GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-05-2012, 19:14   #1
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,679
Blog Entries: 1


Cops can read phone texts, set text traps

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-574...ing-text-trap/

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 19:23   #2
Gun Shark
Senior Member
 
Gun Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,924
Send a message via AIM to Gun Shark Send a message via MSN to Gun Shark Send a message via Yahoo to Gun Shark


My phone is locked so does that mean that they would need to get a warrant for my phone? I'm not personally worried about it, that said. I dissagree completely with that decision and think that this will go all the way to the Supreme Court of the land.
__________________
It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." --Thomas Jefferson

"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter."
Gun Shark is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 19:44   #3
DOC44
Senior Member
 
DOC44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gun Shark View Post
My phone is locked so does that mean that they would need to get a warrant for my phone? I'm not personally worried about it, that said. I dissagree completely with that decision and think that this will go all the way to the Supreme Court of the land.
and who knows which way that loose cannon will fire

Doc44
__________________
Have Gun Will Travel
DOC44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 20:21   #4
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,137
OMG..... 2 bad 4 us
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 21:08   #5
Syclone538
Senior Member
 
Syclone538's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
...
Roden appealed on the basis that the text messages should have been suppressed as evidence because they were protected under the Washington Privacy Act, which requires that police get consent before intercepting a private communication transmitted by telephone.
...
Pretty clear to me.

Quote:
...
But the Washington Court of Appeals disagreed and said that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy with text messages just as there isn't with voice messages left on an answering machine that could be overheard by anyone.
...
That's the problem with "expectation of privacy", if you live in a police state then you have none.
__________________
Some people want freedom, even for those they disagree with, and some don't.
Do lot Do so sinh Ban buon quan ao Chup anh cho be
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAcop View Post
...
The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.
...
Syclone538 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 21:14   #6
G17Jake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 7,137
What does the privacy policy say?
G17Jake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 23:21   #7
CAcop
Senior Member
 
CAcop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 21,296
Courts have been consistently ruling texts and phone logs are free game search incident to arrest. Of course the closer to the arrest the more likely it will hold up.

When it comes to email, internet history, and other searches they want a warrant.

In the end if a warrant is neccessary for any search it will esseintally become routine to take phones as evidence, obtain a warrant, and then search. Cell warrants aren't that hard, at least the way I do them, it is more of a time issue. Of course once we get a warrant everything is free game.
__________________
I wonder if your assessment of "The Wizard of Oz" would sound something like "A teenaged orphan runs away with three psychotic AD/HD patients and a little dog. She kills the first two women she meets." --Sinecure 07/03/2006
Freakin' awsome!! Kickin it old school. Hot sheet on the dash. The report was probably only two sentences. Long live Rencko and Bobbie Hill!--WhiskeyT
CAcop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 00:25   #8
Stubudd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kennesaw GA
Posts: 4,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by DOC44 View Post
and who knows which way that loose cannon will fire

Doc44
Stubudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 06:24   #9
Brucev
Senior Member
 
Brucev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,189
Hum... predictable. The law&order pure bloods justify any procedure regardless of how it violates the clear intent of the COTUS. And, predictably... those who value the clear intent of the COTUS decry such invasive procedures. Predictable. Entirely predictable. The one difference is... those who would prize the COTUS over the convenience of police/prosecutors do so out of a genuine concern for the rights of all Americans under the COTUS. Those who would allow any procedure in the name of law&order are so concerned to protect society from crime real or imagined, that they are willing to see the COTUS violated and society damaged... all in the name of law&order.
Brucev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 06:35   #10
Goaltender66
NRA GoldenEagle
 
Goaltender66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the cultural penumbra of DC
Posts: 14,706
Before everyone gets all bent out of shape over privacy concerns and invoking the COTUS, let's look at the actual fact situation:

Quote:
Police had arrested Daniel Lee on drug charges and one officer searched through the text messages on Lee's iPhone, found some suspicious messages from a "Z-Jon" and texted from Lee's phone to ask if Z-Jon "needed more." Then, according to court papers, Z-Jon followed up with a message using drug slang and agreed to meet up with the police officer posing as Lee. That led to the arrest of Jonathan Roden, aka Z-Jon, and his subsequent conviction for attempted possession of heroin
Not seeing how anything was violated. The police were certainly allowed to look through Lee's cell phone. The tactic of sending a text from Lee's phone to Roden is also allowed. The search of Roden's phone was allowed since Roden met up with the police for the purpose of scoring some smack and was arrested.

