3 ms·

The difference isn't so much whether they conduct surveillance, within or on the edges of the law, but whether they can use whatever information they find. If

by pcrh 11y ago

The difference isn't so much whether they conduct surveillance, within or on the edges of the law, but whether they can use whatever information they find. If the information that is found cannot subsequently be used to (legally) further whatever agenda they have, then it is of very much diminished value, and its collection will receive less support. Small steps...

patzerhacker 11y ago
Good for each of us now, but what of the people that were convicted on evidence found through parallel construction in the past that might not even be aware of it or able to prove it? What exactly can the courts do to help those people?
Pyxl101 11y ago
That's not the only issue. Parallel construction is also a concern - a process where the government "launders" information received unconstitutionally, such as lying and claiming it was from a confidential informant; or using the illegally received information to give them insight into how to pursue building a "clean" line of evidence that appears to be from scratch but isn't, such as "coincidentally" stopping a particular vehicle for a traffic violation, when investigators know the vehicle will be breaking the law from their dragnet surveillance (e.g., smuggling drugs). In some cases, these agencies have lied to the courts about how they obtained their evidence. > But instead of being truthful with criminal defendants, judges, and even prosecutors about where the information came from, DEA agents are reportedly obscuring the source of these tips. For example, a law enforcement agent could receive a tip from SOD—which SOD, in turn, got from the NSA—to look for a specific car at a certain place. But instead of relying solely on that tip, the agent would be instructed to find his or her own reason to stop and search the car. Agents are directed to keep SOD under wraps and not mention it in "investigative reports, affidavits, discussions with prosecutors and courtroom testimony," according to Reuters. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intel...
- pcrh 11y ago
  Sure, but its a small step in the right direction. Outright parallel construction is evidently illegal, and if is caught would be a major embarrassment. The other problems are age old and not specific to internet surveillance.

by pcrh 11y ago

patzerhacker 11y ago

Good for each of us now, but what of the people that were convicted on evidence found through parallel construction in the past that might not even be aware of it or able to prove it? What exactly can the courts do to help those people?

Pyxl101 11y ago

That's not the only issue. Parallel construction is also a concern - a process where the government "launders" information received unconstitutionally, such as lying and claiming it was from a confidential informant; or using the illegally received information to give them insight into how to pursue building a "clean" line of evidence that appears to be from scratch but isn't, such as "coincidentally" stopping a particular vehicle for a traffic violation, when investigators know the vehicle will be breaking the law from their dragnet surveillance (e.g., smuggling drugs). In some cases, these agencies have lied to the courts about how they obtained their evidence. > But instead of being truthful with criminal defendants, judges, and even prosecutors about where the information came from, DEA agents are reportedly obscuring the source of these tips. For example, a law enforcement agent could receive a tip from SOD—which SOD, in turn, got from the NSA—to look for a specific car at a certain place. But instead of relying solely on that tip, the agent would be instructed to find his or her own reason to stop and search the car. Agents are directed to keep SOD under wraps and not mention it in "investigative reports, affidavits, discussions with prosecutors and courtroom testimony," according to Reuters. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-laundering https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intel...

pcrh 11y ago
Sure, but its a small step in the right direction. Outright parallel construction is evidently illegal, and if is caught would be a major embarrassment. The other problems are age old and not specific to internet surveillance.