Judge Throws Out Evidence After FBI Refuses To Reveal Tor Vulnerability

[Lucian Armasu]

A judge canceled a warrant and evidence that the FBI obtained through obscure hacking methods in a child pornography case.

Judge Throws Out Evidence After FBI Refuses To Reveal Tor Vulnerability : Read more

 

[turkey3_scratch]

The FBI hacking people like that, I would think, is an illegal search and seizure to begin with, would it not be? With that, any evidence obtained via illegal search and seizure cannot be held up in the court of law anyway.

 

[Honis]

They originally had a warrant to place the malware on the target computers so the use and gathering was legal. At this point, since the warrant is cancelled, if they continued to gather information then it is illegal search and seizure.

 

[ahnilated]

Well if they get a "legal" warrant it would be legal. The problem is they rarely tell the judge the truth about what they are looking for or that the person is accused of.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

They originally had a warrant to place the malware on the target computers so the use and gathering was legal. At this point, since the warrant is cancelled, if they continued to gather information then it is illegal search and seizure.

That clears things up, thanks.

 

[syrious1]

"There seems to be an increasing trend of the U.S. government trying to hide information about how it gathers evidence through new surveillance techniques. "

Because they're doing it illegally.

 

[vudtmere]

They originally had a warrant to place the malware on the target computers so the use and gathering was legal.

Getting a warrant to place malware on a computer is like getting a warrant to hide spy cameras all over someone's house. It isn't legitimate.

The police state needs to be reigned in. Thought crimes are not real crimes anyway. Unless someone directly infringes on another's life, liberty, or property then they are not guilty of any crime no matter how despicable of a person they are.

 

[bak0n]

I think this also comes to an issue of possible planted evidence as well. If they aren't going to open up to share what they've done, how do you know exactly what they did?

 

[f-14]

I think this also comes to an issue of possible planted evidence as well. If they aren't going to open up to share what they've done, how do you know exactly what they did?

that is a good point if the FBI set up a kiddie porn site or uploaded kiddie porn then the FBI is just as guilty as their suspects, actually more so than their suspects.
now if they set up clickbait they're in the clear. as long as it's something you could find at a beach with certain caption blocking words or ad banners over key areas then monitoring who is going to the site and what they are clicking on that the FBI uploaded is still legal, so long as the FBI didn't break the law to create entrapment.

 

[f-14]

i also think there's is alot more going on here that is being said if the FBI was using the excuse of an on going investigation to hide the vulnerability or planted evidence/clickbait and that the warrant was thrown out now due to the fact a specific name was given for the warrant and the FBI was still using that warrant as a sheild to catch others mystery people who just showed up on the FBI radar for the first time or had long ago vanished and now reappeared.
now if their reason for doing so was to locate an abducted missing child that was being exploited and the FBI won't reveal that information so as not to let the defendant get word out and tip off the perp(s)/human traffickers who stole that child so long ago and had resurfaced....well then i would excuse that no matter what a judge said or did, i would even be glad to help out to catch them.

 

[f-14]

i also think there's is alot more going on here that is being said if the FBI was using the excuse of an on going investigation to hide the vulnerability or planted evidence/clickbait and that the warrant was thrown out now due to the fact a specific name was given for the warrant and the FBI was still using that warrant as a sheild to catch others mystery people who just showed up on the FBI radar for the first time or had long ago vanished and now reappeared.
now if their reason for doing so was to locate an abducted missing child that was being exploited and the FBI won't reveal that information so as not to let the defendant get word out and tip off the perp(s)/human traffickers who stole that child so long ago and had resurfaced....well then i would excuse that no matter what a judge said or did, i would even be glad to help out to catch them.

 

[atavax]

That the FBI won't disclose security breaches that are threats to millions of Americans...The FBI is no longer about protecting American Citizens. Its about putting as much of us behind bars as possible.

 

[H4rdware]

kiddie porn... all involved should be put in a dungeon UNDER the prison.

Regardless of this, I shiver to think what the FBI is capable of, especially if they are allowed to operate, prosecute and incarcerate without proving their case, without divulging HOW evidence was recovered etc.

What would stop them from say, flagging someone for whatever reason, sending them an email with a kiddie porn attachment, then busting the person for kiddie porn and suppressing all the circumstances under the blanket national security, or operational security cop out?

We are coming to a point where our "protectors" are becoming the largest threat.

 

[mrmotion]

I'm all for privacy, but it seems the bigger picture is criminal underworld is technologically advanced past where we have any hope of legally being. You want the FBI be legal in all they do, but the line is moving, and our gov't has no chance unless people are to willing bend. How do you suppose the FBI legally catch these people? If you limit their options to the strict letter of the law, then they have no chance and people like this guy will go free.

My 2 cents.

 

[anneoneamouse]

The judge had already provided the FBI with a warrant to monitor the suspect. If the judge really felt it necessary to understand the technical details of how that monitoring was going to occur, the time to have done that was prior to granting the warrant; not after the fact in an open courtroom.

