealers?

originally posted by: AnteBellum
In court the initial telephone stuff isn't even presented. This is one way to circumvent the system. . .

I guess I'd be troubled by this if I was a drug dealer or criminal, but I'm not so who cares!

Because the most honest citizen and the lowest criminal are subject to the same practices by law enforcement. You have a right to not have your documents searched.

The court however has gone back and forth on this point for over 100 years, with one side arguing that the constitution doesn't apply to electronic communications. Today it's text messages, back then it was tapping the telegraph wire.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: AnteBellum

You don't see where this can extend beyond drug dealers?

Or what until real street criminals gangs or mobs get their hands on the stingray.
COULD be blackmail city, they would also have incentive to listen to what
the other guys are up too,.

a reply to: Reallyfolks

I definitely do, but all they can do is listen to me snitch to my friends about my kids fighting over who gets to enter the car first.

There's no reason for me to care because I'm not the one they're trying to find and the ones they're trying to find are the ones I want them to find. Unless your doing something wrong they can't touch you.

Seriously, if they really wanted to get good information on people all they have to do is go to their Facebook or Twitter accounts.

originally posted by: starfoxxx

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: AnteBellum

You don't see where this can extend beyond drug dealers?

Or what until real street criminals gangs or mobs get their hands on the stingray.
COULD be blackmail city, they would also have incentive to listen to what
the other guys are up too,.

Its really a Hackers world, so as you can see what happened with Ashley Madison and Sony..Etc, its a double edged sword

a reply to: starfoxxx

Maybe a corrupt mayor having police force perform unauthorized surveillance on political opponents? Shake down donors. Things of that nature, corrupt cops using it to shakedown criminals instead of prosecuting. Not gangs getting a hold of devices, but again , possibility of law enforcement selling info on rivals. It could be abused

Nsa spied on congress, in the day it was water gate. Not out of the realm of possibility

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Reallyfolks

I definitely do, but all they can do is listen to me snitch to my friends about my kids fighting over who gets to enter the car first.

There's no reason for me to care because I'm not the one they're trying to find and the ones they're trying to find are the ones I want them to find. Unless your doing something wrong they can't touch you.

Seriously, if they really wanted to get good information on people all they have to do is go to their Facebook or Twitter accounts.

Don't believe it. Folks are dragged through the mud every day, ones that had nothing to do with anything....The prisons are full of them

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Reallyfolks

I definitely do, but all they can do is listen to me snitch to my friends about my kids fighting over who gets to enter the car first.

There's no reason for me to care because I'm not the one they're trying to find and the ones they're trying to find are the ones I want them to find. Unless your doing something wrong they can't touch you.

Seriously, if they really wanted to get good information on people all they have to do is go to their Facebook or Twitter accounts.

Unfortunately, this isn't the case. If the courts worked the way the theory says they do you would have a point. However these days your sentence is determined by your defense attorney and the prosecutor. Sentences and the cost of fighting them are such that you're usually better off simply taking the plea bargain, even if you're innocent. The number of innocent people taking pleas is staggering and 93% of people in jail right now were never convicted, they're there from a plea. Throw in the fact that prosecutors are legally allowed to hide exculpatory evidence and you have very few protections. People are getting convicted all over the place right now for what wouldn't even hold up as circumstantial evidence in court, and that is why the police being able to spy on you is a bad thing.

a reply to: Aazadan

The court system is very corrupt, that is a fact and is one that I've used to my advantage many times.

Are there factual examples I can see, enlighten me. Or are you alluding to terrorists being caught through these methods? What are they plea bargaining down from?
I've seen many wrongs regarding obtaining illegal evidence, just not in cases where it wasn't unwarranted.

All this does matter. . . somewhere.
Trust me, as a former «snip» member I have my own set of dislikes of the system starting with the patriot act, ending at gun restrictions. I just see for most Americans that are just living a normal life being good little sheep, this doesn't affect anything.

But again, if you can make me believe it I'll put this up on my list. Right in front of the pervert that watches me undress, from the penthouse across from me with a telescope, when my blinds are open even 1/4". That and corporate espianage which this device would be wonderful at.

