The concept of justice in this country has certainly wandered far from the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and even the Magna Carta. In other words anything goes if police don't get caught. Including lying to judges attempting to dispense justice fairly.
A stingray device locates and catalogs your cell phone. By moving the device police can determine the location of the phone in a fairly precise manner.
For warrant based searches I approve of the stingray. But that is not what they are doing with it.
Instead they are using the device and either parallel constructing a case based on the illegally obtained information or they are just lying outright to the judges and juries. By using the magic phrase:
confidential sourceThis leaves the citizens, again, subject to abuse of the device by the police with no legal recourse to correct their criminal methods. How is a defendant supposed to build their defense when the police and prosecutors are lying outright to not only the defendant but the judge?
Well Florida has been pulling this subterfuge of their judicial protections for some time. And guess who told them to do it?
The U.S. Marshals ServiceYep the one law enforcement branch I haven't seen turn into unprofessional yahoos drunk on power have become one of them. A total disregard to their oath to the Constitution the US Marshals tell these police forces to LIE about evidence!
Let me repeat that.
US Marshals tell these police forces to LIE about evidence!
The initial email, which bears the subject line “Trap and Trace Confidentiality,” was sent by Sarasota police Sgt. Kenneth Castro to colleagues at the North Port (Florida) Police Department. It was sent after Assistant State Attorney Craig Schaefer contacted police to express concern about an application for a probable cause warrant filed by a North Port police detective. The application “specifically outlined” for the court the investigative means used to locate the suspect. Castro informs his colleague that the application should be revised to conceal the use of the surveillance equipment.Email PDF
“In the past,” Castro writes, “and at the request of the U.S. Marshalls (sic), the investigative means utilized to locate the suspect have not been revealed so that we may continue to utilize this technology without the knowledge of the criminal element. In reports or depositions we simply refer to the assistance as ‘received information from a confidential source regarding the location of the suspect.’ To date this has not been challenged, since it is not an integral part of the actual crime that occurred.”
He then requests that “If this is in fact one of your cases, could you please entertain either having the Detective submit a new PCA and seal the old one, or at minimum instruct the detectives for future cases, regarding the fact that it is unnecessary to provide investigative means to anyone outside of law enforcement, especially in a public document.”