Michigan: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops

[Rasa1111]

Say what?

Is this even "Constitutional"? lol
My mind says no.. Not at all.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/pix/cellebrite.jpg


Michigan: Police Search Cell Phones During Traffic Stops
ACLU seeks information on Michigan program that allows cops to download information from smart phones belonging to stopped motorists.

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan last Wednesday demanded that state officials stop stonewalling freedom of information requests for information on the program.

ACLU learned that the police had acquired the cell phone scanning devices and in August 2008 filed an official request for records on the program, including logs of how the devices were used. The state police responded by saying they would provide the information only in return for a payment of $544,680. The ACLU found the charge outrageous.

"Law enforcement officers are known, on occasion, to encourage citizens to cooperate if they have nothing to hide," ACLU staff attorney Mark P. Fancher wrote. "No less should be expected of law enforcement, and the Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure."

A US Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

"Complete extraction of existing, hidden, and deleted phone data, including call history, text messages, contacts, images, and geotags," a CelleBrite brochure explains regarding the device's capabilities. "The Physical Analyzer allows visualization of both existing and deleted locations on Google Earth. In addition, location information from GPS devices and image geotags can be mapped on Google Maps."

The ACLU is concerned that these powerful capabilities are being quietly used to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

"With certain exceptions that do not apply here, a search cannot occur without a warrant in which a judicial officer determines that there is probable cause to believe that the search will yield evidence of criminal activity," Fancher wrote. "A device that allows immediate, surreptitious intrusion into private data creates enormous risks that troopers will ignore these requirements to the detriment of the constitutional rights of persons whose cell phones are searched."

The national ACLU is currently suing the Department of Homeland Security for its policy of warrantless electronic searches of laptops and cell phones belonging to people entering the country who are not suspected of committing any crime.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/34/3458.asp

Now, Who can come up with a device that when read by this other (fascist) device.. Will fry it, and everything connected to it? lol :lol:

Welcome to your police state!
Where everyone is guilty, and everyone is a criminal!

I believe they also tried something like this in NH, but it was shot down rather quick.

How do you feel about this?

Would you just hand them your phone and say "go for it!"?

I would get arrested for failure to comply,
and I don't even have anything on my phone to hide.

I am not in Michigan (as you can see, I'm on the space station) lol
But I have many friends there.

So,
This "cool" with you? :confused:

[jimbobs]

It sounds like illegal search and seizure to me.

Some might say they don't care because they have nothing to hide but that is the type of simplistic argument that is used to justify totalitarianism.

[3Miro]

This should be shutdown instantly by the Supreme Court.

[Rasa1111]

Some might say they don't care because they have nothing to hide but that is the type of simplistic argument that is used to justify totalitarianism.

Indeed. My thoughts exactly. <3


This should be shutdown instantly by the Supreme Court.

Most agreed.
But I think the S.C. is just as corrupt and shady as anyone pushing for this. (Or more so). lol

Good answers.
Thanks friends. <3

[Derxst]

Sounds like something the Soviet Union would do if it were around today.

[jimbobs]

Sounds like something the Soviet Union would do if it were around today.

Emmmm ..... no, it sounds like something the Michigan State Police ARE doing today :(

[Oliphant]

This is awfully strange. Being involved in Law Enforcement myself, this would NEVER fly in New Jersey. Search and Seizure is very specific and it is one of the easiest cases to lose in court.

Minor traffic violations and I will have my phone downloaded? Seems a bit extreme. I'd like to look into this deeper and find out how in the world they justify this under probable cause.

[earthpigg]

erm,

What happens if I say "No, officer I do not have a cellular phone with me" and he doesn't otherwise have probable cause to search my vehicle?

[Rasa1111]

This is awfully strange. Being involved in Law Enforcement myself, this would NEVER fly in New Jersey. Search and Seizure is very specific and it is one of the easiest cases to lose in court.

Minor traffic violations and I will have my phone downloaded? Seems a bit extreme. I'd like to look into this deeper and find out how in the world they justify this under probable cause.

Indeed.
I sent it to my brother, who is a Sheriff,
and he said.. " F that, that's not going to go over to well"
lol

So I asked him.. "How do YOU feel about it?, If you were a "civilian"? and this happened to you?"
He said.. "I feel the same as you, brother". <3


erm,

What happens if I say "No, officer I do not have a cellular phone with me" and he doesn't otherwise have probable cause to search my vehicle?

Then, from my understanding.. He can't do squat.
They have absolutely no reason or right to search your vehicle just for the sake of searching it.
and if you tell them they cannot, then ..they cannot.

