Michigan cops stealing drivers' phone data

[ShawnD1]

You guys really jumped the shark on this one.

I don't think you understand what that term means :hmm:


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jump the shark

a term to describe a moment when somethin that was once great has reached a point where it will now decline in quality and popularity.

Origin of this phrase comes from a Happy Days episode where the Fonz jumped a shark on waterskis. Thus was labeled the lowest point of the show.

examples: Cousin Oliver on Brady Bunch, Scrappy Doo

 

[jonks]

I don't think you understand what that term means :hmm:


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jump%20the shark

well, when in Rome...

(I think he meant jumped the gun)

 

[ch33zw1z]

What do you think happens when you refuse a search of your car?
The police use that as probable cause to search it anyways.

Doesn't meant that false probable cause will stick. Stand up for yourself.

 

[jonks]

Doesn't meant that false probable cause will stick. Stand up for yourself.

It doesn't even mean that, as has been previously stated refusal to grant consent cannot be used to provide probable cause. And anything recovered during such a search is inadmissible as well as anything such evidence leads to. P-anus is speaking out of himself again.

 

[ShawnD1]

It doesn't even mean that, as has been previously stated refusal to grant consent cannot be used to provide probable cause. And anything recovered during such a search is inadmissible

All depends on how loose probable cause is in your area. If you're in some hick town where they don't take kindly to people who read books and such, probable cause could be anything.

You'll still be arrested if you get searched under probable cause and stuff is found, but it's up to the judge to decide whether or not the probable cause is valid. It's more likely to be "valid" if they really do find weird shit in your car :awe:

Also, finding weed in your car and having the judge agree that it was probable cause for whatever reason also means your cell phone data will be fair game. Hopefully your phone doesn't have any saved texts from your friends saying heaty things. "lol brah I totally claimed bus pass write offs on my taxes even though I don't take the bus!" (tax fraud)

 

[Paladin3]

The larger issue here is the current state of American law enforcement. Protecting and serving, helping people and making society a better place is no longer the primary goal.

Today's cops are taught to use every dirty trick in the book to cite or arrest as many people as possible. I've ridden with cops who have the best of intentions, but consider every person they see while on patrol as an opportunity to put someone in jail, and sadly, as long as they get the arrest it often justifies whatever means were necessary.

Making maters worse is the downturn in the economy which has forced many state, county and local governments to cut their law enforcement budgets, so more than ever cops see the continued revenue stream as vital for funding their departments and protecting their employment.

American citizen will continue to suffer until law enforcement culture is changed. We've come a long was since the Rodney King beating when that type of conduct was considered SOP, but we still have a long way to go.

 

[jonks]

All depends on how loose probable cause is in your area. If you're in some hick town where they don't take kindly to people who read books and such, probable cause could be anything.

You'll still be arrested if you get searched under probable cause and stuff is found, but it's up to the judge to decide whether or not the probable cause is valid. It's more likely to be "valid" if they really do find weird shit in your car :awe:

Also, finding weed in your car and having the judge agree that it was probable cause for whatever reason also means your cell phone data will be fair game. Hopefully your phone doesn't have any saved texts from your friends saying heaty things. "lol brah I totally claimed bus pass write offs on my taxes even though I don't take the bus!" (tax fraud)

If you live in the dystopia of your example illegal searches doesn't sound like it'd be a high priority on the problem scale.

 

[ch33zw1z]

It doesn't even mean that, as has been previously stated refusal to grant consent cannot be used to provide probable cause. And anything recovered during such a search is inadmissible as well as anything such evidence leads to. P-anus is speaking out of himself again.

yep.

 

[rudeguy]

yep.

but...but....but the cops are evil and they can scan your cell phone!!!11one@@@

 

[ch33zw1z]

but...but....but the cops are evil and they can scan your cell phone!!!11one@@@

Some cops are scumbags, and they ruin it for the rest of them. Yea, they can scan your cell phone if you let them...

 

[rudeguy]

Some cops are scumbags, and they ruin it for the rest of them. Yea, they can scan your cell phone if you let them...

that's the point. They can come into your house, take your food and kick your dog....if you let them. I can take your car, house, job, wife, PB&J sammich....if you let me. But no where is it being stated that the cops are making anyone let them access their cell phone data without permission.

Some cops are scumbags. Some are the nicest people I've ever met. But this thread isn't about the mentality of cops. Its about a fearmongering article and people taking things completely out of context.

 

[ch33zw1z]

that's the point. They can come into your house, take your food and kick your dog....if you let them. I can take your car, house, job, wife, PB&J sammich....if you let me. But no where is it being stated that the cops are making anyone let them access their cell phone data without permission.

Some cops are scumbags. Some are the nicest people I've ever met. But this thread isn't about the mentality of cops. Its about a fearmongering article and people taking things completely out of context.

I don't see any reason that the cops require a device like this, even if the citizen consents, I don't see any need for this.

 

[rudeguy]

I don't see any reason that the cops require a device like this, even if the citizen consents, I don't see any need for this.

because people were screaming for anti-texting laws. A Cellebrite is a perfect solution for being able to quickly prove or disprove if someone was texting while driving.

 

[ch33zw1z]

because people were screaming for anti-texting laws. A Cellebrite is a perfect solution for being able to quickly prove or disprove if someone was texting while driving.

