Government wire taps...

[California Joe]

This morning I'm driving my son to school and there's a news story about a local attorney who started complaining about his home phone getting all wonky right around the time he took a case of an Afghani that's currently at Gitmo. This started months ago.

He believes he was being tapped.

When they went to Verizon about it they were told that company policy was not to speak publicly about Homeland Security issues, blah, blah...

Now they have come up with some evidence that his law firm phones have indeed been interfered with and that their computer system was hacked and files downloaded without their knowledge.

Like I said, I heard it on the radio and don't have any source to cite but I imagine if these allegations can be proven there might be some national repercussions during an election year...

It is curious though.

[Laconian]

It depends on how they got the wire tap (and who did it). Although the Afghan/Gitmo angle puts a political spin on it, wire taps are fairly common in large cases (especially ones that involve conspiracies, multiple defendants, etc.) Big fraud/money laundering/dope/smuggling all rely on wire tap evidence, but the new big brother is listening to everything stuff will attract attention.

On a side note, because of the lawyer/client privilege wire taps on attorneys are harder to come by. So, curiouser and curiouser.

[California Joe]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too. Lawyer/client is a pretty heavy duty kinda civil right to mess with.

We are up here in East Buttf*ck so I'm guessing hacking their computers wouldn't exactly be that hard either. heh.

I have no damned idea why some local guy up here got a hold of a Gitmo type case.

[Hollis]

Ill gained evidence is not admissible in a court of law, but it can be used to catch some other fish, Basically Intel gathering.

The Gitmo Angle, I would say yes to it, if I was a Judge from a national security intel gathering view.

CJ how or why the guy got the case is interesting... Gut reaction, Fellow traveler or friends of...

[California Joe]

If it's the guy I think it is he may have even worked as a States Attorney before. Well known as a good guy locally.

All I know is that he's alleging that his home and business phones were tapped and his computer files have been downloaded without his knowledge. To me, that's kinda scary.

Maybe I should write a John Grisham type novel with a northern slant...:)

[Bert]

Uh, of course. The NSA doesn't need warrants or permission to wiretap as long as it is in connection with 'foreign terrorists' or the war on terror in general. If it's in connection with Gitmo they will definitely listen in on anything going in or out of that camp. It's in the interest of 'anti-terrorism', so they can do whatever they want.

How some people are still in denial is amazing.

[Asheren]

Well i guess they don't want to miss any potential intel source.

[hank]

If it's the guy I think it is he may have even worked as a States Attorney before. Well known as a good guy locally.

All I know is that he's alleging that his home and business phones were tapped and his computer files have been downloaded without his knowledge. To me, that's kinda scary.

Maybe I should write a John Grisham type novel with a northern slant...:)

The Grisham novel is a great idea. Hockey instead of baseball. Lots of references to Canadian beer. I see a smash hit.

Seriously keep us posted on this. Methinks that Nat'l Sec thing is a red herring from Verizon. More likely they powers that be are interested in what some of his crim defense clients are up to and how they are paying for his services. I know several crim defense lawyers who have had their bank records inspected and retainers taken because the Feds could prove they were drug proceeds. Hope that is what it is and not something more sinister.

hank

[Laconian]

hank,
The first Fed warrant I ever served was to a lawyer's firm in NYC for that plus some other fraud stuff (they briefed us on the fraud scheme but it was like a monkey trying to do a math problem for me). Most boring warrant I've ever served, until we found the office **** collection, complete w/toys. Some very weird stuff.

[Zoomie]

Most boring warrant I've ever served, until we found the office **** collection, complete w/toys. Some very weird stuff.
Too funny Laconian. What's the lawyer saw when you found them? "Oh, they're my secretary's."?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

In most places, the phone switch has a CALEA interface that's transparent to the end user. It's tied directly to the digital infrastructure of the switch - so you'd never know your conversation was being piped over to somebody else.

That's in most places. I was dating a girl from Lewiston Maine in the mid 80's - and I remember seeing a blurb in the local newspaper about how the last of Maine's old "party line" type phones was phased out.

There is/was a mechanism in place to get around the digital CALEA interface for smaller or rural carriers - since some of those have old equipment - and they continually stall the government for more time. In that case, they'd have to output to an audio monitor port or maybe use a 3rd party test box to break the signal out...so it's not beyond the realm of possibility for him to have experienced phone weirdness.

[hank]

hank,
The first Fed warrant I ever served was to a lawyer's firm in NYC for that plus some other fraud stuff (they briefed us on the fraud scheme but it was like a monkey trying to do a math problem for me). Most boring warrant I've ever served, until we found the office **** collection, complete w/toys. Some very weird stuff.

