Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Prosecutors Drop Key Trial Evidence to Avoid Explaining Stingray Use

posted by janrinok on Wednesday November 19 2014, @10:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the doesn't-the-oath-require-the-whole-truth? dept.

Serp Kannella the Odious writes:

In a Baltimore trial courtroom on Monday, a local judge threatened to hold a police detective in contempt of court for refusing to disclose how police located a 16-year-old robbery suspect’s phone.

But rather than disclose the possible use of a Stingray*, also known as a cell site simulator, Detective John L. Haley cited a non-disclosure agreement, likely with a federal law enforcement agency (such as the FBI) and/or the Harris Corporation, since the company is one of the dominant manufacturers of such devices. Stingrays can be used to determine a phone’s location, and they can also intercept calls and text messages.

Baltimore Circuit Judge Barry G. Williams retorted, "You don't have a non-disclosure agreement with the court," according to the Baltimore Sun.

* [Submitter's Note: Surely there's a joke about fishing expeditions to be had there.]

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Prosecutors Drop Key Trial Evidence to Avoid Explaining Stingray Use | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 19 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by Whoever on Thursday November 20 2014, @02:02AM

    by Whoever (4524) on Thursday November 20 2014, @02:02AM (#117943) Journal

    How long before people start appealing convictions based on the presumption that the cops lied on the stand about how they got evidence?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Funny=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday November 20 2014, @02:51AM

    by sjames (2882) on Thursday November 20 2014, @02:51AM (#117962) Journal

    Sadly, it seems like that assumption is not an unreasonable default condition.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @10:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @10:50AM (#118060)

    http://www.copblock.org/85284/wrongfully-arrested-motorcyclist-sues-dallas-county-sheriffs-deputy-for-1-million/ [copblock.org]

    Eventually Westbrook came up with one, accusing Moore of having a partially obscured license plate. “That was indeed a strange charge for [Westbrook] to make,” says the suit, “considering that before he stopped [Moore], he had radioed his police dispatcher telling the dispatcher the license plate number of [Moore's] vehicle

    They lie way too often for me to trust them. But the solution can't be to not trust them. Just have to figure out a way to make cops more trustworthy.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @04:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 20 2014, @04:27PM (#118153)

    Probably about the same time they start prosecuting cops for perjury.