Does it only pull texts? Doesn't sound like it.

 

[piasabird]

No one has ever asked to search my car????

 

[rudeguy]

Does it only pull texts? Doesn't sound like it.

When you plug a phone in, it asks you what you want to copy. So they could only be copying texts.

Read the article. It has one sentence about what is going on and the rest is about what Cellebrites can do. Not what the cops are actually doing.

 

[OCGuy]

The question is, why does rudeguy trust cops with such information?


You have serious issues if you dont see constitutional issues with this...

 

[NoStateofMind]

The question is, why does rudeguy trust cops with such information?


You have serious issues if you dont see constitutional issues with this...

From what I'm understanding is that he has no problem if people are voluntarily giving up said information. He's trying to point out the citizens compliance. Now if they were forcibly taking it without warrant or permission I'm sure he wouldn't agree.

 

[rudeguy]

From what I'm understanding is that he has no problem if people are voluntarily giving up said information. He's trying to point out the citizens compliance. Now if they were forcibly taking it without warrant or permission I'm sure he wouldn't agree.

100% correct

Show me where this is being done forcibly and that's a whole different issue

 

[iGas]

The larger issue here is the current state of American law enforcement. Protecting and serving, helping people and making society a better place is no longer the primary goal.

Today's cops are taught to use every dirty trick in the book to cite or arrest as many people as possible. I've ridden with cops who have the best of intentions, but consider every person they see while on patrol as an opportunity to put someone in jail, and sadly, as long as they get the arrest it often justifies whatever means were necessary.

Making maters worse is the downturn in the economy which has forced many state, county and local governments to cut their law enforcement budgets, so more than ever cops see the continued revenue stream as vital for funding their departments and protecting their employment.

American citizen will continue to suffer until law enforcement culture is changed. We've come a long was since the Rodney King beating when that type of conduct was considered SOP, but we still have a long way to go.

The traffic ticket quotas went up in my town a year after city police force created a separate traffic division. And, the police department hired 8 more cops just for the traffic division to create revenue for them.

 

[NoStateofMind]

The traffic ticket quotas went up in my town a year after city police force created a separate traffic division. And, the police department hired 8 more cops just for the traffic division to create revenue for them.

What city is this that I don't want to travel through?

 

[MrEgo]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=21443

Quoted from DailyTech:

Update 1: April 21, 2011 6:55 p.m. -

The Michigan State Police have shared with us the following statement:


Recent news coverage prompted by a press release issued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has brought speculation and caused inaccurate information to be reported about data extraction devices (DEDs) owned by the Michigan State Police (MSP).

To be clear, there have not been any allegations of wrongdoing by the MSP in the use of DEDs.

The MSP only uses the DEDs if a search warrant is obtained or if the person possessing the mobile device gives consent. The department*s internal directive is that the DEDs only be used by MSP specialty teams on criminal cases, such as crimes against children.

The DEDs are not being used to extract citizens' personal information during routine traffic stops.

The MSP does not possess DEDs that can extract data without the officer actually possessing the owner's mobile device. The DEDs utilized by the MSP cannot obtain information from mobile devices without the mobile device owner knowing.

Data extraction devices are commercially available and are routinely utilized by mobile communication device vendors nationwide to transmit data from one device to another when customers upgrade their mobile devices.

These DEDs have been adapted for law enforcement use due to the ever-increasing use of mobile communication devices by criminals to further their criminal activity and have become a powerful investigative tool used to obtain critical information from criminals.

Since 2008, the MSP has worked with the ACLU to narrow the focus, and thus reducing the cost, of its initial Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. To date, the MSP has fulfilled at least one ACLU FOIA request on this issue and has several far-lower cost requests awaiting payment to begin processing. The MSP provides information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act. As with any request, there may be a processing fee to search for, retrieve, review, examine, and separate exempt material, if any.

The implication by the ACLU that the MSP uses these devices "quietly to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches" is untrue, and this divisive tactic unjustly harms police and community relations.

Note, as the ACLU and this article state, the police have to ask a citizen to get their phone during an investigation.

The police department's accounting that the device is not used during traffic stops reports with local reports and local testimony. It is unclear whether this is due to confusion in the department, officers breaking with protocol, or problems with eyewitness credibility.

The statement does not state whether or not charges of obstruction of justice can be filed against citizens refusing to part with their mobile devices.

It also makes it clear that the full body of the collected information has not been released, as the ACLU has accounted.

We will make more information available as we receive it

Minor details, right? Let's freak out some more. OUTRAGE!!!

 

[rudeguy]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=21443

Quoted from DailyTech:





Minor details, right? Let's freak out some more. OUTRAGE!!!

but...but...but they can scan our cell phones!!!111one@@@@

 

[Nintendesert]

Look at the idiots that are giving consent because they think if they don't then that's probable cause and the cops will search it anyways. Consent isn't consent when it is coerced and that's exactly what cops do. People are afraid of cops and getting in trouble and give up rights they had no business giving up. Trained interrogators can make someone admit to anything, and against a scared normal citizen and cop can get them to consent to just about anything.

 

[ch33zw1z]

When you plug a phone in, it asks you what you want to copy. So they could only be copying texts.

That indicates to me that you would trust a police officer. That is your mistake, they are not your friend. You hand over that phone, they will take it all...no doubt in my mind.