Want to stay current on e–commerce law? Sign up for Email Newsletter.
FBI Use of the Stingray to Locate Identity Thief Fuels Constitutional Drama
In 2008, Daniel David Rigmaiden, a self-proclaimed hacker, was arrested and charged with, among other things, identity theft, and false tax filings in the United States.
For the last year, Rigmaiden has claimed that his arrest was a result of a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, which protects American citizens from unreasonable search and seizure, because the government used a device called the stingray to track his cell phone without a valid warrant. The U.S. Department of Justice has stood by the defense that the use of the stingray is not considered a search because the user did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy while sending data through wireless machines or cellphones and the U.S. Department of Justice has been reluctant to disclose how the device works.
What is known about the stingray thus far is, it mimics a cell tower to measure the signal strength of a target mobile device. The stingray is moved to other locations, and the resulting data is used to triangulate the position of the target. The scope of data it collects is unknown, particularly because investigators delete the tracking data, rather than submitting it to the court.
In a recent development, the government is now admitting that the use of the stingray in this case could be considered a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. They are willing to make concessions specifically for this case in order to “avoid unnecessary disclosures” about the device. The judge in the case, David G. Campbell, has expressed the potential need for more information about the stingray before being able to determine whether or not its use can be considered a search in this case.
For additional information, please visit:
http://on.wsj.com/qMKWCR