It's kind of funny though isn't it, even with all there technology and advanced surveillance systems, the drug trade isn't exactly suffering... there futile war on drugs is no closer to being won.

They just keep using the same old feeble minded tactics. There like wolves, they observe the herd and pick out an injured or vulnerable member, then attempt to separate it from the herd. The strongest members of the herd never even get targeted and 99% of the weakest members of the herd escape by overwhelming the predators with sheer numbers, lol.

Anyway... right or wrong, fact is there will always be (for my life time anyway) people that are paid good money to invade the privacy of citizens, in an attempt to control our "moral" behavior. So just never do anything your not prepared to go down for, I suppose.

Its just a shame theirs no after life... otherwise these low life's would get there own for destroying lives and invading peoples homes to steal from them..... As if a plant is somehow inherently evil!

originally posted by: darkbake
A lot of people will say they don't care that they are being spied on. It often seems like they are just being spiteful, but could it be true? Could people these days expect everything they say to be free game for eavesdropping government officials? .

Poeple who dont care about their privacy do so because they have been deluded into thinking that they are ones who are going to decide wether or not they have done anyhting wrong or have anything to hide.

It seems that everyone but them knows that the quaint litte phrase " well, if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide have?" this litte trick hides the reality that its not going to be them to make that decision. Wether or not you me and the rest of us have anyhting to hide will be made initailly by someone sitting in front of a computer screen christ knows where in the world and in the second instance by a couple in-your-face suits in a police station.

Secondly, i complelty fail to understand why you reckon that any evidence any police get my any means should be admissible. Would you like the police to take this exact same line with you when they have you in a cop shop one night deciding wether or not you have anything to hide??

cheers

a reply to: darkbake

I love reading the responses here. The answer is simple... if you are an American and you utter the words "Freedom" in conjunction with America you deserved to be punched in the face for being a mindless lemming.

The truth is America isn't and hasn't been "land of the free" for a very, very long time. But the vast majority of the socially conditioned lemmings don't understand it.

If you want real freedom you have to work to end what is happening in America, it's the responsibility of every American. Problem is we don't really have Americans anymore. We are in the Matrix, the minds of most Americans have been conditioned appropriately (even many of you) to react to these BS news stories. The major difference is the Matrix we live in is nowhere near as cool as the movie.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
Are there factual examples I can see, enlighten me. Or are you alluding to terrorists being caught through these methods? What are they plea bargaining down from?
I've seen many wrongs regarding obtaining illegal evidence, just not in cases where it wasn't unwarranted.

Plea Bargains happen before trial. Usually the prosecutors throw as much as they can at a person just to see what sticks, it also works as a scare tactic.

Usually plea's involve things like pleading down from murder to manslaughter, or a drug charge to a lesser drug charge, and so on. Though in some cases the plea can be to something completely unrelated. Whether those initial charges were ever justified in the first place is a mystery because they're never challenged. By taking the plea there is no courtroom, judge, or jury. There is only what the prosecutor says you agree to say you're guilty to.

We know in death penalty cases there is an error rate of 4.1% where the person actually isn't guilty, though that rate could be higher as many of the potential non guilty people get their sentence reduced to life in prison, where everyone forgets about them. In reality we're probably closer to 8% on those cases, and even higher on less important ones where there is much less evidence.

originally posted by: SPECULUM

originally posted by: starfoxxx

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: AnteBellum

You don't see where this can extend beyond drug dealers?

Or what until real street criminals gangs or mobs get their hands on the stingray.
COULD be blackmail city, they would also have incentive to listen to what
the other guys are up too,.

Its really a Hackers world, so as you can see what happened with Ashley Madison and Sony..Etc, its a double edged sword

This is one of my views on the matter.

It seems like the 'bad guys' are always one step ahead. Is it really much of a stretch to think that hackers or 'bad guys' could do their deeds and make it seem like it is coming from someone else's computer? What with everyone's home being wireless/wifi spots. How hard would it be for someone to hack into someones bank account and make it look like it was done from a neighbor's computer?