Hilarious. I'm sure that was boring as hell. I know a crim defense guy in Knoxville who had a client try to pay a retainer with 25 large in a shopping bag. My buddy wouldn't take the cash b/c that was too easy to identify as drug money. I can't remember exactly what they did but I think it involved a sh*tload of money orders. Easy to see why I don't do crim defense. He is the same one who's been wire-tapped several times.

hank

[Group9]

In most places, the phone switch has a CALEA interface that's transparent to the end user. It's tied directly to the digital infrastructure of the switch - so you'd never know your conversation was being piped over to somebody else.

That's in most places. I was dating a girl from Lewiston Maine in the mid 80's - and I remember seeing a blurb in the local newspaper about how the last of Maine's old "party line" type phones was phased out.

There is/was a mechanism in place to get around the digital CALEA interface for smaller or rural carriers - since some of those have old equipment - and they continually stall the government for more time. In that case, they'd have to output to an audio monitor port or maybe use a 3rd party test box to break the signal out...so it's not beyond the realm of possibility for him to have experienced phone weirdness.

Maybe a state wiretap might do that, but the federal governemt uses induction taps for hard lines. It is physically impossible for the tap to interefere with the line. And a hard line is the easiest line there is to successfully tap. CALEA was primarily desinged to get the cellular phone carriers in line as far as making their systems compatible for wiretaps. But, I've never know a wiretap on a cellular or hard line telephone to cause any problems, (and I've done a lot of them).

The only exception I have ever seen to that was once when we installed a wiretap on a hard line and the tech agent forgot to hook the line back up after he had finished installing the tap. The target had no phone service, not poor phone service, until the agent went back out and plugged the line back in.

People who don't know anything about Title 3 (wiretap) interceptions think they are extensively used by the federal government. They are not. They are so much trouble, so expensive, and so manpower intensive (someone has to actually listen to all of the conversations intercepted or what's the point of intercepting them?) that they really are a tool of last resort.

There might be a reason to tap the phone of a lawyer who was representing someone at Gitmo, but it would be something else besides the bare fact that he was representing him. And, to tap a lawyer, even using FICA, you don't get a rubber stamp for a lot of reasons, some legal, and some practical.

[California Joe]

That makes good sense to me.

With the current technology that I know about from my last job I couldn't imagine that there would be noticeable differences on the guys phone line.

Thanks for the info. You too 2Sheds...:)

[hank]

Maybe a state wiretap might do that, but the federal governemt uses induction taps for hard lines. It is physically impossible for the tap to interefere with the line. And a hard line is the easiest line there is to successfully tap. CALEA was primarily desinged to get the cellular phone carriers in line as far as making their systems compatible for wiretaps. But, I've never know a wiretap on a cellular or hard line telephone to cause any problems, (and I've done a lot of them).

The only exception I have ever seen to that was once when we installed a wiretap on a hard line and the tech agent forgot to hook the line back up after he had finished installing the tap. The target had no phone service, not poor phone service, until the agent went back out and plugged the line back in.

People who don't know anything about Title 3 (wiretap) interceptions think they are extensively used by the federal government. They are not. They are so much trouble, so expensive, and so manpower intensive (someone has to actually listen to all of the conversations intercepted or what's the point of intercepting them?) that they really are a tool of last resort.

There might be a reason to tap the phone of a lawyer who was representing someone at Gitmo, but it would be something else besides the bare fact that he was representing him. And, to tap a lawyer, even using FICA, you don't get a rubber stamp for a lot of reasons, some legal, and some practical.

So generally it is very difficult to tap lawyers? That is comforting. Waht kind of stuff do you generally need to show to get the warrant? The only examples I personally know of all involved the payment of legal fees with drug money that Fed LEO could identify. Are there any other more easy examples that you've encountered?

And, you know, a lot fo that actually involved reviewing bank records for which the govt needed a subpoena. I may be remembering that incorrectly. Have you ever heard of getting wiretaps for the issue I describe?

hank

[2Sheds_Jackson]

In practice, I really don't know who typically uses CALEA taps, only that the capabilities exist on most wireless, landline and VoIP carrier switches. I'd get the interface installed and tested, but once they were handed off to the company - I don't know who was jumping onto it. The CALEA act itself specifies that the subject must not be able to detect that they're being tapped - so it's pretty creepy that LE can just hop onto your phone line with a few keystrokes.