Police Blotter is a weekly CNET News.com report on the intersection of technology and the law.
What: Armed-robbery defendants object to the use of their text messages as evidence in their criminal trials.
When: U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rules on February 12.
Outcome: Convictions upheld.
What happened, according to court documents:
Two men convicted of armed robbery made the mistake of using text messages--which their wireless provider turned over to police when asked.
Derrick McCreary and his co-defendant, Jonathan Hunter, were accused of masterminding heists at credit unions, with one article in Credit Union Journal reporting that they made off with almost $300,000.
Prosecutors obtained the contents of the archived text messages by sending a grand jury subpoena to SkyTel. McCreary and Hunter were each convicted of one count of conspiracy, two counts of bank robbery, and two counts of using a firearm in a violent crime. They appealed.
This isn't the first time the Police Blotter has covered how telecommunications providers store copies of text messages--and how police have obtained them to use in criminal prosecutions.
Some of the ground rules remain unsettled, with defense attorneys frequently arguing that privacy laws and the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment suggest that archived text messages should be--legally speaking--difficult to obtain. Police, on the other hand, believe that they should be much easier to obtain.
In last year's wire fraud case, defense attorneys said prosecutors should have requested a proper search warrant signed by a judge. They lost, with the judge saying only a subpoena signed by a prosecutor was needed.
In the current armed-robbery case, McCreary, one of the defendants, asked the district court judge in January 2005 to suppress the text messages obtained from SkyTel on the grounds that the subpoena violated the Fourth Amendment and the Stored Communications Act. Hunter joined that motion. (SkyTel sells pagers and two-way messaging devices.)
In May 2005, U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Martone denied that request. Earlier this month, so did the 9th Circuit, which concluded that the evidence against McCreary was so overwhelming, it wasn't even going to bother worrying about text messages.
Hunter, the other armed-robbery defendant in the same proceeding, claimed that the text messages were improperly authenticated and that the full contents, rather than a summary, should have been admitted as evidence. The 9th Circuit rejected his argument as well.
Excerpts from the 9th Circuit's decision in U.S. v. McCreary:
The investigation of the two robberies revealed that McCreary and his co-defendant, Jonathan Hunter, communicated by text messages in planning the two robberies. The government had a grand-jury subpoena issued to the service provider, MCI/SkyTel, seeking the toll records, including the text of the messages.
McCreary contends that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in these messages and that the acquisition of these messages by a grand-jury subpoena without a search warrant violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment. He contends that to the extent 18 U.S.C. Section 2703 of the Stored Communications Act authorized obtaining the text messages without probable cause and a search warrant, it violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
We do not reach this contention because we conclude that any error in admission of the text messages was harmless. The government presented overwhelming separate, independent evidence of McCreary's guilt. The government presented the testimony of two of the co-conspirators, who participated in the robberies detailing McCreary's leadership in planning the robberies, providing clothes and guns, and giving instructions as to how the robberies were to be conducted and the getaway to be achieved. McCreary's participation was also corroborated by other substantial evidence.
Excerpts from the 9th Circuit's decision in U.S. v. Hunter:
Hunter claims that the text message testimony was improperly authenticated and that the text messages were improperly admitted because only summarized excerpts were admitted. However, these claims lack merit.
"A document can be authenticated by the testimony of a witness with knowledge." United States v. Workinger. Here, the government properly authenticated the text messages by using the testimonies of the senior manager of the pagers' service provider, the FBI agent who compiled the records, and Hunter's co-conspirators.
Excerpts of a compilation of evidence are admissible. United States v. Soulard, 730 F.2d 1292, 1300-01 (9th Cir.1984) (holding that a summary chart of evidence was properly admitted). If the defendant objects to the summary of the evidence, he cannot have the evidence excluded, but instead can compel the government to introduce the rest of the incomplete evidence. Id. at 1301. Therefore, the court properly admitted the excerpts of text messages.
What country were they in? In this country (US), there is no such thing--particularly if the technology used for communication is less than 20 years old.
There guys were criminals and got what they deserved. But the arguments they made about the privacy of text-messaging got no attention. We all have a significantly reduced expectation of privacy as a result of cell phones, internet and text-messaging.
Expectation of Privacy in the USA? NFW, No...Way!!
