Subject: Re: [Raven] Notes from the IETF meeting discussion on wiretapping

From: Jacob Palme <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 07:34:23 +0100

The quotes you cite were what I wrote down that people
said at the meeting, not necessarily the opinions of
either me or Declan McCullagh.

At 20.59 +0100 99-11-16, chefren wrote:
>> >Show of hands: About 10 % yes, 10 % abstain, 80% no.
>> >(I was one of the 10 % who voted yes!)
>
> Thanks!
>
> (If I may ask, would you have voted so before the Raven
> discussion and the probably new "audited tcpdump" idea?)

I am not a member of RAVEN. The reason I voted yes is
because of a general view that Internet is becoming more
and more wild west, with increasing illegal or unethical
use (virus distribution, spamming, fraud, child pornography
distribution, racial agitation, spoofed messages, various
kinds of "bombing", etc.) and that we need to help law
enforcement agencies to combat this.

This is also, perhaps, a difference of the view on
law enforcement agencies. In the U.S. you seem to be
much more afraid of misuse by law enforcement agencies,
you do not seem to trust your police as much as we do
in some other countries.

The figures 10 %-10 %-80 % are rough estimates, I did not
count the votes, it may have been even more than 80 %
against wiretapping.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Palme <[email-masked]> (Stockholm University and KTH)
for more info see URL: http://www.dsv.su.se/jpalme/

_______________________________________________
raven mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven

---

From: Ed Stone <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 06:27:40 -0500

>you do not seem to trust your police as much as we do

I expect that US persons trust the police less. Possibly the news reports 
below (one city, recent reports only) are not widely reported outside the US.

1.
"Man Convicted in Tainted Rampart Case Files Lawsuit
Los Angeles Times, Tuesday, November 16, 1999 Home Edition ID: 0990104331 
Metro Section 257 words

A man whose conviction for illegal gun possession was thrown out because of 
evidence uncovered in the Rampart police division scandal filed a federal 
civil rights lawsuit Monday against present and former officials of the Los 
Angeles Police Department, the Police Commission, the city attorney's 
office and the City Council. "
http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=98124

2.
"2nd Inmate to Be Freed in Rampart Probe
Los Angeles Times, Tuesday, November 9, 1999 Home Edition ID: 0990101881 
PART A Section Byline: MATT LAIT and SCOTT GLOVER TIMES STAFF WRITERS 679 words

A second prison inmate authorities now believe was framed by corrupt 
officers of the Los Angeles Police Department's Rampart Division is 
expected to be freed from custody this week, while another will be released 
from parole and yet another will be ordered resentenced, according to 
sources close to the ongoing corruption probe. "
http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=95803

3.
"2 Rampart Officers Were Disciplined in Sex Case
Los Angeles Times, Friday, November 5, 1999 Home Edition ID: 0990100475 
PART A Section Byline: SCOTT GLOVER and MATT LAIT TIMES STAFF WRITERS 982 words

Two Los Angeles police officers currently relieved of duty in connection 
with the continuing Rampart corruption probe were disciplined earlier this 
year after one of the officers admitted having sex with a drug user whom he 
and his partner stopped and questioned while on patrol. "
http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=94390

4.
"Rights Group Holds Police Abuse Hearing
Los Angeles Times Wednesday, September 22, 1999 Home Edition ID: 0990084985 
Metro Section Byline: JOSH MEYER TIMES STAFF WRITER 530 words

As the Los Angeles Police Department corruption probe continued Tuesday, 
the civil rights group Amnesty International came to town to take testimony 
on the issue of police brutality, and to decry what it called a trend of 
bad shootings against innocent civilians."
http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=79849

5.
"FBI Probes Man's Killing in Police Raid;
Los Angeles Times Tuesday, August 31, 1999 Home Edition Section: PART A 
Page: A-1

By: NICHOLAS RICCARDI TIMES STAFF WRITER
Federal authorities have opened an investigation into the El Monte Police 
Department's fatal shooting of a 61-year-old grandfather during a narcotics 
raid in Compton, officials said Monday.

Assistant U.S. Atty. Mike Gennaco said his office asked the FBI to open a 
probe to see if Mario Paz's civil rights were violated by the El Monte 
officers who, during a nighttime raid, shot off the locks to his home and 
then shot him in the back.