 

[atavax]

I'm all for privacy, but it seems the bigger picture is criminal underworld is technologically advanced past where we have any hope of legally being. You want the FBI be legal in all they do, but the line is moving, and our gov't has no chance unless people are to willing bend. How do you suppose the FBI legally catch these people? If you limit their options to the strict letter of the law, then they have no chance and people like this guy will go free.

My 2 cents.

The thing is crime is down across the board. We are safer now than ever in human history. But if you listen to the tale the media and government spins, you would never know it. They are selling fear to us to get us to give them as much power as possible.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I'm all for privacy, but it seems the bigger picture is criminal underworld is technologically advanced past where we have any hope of legally being. You want the FBI be legal in all they do, but the line is moving, and our gov't has no chance unless people are to willing bend. How do you suppose the FBI legally catch these people? If you limit their options to the strict letter of the law, then they have no chance and people like this guy will go free.

My 2 cents.

The thing is crime is down across the board. We are safer now than ever in human history. But if you listen to the tale the media and government spins, you would never know it. They are selling fear to us to get us to give them as much power as possible.

^^This is 100% true. Since the late 90s, crime has dramatically decreased in the U.S. each consecutive year. However, the media shows 5X as many violent crimes on the news as it did then.

Many people fall under the dramatic fallacy of crime, and the ingenuity fallacy. Criminals are not geniuses, crime is very instinctive. Also, what the FBI primarily does is very boring. It's mostly a bunch of guys in an office recording statistics known as the uniform crime rate.

 

[Math Geek]

the reason the evidence was thrown out was not an issue of legality of the warrant (though that has also been questioned and dismissed as well in other cases) but rather in this case it has to do with the exploit they used in tor to do what they did.

the defense has the right to question how they did it and see if it was within the scope of the warrant. since the fbi won't disclouse how they did it, then the defendant can't exercise his right to cross examine the evidence against him. notice the judge did not dismiss the case here but rather threw out the evidence from the warrant. the prosecutor can still come up with another way to bring th eevidence to court if they can get to it another way.

this is the same as the cell phone tower spoofing they do. they know anything they find can't be used. but they use the info to guide them to the evidence in a legal way they can bring up in court. when this first came to light a long time ago i was confused as to how they were allowed to run a kiddi porn site for 2-3 weeks. that right there is where it becomes illegal and EVERYTHING after that is thrown out.

i have no sympathy for the kiddi porn people and would love to see them removed from Earth with extreme prejudice but i still believe in the law of the land and want it done in a legal way.

 

[mrmotion]

the reason the evidence was thrown out was not an issue of legality of the warrant (though that has also been questioned and dismissed as well in other cases) but rather in this case it has to do with the exploit they used in tor to do what they did.

the defense has the right to question how they did it and see if it was within the scope of the warrant. since the fbi won't disclouse how they did it, then the defendant can't exercise his right to cross examine the evidence against him. notice the judge did not dismiss the case here but rather threw out the evidence from the warrant. the prosecutor can still come up with another way to bring th eevidence to court if they can get to it another way.

this is the same as the cell phone tower spoofing they do. they know anything they find can't be used. but they use the info to guide them to the evidence in a legal way they can bring up in court. when this first came to light a long time ago i was confused as to how they were allowed to run a kiddi porn site for 2-3 weeks. that right there is where it becomes illegal and EVERYTHING after that is thrown out.

i have no sympathy for the kiddi porn people and would love to see them removed from Earth with extreme prejudice but i still believe in the law of the land and want it done in a legal way.

But if we are constantly living in this outdated law system we have trying to catch people who don't care about fair, we are going to have to rewrite what is legal. And some inoccent people may lose privacy along the way.

 

[atavax]

But if we are constantly living in this outdated law system we have trying to catch people who don't care about fair, we are going to have to rewrite what is legal. And some inoccent people may lose privacy along the way.

Maybe eventually we will. But if we have to grant the government more power and give up a significant amount of privacy, you know who has to be the first people to lose their privacy? The government. The more power they have, the more prevalent corruption will likely be. The Snowden leaks revealed NSA spying that was ruled in courts to be unconstitutional. If Snowden hadn't leaked what he did, the government would still be violating our constitutionally protected right to privacy without our knowledge. If the government can do that with 1 constitutionally protected right, they can do it with any; voting, free speech, carry arms, ect. For the government to still be a democracy, we have to know what rights we do and don't have. We have to know how the government is governing us. The excuse that they don't want criminals to know their methods or that if we aren't doing anything wrong we have nothing to fear is not good enough.

 

[Math Geek]

i refuse to give up an inch of my freedom in the hopes that it "may" stop someone from doing something bad. i did not spend 10 years running around combat zones in the army and defending our country to sit here and watch it all go away because someone is scared of a bad guy or two.

the gov has taken too much of our privacy already and already does WAY too much behind the scenes we know nothing about. i refuse to hand over even more of my life in the hopes we'll be "safer" because of it. i'm plenty safe and don't lose a single second of sleep worrying about what someone else may or may not be doing.

we are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. i'm tired of people letting the gov tell me what's what when it is supposed to be the other way around!!