How does this "violate the clear intent of the COTUS?" What was unreasonable about any of the searches of the cell phones?
__________________
The US Air Force has started including tax protester literature in the emergency supplies of their aircraft. If the plane crashes in a remote area, the crew is instructed to read the pamphlets and Goalie will be along shortly to rebut them.
Goaltender66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 07:26   #11
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucev View Post
Hum... predictable. The law&order pure bloods justify any procedure regardless of how it violates the clear intent of the COTUS. And, predictably... those who value the clear intent of the COTUS decry such invasive procedures. Predictable. Entirely predictable. The one difference is... those who would prize the COTUS over the convenience of police/prosecutors do so out of a genuine concern for the rights of all Americans under the COTUS. Those who would allow any procedure in the name of law&order are so concerned to protect society from crime real or imagined, that they are willing to see the COTUS violated and society damaged... all in the name of law&order.
That's not the only thing that is predictable.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 07:38   #12
71Commander
Senior Member
 
71Commander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Tennessee & Michigan
Posts: 1,474
Quote:
Cops can read phone texts

Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2
I love the irony.
__________________
US Army 1970-72
USPSA CRO
Patriot Guard rider
NRA member
71Commander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 07:38   #13
DOC44
Senior Member
 
DOC44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 10,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
That's not the only thing that is predictable.
I see what you did

Doc44
__________________
Have Gun Will Travel
DOC44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 09:56   #14
Brucev
Senior Member
 
Brucev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 9,189
Not seeing how anything was violated. The police were certainly allowed to look through Lee's cell phone. The tactic of sending a text from Lee's phone to Roden is also allowed. The search of Roden's phone was allowed since Roden met up with the police for the purpose of scoring some smack and was arrested.

How does this "violate the clear intent of the COTUS?" What was unreasonable about any of the searches of the cell phones?

If you can't see it, then you need to go to the eye doctor because you are blind as a bat.
Brucev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:19   #15
Goaltender66
NRA GoldenEagle
 
Goaltender66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the cultural penumbra of DC
Posts: 14,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucev View Post
Not seeing how anything was violated. The police were certainly allowed to look through Lee's cell phone. The tactic of sending a text from Lee's phone to Roden is also allowed. The search of Roden's phone was allowed since Roden met up with the police for the purpose of scoring some smack and was arrested.

How does this "violate the clear intent of the COTUS?" What was unreasonable about any of the searches of the cell phones?

If you can't see it, then you need to go to the eye doctor because you are blind as a bat.
If you can't explain it then perhaps it's not as clear cut as you're presenting.

Seriously. Point out how it's repugnant to the COTUS to search the effects of someone under arrest. What, specifically, in this situation goes against the clear intent of the COTUS?
__________________
The US Air Force has started including tax protester literature in the emergency supplies of their aircraft. If the plane crashes in a remote area, the crew is instructed to read the pamphlets and Goalie will be along shortly to rebut them.
Goaltender66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:43   #16
CAcop
Senior Member
 
CAcop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 21,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucev View Post
Hum... predictable. The law&order pure bloods justify any procedure regardless of how it violates the clear intent of the COTUS. And, predictably... those who value the clear intent of the COTUS decry such invasive procedures. Predictable. Entirely predictable. The one difference is... those who would prize the COTUS over the convenience of police/prosecutors do so out of a genuine concern for the rights of all Americans under the COTUS. Those who would allow any procedure in the name of law&order are so concerned to protect society from crime real or imagined, that they are willing to see the COTUS violated and society damaged... all in the name of law&order.
You know who benefits the most from the exceptions to the 4th amendment?

Judges.

If they didn't carve out the exceptions we would have to wake one up every time we detained or arrested a person or stopped a vehicle and saw contraband in plain sight or observed a crime in progress inside a home. In fact it might happen so often judges would have to ride along with each officer. The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.

So get off the cross we need the wood.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
__________________
I wonder if your assessment of "The Wizard of Oz" would sound something like "A teenaged orphan runs away with three psychotic AD/HD patients and a little dog. She kills the first two women she meets." --Sinecure 07/03/2006
Freakin' awsome!! Kickin it old school. Hot sheet on the dash. The report was probably only two sentences. Long live Rencko and Bobbie Hill!--WhiskeyT
CAcop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:44   #17
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goaltender66 View Post
If you can't explain it then perhaps it's not as clear cut as you're presenting.
Maybe I am missing something, but here goes.

