Not to piss on your parade, but your not going to know if they get the court order and if they us the homeland security excuse they can do alot of things they couldn't do 11 years ago, like close to whatever they want to. I guess it depends on how many of your neighbors complain about you.
Use code words. pizza rolls = dollars underwear = weed So it's X amount of pizza rolls for X ounces of underwear. Oops, nevermind that one, I just gave it away.. :mickey:
It's not like I'm a terrorist or anything. It's just I'm a little paranoid when it comes to stuff like this. It's no big deal, I haven't given anyone a reason to tap my phone or get a warrant for my arrest. Just a little freaked out
If this paranoia is what gets you to carefully weigh every bit of communication you do electronically then you will be far better for having put yourself through what is most likely needless worry.
I wouldn't worry unless you selling a couple thousand XTC, ounces of coke, and pounds of weed. In my experience the feds will only tap the top dogs. Or the middle man, they could care less about the guy who buys a little here and there.
I would not worry too much, and even if they did they likely would come for you though a friend they get to flip on you and he will come to you wanting to do a deal like always and then BAM cops flying out the back bedroom, it has happed to someone I know, they knew each other for years but he was facing allot of prison time. So if your gonna be paranoid, it's not your phone it's your friends.
They still need a warrent to tap your phone for drugs, however they can do warrentless taps for terrorisim, but anything non-terrorisim related is not admissable in court. They also have software that randomly searches all international calls ecpecally ones to "terrorist" countrys for key words. If you aren't a big dealer they won't waste the time and man power to listen to your conversations. However every text, IM, e-mail, and voicemail, you send or recive, and every number you call or calls you, is saved for at least a year,and it is common practice for police to look at all of it if you get arrested for a big enough crime, so it always pays to watch what write. Generally electronic communication is not secure at all. It always amazes me when some corprate fraudster or crooked pol gets busted how much of the evedence is in their emails.
VOIP = no protection, the law has not caught up with technology Telephone = level of protection, the fourth amendment protects people not places so you should be secure in your affects and therefore a warrant would be needed. If there is reasonable suspicion that you are committing illegal acts however a warrant is only a phone call away. That being said the patriot act has made it so that you can be tapped without a warrant so if you are calling pakistan and discussing international bank accounts to fund militias in yemen you might be in trouble.
Thats not true, there is something called "the good faith clause" which states that if an investigation for one thing turns up wrong doing for something else the officer doing the searching acting in good faith to uphold there suspicion of original wrong doing but discovered a separate unrelated illegal act by chance and you can be prosecuted for that other crime. However if you are currently in court for crime A and they are deciding what do you with you about crime A the prosecutor cannot toss in evidence from crime B to be used against you when deciding punishment on crime A. Good faith clause is applicable only during searches.
Police need a warrant to tap a phone. On top of that it requires someone actually sitting there and listening into your pointless phone calls. Unless you're a special snowflake(i.e. known drug dealer) the police are not listening to you. As for the good faith clause, it only goes so far. Bitch and moan about the government all you want but the US has basically the strictest use of the exclusionary rule in the world. The thing is normally that doesn't matter since your lawyer isn't going to go argue to a judge to throw out seized evidence because the vast majority of cases never even go to trial and are settled through plea bargains.
Could you decipher this and let me know if you are still correct or out of date. Thanks. ETSI LI Technical Committee work today is primarily focussed on developing the new Retained Data Handover and Next Generation Network specifications, as well as perfecting the innovative TS102232 standards suite that apply to most contemporary network uses. USA interception standards that help network operators and service providers conform to CALEA are mainly those specified by the Federal Communications Commission (which has both plenary legislative and review authority under CALEA) CableLabs, and the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS). ATIS's standards include new standards for broadband Internet access and VoIP services, as well as legacy J-STD-025B which updates the earlier J-STD-025A to include packetized voice and CDMA wireless interception. All of these standards have been challenged as "deficient" by the U.S. Dept of Justice pursuant to CALEA. Generic global standards have also been developed by Cisco via the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) that provide a front-end means of supporting most LI real-time handover standards. http://blog.tmcnet.com/lawful-intercept/doj-files-deficiency-petition-with-fcc-over-jstd025b.asp
The good faith clause only applies if the police belive that the evidence was obtained properly, even if it wasn't. For example if they have a search warrent that later turns out to have a typo, or if they are looking for weed and the find counterfeit cash. It does not apply to terrorist related warrentless wire taps because it is spelled out in the statute that it doesn't.
It basically says that telecom companys have to provide a means for cops to tap whatever communication services they provide, and keep a record to provide to cops in a timely fasion.