What I would be 'worried' about, in the future..
is their ability to just scan your vehicle or person,
and if a cell phone is "detected" it will just lift everything from your phone that way.
Similar (or exact) technology does exist I'm sure.

Embrace your dictatorship! lol <3

[Throne777]

Is that normal for american police departments to just demand (what borders on) ransom money for information on their seemingly illegal procedures?
In England, I'm fairly certain you can use the Freedom Of Information Act to get hold of things like that, & there's not much the police could do about it.
Even without the act, the press would have an absolute field day.

[lisati]

Let's see if we can keep away from the politics here.....

My $0.02:

The police usually need a good reason to search your vehicle and have any "evidence" they find stand up in court.
If you have nothing to hide, then ideally you shouldn't have any worries.
Being respectful to authority figures is a good idea, even when you don't agree. If, for some reason, they think you're being deliberately difficult, well, who knows?

[jimbobs]

Well the device mentioned certainly exists:

http://www.cellebrite.com/forensic-products/ufed-physical-pro.html

They tout:
UNPARALELLED (sic) ACCESS TO PHONE MEMORY
and
INTELLIGENT SOFTWARE FOR DEEPER INVESTIGATIONS

It appears that this and similar devices were developed to assist in the forensic examinations of cellphones (presumably covered by search warrant or as evidence on a crime).

[Shmantiv_Radio]

Being respectful to authority figures is a good idea, even when you don't agree. If, for some reason, they think you're being deliberately difficult, well, who knows?
[/LIST]

Are you for real?

[lisati]

Are you for real?

No, I am a figment of my own psychosis. :D

But seriously, "stuff" happens. Where I'm coming from is this: is the risk of being locked up for supposedly being uncooperative worth the risk? If you have a problem with the actions someone in authority, e.g. police, forum staff, whoever, there's usually a process available to deal with it safely without inflaming the issue. (or at least should be)

[Rasa1111]

Let's see if we can keep away from the politics here.....

Yes, please.
I am trying. lol


If you have nothing to hide, then ideally you shouldn't have any worries.


Worries no,
Concerns? You bet.
But still, that "logic" is extremely flawed.


Being respectful to authority figures is a good idea, even when you don't agree. If, for some reason, they think you're being deliberately difficult, well, who knows?

One can be respectful and still refuse to have their rights trampled on.
I have done it many times with "authority figures", and walked away free every time. lol

Also,
If one wants respect.. regardless of their position or authority..
One must give the same respect.
And treating me (or anyone else) as if they are a criminal for refusing to give them your phone (for NO reason) is not respect, my friend.

<3

@jimbobs, yes, it really does exist. lol ;)

[themarker0]

Ever heard of text to speech, and vise versa?

[wilee-nilee]

189663

[Shmantiv_Radio]

No, I am a figment of my own psychosis. :D

But seriously, "stuff" happens. Where I'm coming from is this: is the risk of being locked up for supposedly being uncooperative worth the risk? If you have a problem with the actions someone in authority, e.g. police, forum staff, whoever, there's usually a process available to deal with it safely without inflaming the issue. (or at least should be)

Is standing up for yourself and what you believe in worth the risk? Yes. Yes it is, and I pity anyone who doesn't.

[Rasa1111]

Where I'm coming from is this: is the risk of being locked up for supposedly being uncooperative worth the risk?

The risk of being locked up? For standing up for your rights?
Not happening. Not if you know your rights.
I'm not going to keep my mouth shut (if i know I am right) for
"fear of being wrongly locked up"


If you have a problem with the actions someone in authority, e.g. police, forum staff, whoever, there's usually a process available to deal with it safely without inflaming the issue.

Yeah, that process is called learning ones rights and using that knowledge against those trying to abuse it.
Something most people (at least in america) are almost totally ignorant of. (Their actual rights)

Did you know, in america..
You do not have to just give your ID to an officer because he tells you to?
it's true,
But most people think otherwise, and gladly just hand their ID to any "authority" figure who asks. :rolleyes:


Is standing up for yourself and what you believe in worth the risk? Yes. Yes it is, and I pity anyone who doesn't.

Exactly. <3

[Oliphant]

I cannot speak for Michigan or any other state except New Jersey. In order to search there has to be some type of probable cause which at least here is more than getting stopped for speeding, stop sign, tail light out etc...

There has to be exigent circumstances to search immediately otherwise your getting on the horn with a judge and applying for a search warrant. You have to articulate your reasons.

If you are giving a consent search, it is mandatory for the officer to also say, "You have the right to stop this search at ANY time."

I understand the, "If you have nothing to hide.." but what it comes down to is when is it too far? If I were in the position of getting stopped and have nothing to hide, then No I will not be pressured into it in fear of being arrested for being "uncooperative." Again here in NJ you cannot just be arrested for failing to submit to a search of your person or belongings.