The police say an officer feared that Paz was armed or was reaching for a 
weapon--characterizations disputed by the family. El Monte police had been 
looking for an alleged drug dealer who had used Paz's address. Police have 
since said they had no information to tie Paz or his family to drug 
trafficking and still do not have any information or evidence of wrongdoing."
http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=72971

6.
"Coroner Charges Police 'Overkill'; Crime:
Los Angeles Times Monday, July 26, 1999 Home Edition Section: Metro Page: B-1

San Bernardino County official speaks out on Hawthorne case that left man 
dead. Relatives have filed suits against authorities, who said suspect was 
'definite threat.';

By: EDWARD J. BOYER TIMES STAFF WRITER
By the time they stopped firing, Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies, 
Hawthorne police and California Highway Patrol officers had shot Michael 
William Arnold 106 times.

Arnold, 39, was struck seven times in the head and neck, 50 times in the 
torso and dozens of times in other parts of his body. An autopsy found that 
at least 55 of the wounds were serious enough to be fatal.

Bullets also flew through the Hawthorne neighborhood near 118th Street and 
Prairie Avenue, across the street from York Elementary School, where Arnold 
was shot.

One round ripped through the outer wall of an apartment building two blocks 
away and continued through a bedroom wall, coming to rest on a bunk bed 
next to a sleeping teenager. Two other children slept in the bedroom."
(The man who was shot 106 times was insane and had only an air (BB) pistol.)

..................

The illegal wiretapping of the Los Angeles Police Department is detailed by 
the Public Defender's Office at http://pd.co.la.ca.us/index.htm .

--
--------------------------
Ed Stone
[email-masked]
--------------------------

---

From: Ed Stone <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:04:12 -0500

>you do not seem to trust your police as much as we do

"Los Angeles Times, Friday, September 24, 1999 Home Edition Section: PART A 
Page: A-1

Lawyers Seek to Reopen Cases Over Wiretapping; Courts: Hundreds of 
defendants were not told government was listening. Attorneys say evidence 
was improperly gained.;

By: ANN W. O'NEILL and HUDSON SANGREE TIMES STAFF WRITERS
Hundreds of criminal convictions dating back a decade should be reviewed 
and possibly retried because defendants were never told that the evidence 
against them came from illegal wiretaps, a group of criminal defense 
attorneys said this week in a strongly worded court affidavit.

The Los Angeles County public defender and about 50 other lawyers accused 
the district attorney's office of covering up illegal wiretapping 
operations in violation of the law and a Los Angeles Superior Court order.

That order, issued in November by supervising criminal courts Judge Larry 
Fidler, required prosecutors to notify defendants who have been charged or 
convicted of crimes as a result of the secret wiretaps.

In most cases, the defendants charged were not the original targets of the 
wiretaps, but were caught by chance. The court papers also charge that 
prosecutors and police have been overly broad in their snooping.

By tapping cellular phone companies and public pay phones, they listened in 
on private conversations of thousands of people who were not the targets of 
criminal investigations.

Assistant Public Defender Bob Kalunian said Thursday that his office is 
"very concerned about the impact on pending cases and hundreds of closed 
cases," as well as "the extent of the invasion of privacy of innocent 
individuals."

The district attorney's office declined to comment. Previously, prosecutors 
have defended the so-called handoff practice, in which information gathered 
during electronic surveillance of a suspect is used to build a case against 
other people implicated in unrelated crimes. Prosecutors also have insisted 
that the wiretaps were used sparingly.

The defenders dispute that and say the district attorney is not being candid.

"The [district attorney's] misrepresentations to this court may be alleged 
as grossly negligent but appears more likely to have been knowingly and 
intentionally made," the court papers charge. "The court can no longer 
trust the People to fulfill their obligations under the wiretap law."

Under the so-called handoff technique, first adopted by the LAPD in 1985 
with the district attorney's approval, narcotics officers conducting 
electronic surveillance of a target passed information about other 
suspected crimes on to other law enforcement officials to avoid disclosing 
the existence of the wiretaps. Law enforcement officials referred to such 
insulating tactics as "building the wall."

In many cases, the documents say, police and prosecutors obtained search 
and arrest warrants by claiming that confidential informants were the 
source of information when, in fact, the leads were uncovered by wiretaps.

Defendants never learned of those wiretaps and had no opportunity to 
challenge their legality in court.

When it came to light last year, the practice outraged defense attorneys, 
who say that it skirts state and federal wiretapping guidelines and 
violates defense discovery rights, as well a defendant's fundamental right 
to confront his or her accusers. The Los Angeles Police Department and the 
county Sheriff's Department participated in handoffs, court records show.

To support the allegation that prosecutors have deliberately ignored 
Fidler's disclosure order and underreported the scope of the wiretaps, the 
public defender's office filed thousands of pages of surveillance logs, 
internal reports and other documentation obtained from a variety of sources.

A review of some of those documents, obtained Thursday, indicates that as 
many as 425 defendants--far more than the 58 defendants Dist. Atty. Gil 
Garcetti has acknowledged publicly--may have been convicted by tainted 
evidence.