Cops grab drug dealer.
They arrest drug dealer.
Drug dealer either co-operates or cops get warrant for accessing phone.
Cops send message from phone to druggy.
Cops receive message from druggy.


I don't see this as a violation of search and censure laws.
But it may be entrapment.

They also don't know that the druggy sent the message.
So the guy shows up to pick up his drugs the deal must go through. So you have him.


One more thing, who was billed for the messages sent from the drug dealers phone?
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.

Last edited by RWBlue; 07-06-2012 at 10:48..
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 10:56   #18
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAcop View Post
You know who benefits the most from the exceptions to the 4th amendment?

Judges.

If they didn't carve out the exceptions we would have to wake one up every time we detained or arrested a person or stopped a vehicle and saw contraband in plain sight or observed a crime in progress inside a home. In fact it might happen so often judges would have to ride along with each officer. The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.

So get off the cross we need the wood.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Are you claiming that the digital information in a phone or computer is in plain sight?
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:02   #19
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 20,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWBlue View Post
Are you claiming that the digital information in a phone or computer is in plain sight?
Plain sight is irrelevant in a search incident to arrest. That's why we get to take your wallet out of your pocket, and your stolen credit cards out of your wallet.

ETA: generic "you", of course.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Last edited by Sam Spade; 07-06-2012 at 11:03..
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:17   #20
Blankshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 116
I deffinately don't see it as a violation of privacy in any way, but i do see it as a form of identity theft. The cops using the phone is not the problem, but the cops using the phone to knowingly acting as someone else is what I would see as wrong.

The article compared it to leaving a voicemail, but a voicemail would be different in multiple ways. A call is more likely to possibly be someone different than who the number is listed to, the voice alone would be an identifier, and it would be illegal for the police to claim to be (insert drug dealer name here). By sending a text without indentifying themselves as someone else, they knew the buyer would assume it was the dealer.

I can see it going either way, but it is a little sketchy. I mean if you walked into the police chiefs office and asked to use his computer then sent an email from his open account, chances are the person on the other end would assume you were the police chief. A little more extreme, but ideally the same action.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Blankshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:40   #21
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,679
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blankshooter View Post
I deffinately don't see it as a violation of privacy in any way, but i do see it as a form of identity theft. The cops using the phone is not the problem, but the cops using the phone to knowingly acting as someone else is what I would see as wrong.
Are you guilty of ID theft because you use a name not your own on an Internet forum?


Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:42   #22
CAcop
Senior Member
 
CAcop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California
Posts: 21,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWBlue View Post
Are you claiming that the digital information in a phone or computer is in plain sight?
There are many exceptions to the search warrant requirement. Read the link below and think about how hard it would be to get a warrant for officers on the streets without a judge being physically present.

http://caselaw4cops.net/articles/exceptions.html

Judges went to law school to avoid having to work nights, weekends, and holidays.
__________________
I wonder if your assessment of "The Wizard of Oz" would sound something like "A teenaged orphan runs away with three psychotic AD/HD patients and a little dog. She kills the first two women she meets." --Sinecure 07/03/2006
Freakin' awsome!! Kickin it old school. Hot sheet on the dash. The report was probably only two sentences. Long live Rencko and Bobbie Hill!--WhiskeyT
CAcop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:44   #23
oldman11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,270
It sure seems like the lawyers and judges and the courts are doing everything they can to protect the criminals.
oldman11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 11:51   #24
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 20,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldman11 View Post
It sure seems like the lawyers and judges and the courts are doing everything they can to protect the criminals.
Well, that's the micro application of it. The bigger picture is that the slime serve as crash test dummies for the framework that protects actual taxpayers.

In spite of the interwebz rhetoric, there just aren't that many good people getting violated to make the rules we need. So, we use rapists like Miranda, robbers like Terry and so on to set the framework for the rest of us.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 12:28   #25
Blankshooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Are you guilty of ID theft because you use a name not your own on an Internet forum?


Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2
Possibly, that's the difficulty of regulating many forms of technology, is that it is very difficult to know where to draw the line. You aren't violating anything by using another name online, but you are committing indentity theft by using someone else's name with the intention to deceive.

Using a screen name is assumed to be just that, a nickname. But using any symbol, image, name, email, text, watermark, whatever you want to call it with the intent to be acknowledged as someone else, yes. That is identity theft

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
Blankshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:17.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,175
338 Members
837 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42