They should realize there is no such thing as privacy when it comes to anything involving the wireless or wired telephone network or the Internet. But to use text messages to plan their heist, it goes on "your permanent record" as they used to say---give them 20 years for robbery; but give them life for stupidity. Let's hope they haven't sired any offspring.
The "new professionalism" cop [and supreme court] harbor the notion that if, you appear guilty in their minds that, constitutional violations are acceptable.
Then if they are wrong either a bullet to the head of the defendant or a simple apology for the dead dog and ransacked,bullet riddled home should be acceptable.
we have come full circle to the days of law by "the crown". Shoot first ask questions later.
They may have been right this time but, how do we know? There are no constitutional protections in place therefore, any evidence is good evidence.
Welcome to the 21st century privacy no longer exists
People can be tracked via their web searching habits as well. All of that is public info for anyone who wants it. Most of that stuff is sold from Internet Databases for $35 and all you need to track someone is their email address, pay the $35, and get their Internet History.
Cell phone text messages are stored the same way, and also available for purchase. That is how cell phone companies target text message advertising to you, based on your prior text message history. It is also how email spam and Google AdWords work as well based on web browsing history.
Privacy is an illusion, it never existed. Anyone can be tracked even if they use anonymous means, eventually you can track the IP address they used even if you have to pull it out of proxy server logs. Once they got your IP address, they can tell what country you live in and what part of that country you are from. Then your ISP can tell them what your personal info is, by request, sometimes your ISP sells that personal info to the highest bidders, and Internet databases sell it for profit to spammers, etc.
This sounds over the line by the authorities. What would be different if we would do the same to the whitehouse or elected officials and pull up messages on their PDA's or textmessage history if the phone is paid for by the taxpayer. I see nothing illegal with the last one if they are not paying their own bill. Imagine the dirt you could find.
The entire point is privacy. We expect message logs to be erased. FISA should not have permission to dig unless you are dirty as the garbage dump. Same with emails.
I guess this tells us we need to learn a new code when sending messages to keep the suits off our back.
The two telecom carriers will carry a next-generation iPad running on the fast, next-generation wireless technology, sources tell The Wall Street Journal.
Google creates an animated doodle that features a boy, a girl, Google's search engine, and a jump rope. But might there be darker, more analytical, more troubling interpretations to this tale?
Hamza Kashgari's tweets of an imaginary conversation with the Prophet Mohammad are viewed as blasphemous by the Saudi Arabian government. Now he faces trial with a possible death sentence.
The Silicon Valley online payments startup grew by 1,000 percent last year and is hopeful it can repeat that level of growth this year. To do that, it's had to move away from its early friends-and-family roots and embrace small businesses.
Chamtech's spray-on antenna uses a nano material to provide a low-power boost to antenna range. The wireless-in-a-can product may some day bring an end to unsightly cell towers.
EnerG2 opens a plant to make an engineered carbon that will improve performance of energy storage devices and make storage for start-stop hybrid cars less expensive.
There guys were criminals and got what they deserved. But the arguments they made about the privacy of text-messaging got no attention. We all have a significantly reduced expectation of privacy as a result of cell phones, internet and text-messaging.
Then if they are wrong either a bullet to the head of the defendant or a simple apology for the dead dog and ransacked,bullet riddled home should be acceptable.
we have come full circle to the days of law by "the crown". Shoot first ask questions later.
They may have been right this time but, how do we know? There are no constitutional protections in place therefore, any evidence is good evidence.
Cell phone text messages are stored the same way, and also available for purchase. That is how cell phone companies target text message advertising to you, based on your prior text message history. It is also how email spam and Google AdWords work as well based on web browsing history.
Privacy is an illusion, it never existed. Anyone can be tracked even if they use anonymous means, eventually you can track the IP address they used even if you have to pull it out of proxy server logs. Once they got your IP address, they can tell what country you live in and what part of that country you are from. Then your ISP can tell them what your personal info is, by request, sometimes your ISP sells that personal info to the highest bidders, and Internet databases sell it for profit to spammers, etc.
different if we would do the same to the whitehouse or elected
officials and pull up messages on their PDA's or textmessage
history if the phone is paid for by the taxpayer. I see nothing
illegal with the last one if they are not paying their own bill.
Imagine the dirt you could find.
The entire point is privacy. We expect message logs to be
erased. FISA should not have permission to dig unless you are
dirty as the garbage dump. Same with emails.
I guess this tells us we need to learn a new code when sending
messages to keep the suits off our back.