Deputy Public Defender Kathy Quant wrote in the court papers that a 
nine-month investigation by her office indicates that about 300 clients 
have standing to challenge the wiretaps. An additional 125 suspected cases 
are still being investigated.

Other documentation remains under court seal.

The defense attorneys are seeking hearings at which they can challenge and 
suppress any incriminating evidence gained through wiretaps that targeted 
people other than their clients. They also are asking for bail if new 
trials are granted to clients who are jailed or imprisoned as a result of 
illegal wiretap evidence.

The district attorney's office will have no comment until it has the 
opportunity to review the defense lawyers' documentation, spokeswoman Sandi 
Gibbons said Thursday.

The defense attorneys say that the prosecutors have misled the judge and 
can no longer be trusted. As an example, the lengthy affidavit cites one 
occasion during which a single wiretap was reported, but about 250 phones 
were actually monitored.

Garcetti, several of his top deputies, former Police Chief Willie L. 
Williams, the LAPD, the city and the county also were named last month in a 
class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court alleging a longtime pattern of 
illegal eavesdropping.

One of the plaintiffs in the federal case is Jack Whitaker, a criminal 
defense lawyer who says his phone conversations were intercepted and 
recorded while he defended a first-degree murder case. He and other 
plaintiffs are seeking $10 million in damages for civil rights violations. 
They also seek an injunction ending the wiretapping practice.

The city is asking to be dismissed as a defendant, Deputy City Atty. Cecil 
Marr said. A hearing is scheduled for Oct. 18.

Two days later, prosecutors and defense attorneys are scheduled to appear 
before Fidler in Superior Court for a hearing to determine whether law 
enforcement officials are in compliance with his order.

In one case, the recordings were so voluminous that a forklift was needed 
to retrieve them, the lawyers said in the court papers. "

see http://www.latimes.com/cgi-bin/slwebcli?DBLIST=lt99&DOCNUM=80739

---

From: Matthew Saroff <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 08:55:08 -0600

> you do not seem to trust your police as much as we do
	FYI, the justice system in the US is tremendously punative, with an 11
year old convicted as an adult of murder and facing life in prison, and a
couple of kids who put soap in their teacher's water facing FELONY charges.
 The US is also one of about 6 countries (Saudi Aribia and Iran are others)
that allow a minor to face the death penalty.
	When you add to that the growing trend of mandatory sentencing, and the
fact that well over 1/3 of the politicians in congress used their positions as
a "Tough on Crome" prosecutor as a stepping stone to further office, it gets
truely scary.
	I'm waiting for governments in civilized countries to start issuing
travel advisories for tourists in the US.

-- 
Matthew Saroff
Do not reply directly to this message.  Reply to
[email-masked]

---

From: "chefren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 18:48:38 +0100

> travel advisories for tourists in the US.

Please don't complain and =do= something...

Its the people of the US that have chosen evidently stupid 
politicians so clearly the people don't agree with your 
(and my) views. I thinkt the only thing you really can do 
is try to =educate= them.

And education in mathematics wouldn't help. What 
differentiates the US from countries that do better?

I think openness, trust and above all not respect but 
tolerance for fellow citizens are key.

Respect has too much to do with power, people who gained 
power shouldn't be respected because of the gained power 
(more money, bigger gun, larger car, faster CPU, stronger 
encryption... (JOKE!)) but if at all interesting: examined 
for the way and reasons they gained the power.

Look at the other aspects: Nobody should misuse privacy, 
misuse encryption, misuse guns. Lot's of problems are 
difficult to solve, above all problems that come out of 
beliefs instead of science.

For a starter: In a solid democratic society normal 
citizens shouldn't personally need guns or encryption. Both 
beginnings of useless armament races.

enfin...

Because I think digital evidence in court is inevitable I 
try to get up a world standard for serious auditable 
tapping. Instead of lots of splintered incompatible and 
above all =uncontrolled= versions of it.

+++chefren

= =
ii.nl ontwerpt, bouwt én onderhoudt websites
100 Euro aanbrengpremie: http://www.ii.nl/premie

---

From: Christian Price <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 10:54:38 -0700

I think that this is in part due to the fierce individualism which the
US was founded on and the reason for its founding - abusive government
in the form of King George III.  We have a history of not trusting
government and it has served us well.  I think that often times the
evils perpetrated by individuals, while a problem, are mild in
comparison to what an unchecked government can inflict on its people.  I
am very loathe to relenquish the individual liberties that the founders
of this country fought so hard to gain.  Oh, in case you care, my
parents are both immigrants to the US - I don't have any traditional
ties to the US, my family chose this country to live in.

--Christian