FBI Taps Wrong Number Using the Patriot Act

Provisions 213, 216, and Section 505

Provision 213 eliminates the requirement of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to provide a search warrant during sneak and peek operations.

Section 216, allows judges to obtain government investigators “ex parte orders” to examine personal phone and internet records on the weak assumption of being "relevant for an on going investigation", rather than probable cause as required in the fourth amendment.

On September 29, 2004, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero ruled Section 505 was unconstitutional. Section 505 violated the first and fourth amendment by allowing the federal government the right to obtain records of internet service providers for individuals under investigation. Section 505 did not provide "judicial oversight."

Thus, the Patriot Act attempts to re-write the very principles of our founding fathers.

 

Provision 213 eliminates the requirement of Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to provide a search warrant during sneak and peek operations before entering the space to be searched.

 

Here's the text of Section 213:

SEC. 213. AUTHORITY FOR DELAYING NOTICE OF THE EXECUTION OF A WARRANT.

Section 3103a of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by inserting `(a) IN GENERAL- ´ before `In addition´; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(b) DELAY- With respect to the issuance of any warrant or court order under this section, or any other rule of law, to search for and seize any property or material that constitutes evidence of a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States, any notice required, or that may be required, to be given may be delayed if--

`(1) the court finds reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the execution of the warrant may have an adverse result (as defined in section 2705);

`(2) the warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property, any wire or electronic communication (as defined in section 2510), or, except as expressly provided in chapter 121, any stored wire or electronic information, except where the court finds reasonable necessity for the seizure; and

`(3) the warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution, which period may thereafter be extended by the court for good cause shown.´.

The section doesn't eliminate the need for warrants, it just allows courts to authorize delays in informing subjects that the warrants have been served.

It makes sense, I think. In some cases, telling subjects that they are the subject of an investigation might tip them off to stop what they are doing and to start destroying evidence.

 

Sounds like an oops for the FBI.

 

Warrant After Search

That is exactly what I said,

"Provision 213 eliminates the requirement.... to provide a search warrant ...... before entering the space to be searched."

Serving a warrant after entering (sometime 90 days after) is a little pointless isn't it?

 

Re: Warrant After Search

Investigators still have to have warrants before they conduct searches. But now the courts are permitted to authorize delays in informing the subject of the search that the search has taken place.

I think that the concern here is less with searching somebody's residence (in which case the search itself would be notice that the search occurred) than with obtaining business records and stuff like that, without tipping the subjects to go to ground.

 

Wikpedia

"In special cases covered by FISA (incorporated in the USA PATRIOT Act), the warrants may come from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) instead of a common Federal or State Court. FISC warrants are not public record and therefore are not required to be released. Other warrants must be released, especially to the person under investigation."
(Wikpedia, 2005)


Serving a warrant to an individual was intended to insure that proper steps were followed before anyone could enter your home. If you serve the warrant after the search, it defeats the right of that individual to protect himself, and thus undermines the rights of all Americans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_act

 

They can tap all they want... Heck , I'll even maintain the service for them ( dont want it to get wet and distort the voice) I have nothing to fear, then again I have nothing to hide. Democracy is not a perfect machine but requires vigilance. Generally the ones who scream about such events, have a political agenda, and many of the same indivduals dream of a better world where everyone lives harmony. Well thousands of years have proven that fairly elusive! However many of the same have been show too quickly sue for peace, or even assume the Ostrich position; only to poke their heads out when their kids inherit their bumbling concepts and end up doing the fighting!
Lets face it Utopia is not around the corner so lets not assume a candy-assed role of beating up those who do step up to the plate. Even the FBI can make mistakes, but did we all of sudden foget about a court system?
Need an Address?
-Gavin