Now, there are many many officers that take it too far and will arrest and charge with a "catch-all" (later dropped from lack of probable cause) and those officers unfortunately spoil it for the rest who do follow the rules.

I'm in agreement with Rasa and Shmantiv... Stand up for your beliefs.


Yeah, that process is called learning ones rights and using that knowledge against those trying to abuse it.
Something most people (at least in america) are almost totally ignorant of. (Their actual rights)

Did you know, in america..
You do not have to just give your ID to an officer because he tells you to?
it's true,
But most people think otherwise, and gladly just hand their ID to any "authority" figure who asks.

You are correct, most do not fully understand their rights. If an officer just wants to see your ID, yes you can walk away barring any involvement in an investigation. For example, a robbery occurs and a basic description is given to officers. AN officer rolls up on you and unfortunately you match most of the description, your kind of stuck with submitting to your ID or you will more than likely be brought down to the precinct for further investigation. Maybe not under arrest but the cleverly worded, "Investigative Detention" :)

(More than happy to discuss any law enforcement matters):popcorn:

[3Miro]

If you have nothing to hide, then ideally you shouldn't have any worries.

Define "nothing to hide". A sexing from my girlfriend or wife? What if there is an inappropriate picture, does an officer get to see it?

There are more gray areas here. What if I am involved with Wikileaks spreading information about the government? Or perhaps I am making donations to a political organization trying to legalize marijuana, perfectly legal, yet perhaps not something I would do openly. There are many people that have to hide their sexual identity or religious believe or political convictions in order to keep their jobs or status in society. What if I was a gay soldiers before the appeal of "don't ask don't tell" and the officer finds out sexing messages on my phone form another guy. This varies form a place to a place and a situation to a situation, but social discrimination for perfectly legal actions does exist.

What is someone has cheated on their spouse. We would probably all agree that it is illegal, but I, for one, want police catching criminals, not sorting out random Joe's family affairs.

Furthermore, regardless of whether you think the government is corrupt or not, individual officers can be and sometimes are corrupt. This can give an officer a way to destroy incriminating evidence or blackmail people even if they have done nothing wrong.

No offence but "Nothing to hide" is an ignorant excuse. Even if you don't go to the extreme of "I am hiding (Jews/dissidents to the communist government/escaped Negroes) in my basement", there are many case where one has done nothing wrong or even illegal and yet no authority figure should know about it.

[Rasa1111]

Thanks Oliphant. :) <3

Yeah there are definitely good "cops",
but the bad ones do sadly kind of stain the uniform for all.

Often times, When I talk about these kind of things..
People automatically assume that I "hate cops" or something. lol
But that couldn't be further from the truth.
I know some very, very good people who happen to be in law enforcement,
who do their jobs properly and with integrity.
I respect those kind of people a lot.
Most of my brothers friends are sheriffs/detectives/cops..
and some of them are the coolest cops you could ever hope to run into.
Unless you give them reason to bash your head in the pavement. haha :lol:
But, I also dislike (to the extreme) those who abuse their positions,
and take advantage of knowing the fact that most people really do not fully know their rights.

Here's an example of someone knowing their rights.. (in regards to the ID thing)
and the officer actually accepting it. lol
He just gives up and slams the doors. :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFzWa3D2qho

<3

[PhillyPhil]

If you have nothing to hide, then ideally you shouldn't have any worries. This is a sentence I'd be happy to never see again. It's just used as (incredibly weak) justification for any restrictive or invasive move by authorities.

Even if I don't have anything to hide I don't want my rights eroded. And one day, your idea of ''nothing'' may not match their idea of ''nothing''.

[dwhite]

thanks Oliphant :)

[Zerocool Djx]

Sounds like big brother is ramming us in the rear again..

Let it be known, my phone is MY phone,... I'll leave it at that

[SEisch]

Another reason I'm glad I don't have a cell phone.
I'd like to see them hook up that thing to my old rotary-dial telephone and get information off of it.:)

[Rasa1111]

@ 3Miro~
Very well said. <3
Couldn't agree more.
You addressed many of my concerns and thoughts. thanks.

PhillyPhil~
also well said, man.
thanks<3

lol@ zerocool..
you know it. ;)

[false truths]

Considering the only cell phone I've ever owned only had a power plug, no data ports of any sort, they'd have a very hard time getting data off it with that thing... Either way, that violates privacy rights, and although I don't really care who sees my phone's data, it's constitutionally not okay for the police to gather it without permission unless they have a warrant, and blanket warrants legalising things like that are, again, unconstitutional.