Notifications
Clear all

Cellphone ruling

Page 1 / 2
armresl
(@armresl)
Community Legend

I was reading the case papers and I have to say I've never heard of the people doing this.

http//www.cherrybiometrics.com/celltowertracking/index.html

"Given that multiple factors can affect the signal strength of a tower and that Special Agent Raschke's chosen methodology has received no scrutiny outside the law enforcement community, the court concludes that the government has not demonstrated that testimony related to the granulization theory is reliable."

Could this mean "LE, learn to share and play with non LE and we all are for the better?"

What are your opinions on the ruling and what the company is saying.
I'm kind of surprised that an Agent would make such sweeping claims of "nearest tower"

Quote
Topic starter Posted : 13/09/2012 9:35 am
trewmte
(@trewmte)
Community Legend

Downloaded article, will read it and respond later on.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/09/2012 12:01 pm
jaclaz
(@jaclaz)
Community Legend

I was reading the case papers and I have to say I've never heard of the people doing this.

http//www.cherrybiometrics.com/celltowertracking/index.html

"Given that multiple factors can affect the signal strength of a tower and that Special Agent Raschke's chosen methodology has received no scrutiny outside the law enforcement community, the court concludes that the government has not demonstrated that testimony related to the granulization theory is reliable."

Could this mean "LE, learn to share and play with non LE and we all are for the better?"

What are your opinions on the ruling and what the company is saying.
I'm kind of surprised that an Agent would make such sweeping claims of "nearest tower"

Can you point to the actual papers from which you cited?
Is it inside one of the thre .pdf's actually there
http//www.cherrybiometrics.com/celltowertracking/TC%20Opinion%20and%20Order%20Denying%20Motion%20for%20New%20Trial%20March%206,%202012.pdf
http//educatedevidence.com/Dial%20'M'%20For%20Misleading.pdf
http//educatedevidence.com/Viewpoint_J-F.pdf

Or does it come from this
http//il.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20120829_0002256.NIL.htm/qx
(which is seemingly not linked to from the site)

The material on the linked site seems to me a lot more "common sense" than anything else, i.e. at least from the three .pdf's to which there is a link it seems to me lilke the essence is a truism

GSM data is more accurate than cell tower tracking

and the rest is about "mistakes" of the prosecuting part, essentially overestimating the precision of cell tower tracking and relying too much in the trial on this data.

jaclaz

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/09/2012 2:01 pm
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

The prosecution used information from a single phase I cell phone tower to place the individual in the tower's radio range.

I think the claim that they "refuted the reliability of Historical Cell Phone Location Tracking" is a bit stretching it in my opinion.

What I think they refuted is the level of training for the prosecution's expert. I beleive their own admission is not "impossible" to provide location information, just imprecise..

Call Detail Records are imprecise. Tracking determines the latitude and longitude of a phone. It is precise.

Imprecise is not impossible.

So, using Call Detail Records (CDR) will still put someone in town - and sometimes that is good enough.

I used signal strength with a home made radio to locate transmitters when I was a pup, during radio orienteering races. Clearly I must have been using junk science. twisted

ReplyQuote
Posted : 13/09/2012 8:50 pm
trewmte
(@trewmte)
Community Legend

Not surprising, perhaps, but I am not agreeing with Cell Tower Junk Science as relevant to cell site analysis although I did enjoy the summary of each case.

Is it correct to suggest that every Mast (Cell Tower) transmits upto 25-miles? To make a declaration that every Mast in the US transmits that far without checking first is rather careless one might think?

The commentary shows a lack of understanding about the cellular network, the identities used and what is exactly contained in the communications associated with control and traffic channels in addition to signal strength etc etc etc. This maybe due to the way in which the CSA evidence was presented.

I did note the article failed to mention which radio transmission technology was relevant to each case.

GPS tracked movements or GPS location may not be needed or be even necessary for all criminal or civil cases. I am not convinced that for law enforcement to do their job would require proving the defendant had to make an 911 call before GPS evidence could be obtained in order to bring cellular evidence before the courts.

Maybe the use of an analogy might help here. Why would a criminal, tooled up with a shooter, go into a bank to hold it up (so to speak) and leaving his/her mobile switched ON. You can imagine the bandit shouting to the people in the bank to get on the floor and the tellers to give him/her the cash, then…..

Ring Ring,
Ring Ring,
"hello… oh hi mum..yer abit busy right now..ok yer I'll try an get you some groceries abit later…can't at present as I have a shooter shoved in the face of the bank manager…sorry what was that mum?…yer 'course I'll ring 911 to let them know an armoured robbery is in progress at the Bank so that they can get a GPS fix on my mobile, after all I am a law abiding citizen.."

Poor presentation of CSA doesn't make CSA a Junk Science.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/09/2012 12:47 am
armresl
(@armresl)
Community Legend

One thing I found interesting is that I've never heard of the people with this claim, and that they indirectly call out a lot of examiners who have done cell tower work.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 14/09/2012 4:10 am
trewmte
(@trewmte)
Community Legend

One thing I found interesting is that I've never heard of the people with this claim

I did check that out too but there is no point in shooting the messenger if s/he believes an injustice is being exposed. What is needed is a programme of education for law enforcement and independent investigators/examiners.

What benefits are being accrued on the US CSA model when published critiques, supported by case summaries like the ones published in the article, which suggests flaws are in the practice of CSA and its presentation that requires more a little tinkering around to modify a few points?

I am informed that it is 'cheaper' to train in the US, due to local pricing, than for LE etc to get on a plane and come to the UK for training that I provide. Is that still a relevant approach in light of this topic?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/09/2012 11:27 am
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

I am informed that it is 'cheaper' to train in the US, due to local pricing, than for LE etc to get on a plane and come to the UK for training that I provide. Is that still a relevant approach in light of this topic?

Very much so. I would have spent my own money if you where here, and forgo that kidney transplant.

Alas, the flight, room & board and the TSA removing body parts for further examination with a rusted spoon sort of puts a damper on vast desire to enhance my understanding.

Seriously, if you had one here in DC, I would call on all the local groups I belong to and let them know.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/09/2012 10:28 pm
BitHead
(@bithead)
Community Legend

Alas, the flight, room & board and the TSA removing body parts for further examination with a rusted spoon sort of puts a damper on vast desire to enhance my understanding.

So just because you are spending $2000 to fly across the pond you want TSA to use a clean spoon? You are obviously not a patriot. 😉

ReplyQuote
Posted : 14/09/2012 11:00 pm
trewmte
(@trewmte)
Community Legend

Seriously, if you had one here in DC, I would call on all the local groups I belong to and let them know.

I very much appreciate your comments, genuinely, thank you.

I, too, would have the same logistics / costs headache. Perhaps if there was an indication of number of attendees may help to amortise all costs spread between the numbers attending.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/09/2012 12:29 am
Cowboy
(@cowboy)
Junior Member

To attend one of your training sessions? All I can say is "anywhere any time". Post it and I think you will be surprised and pleased at the response.

Best regards,

Cowboy

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/09/2012 8:39 am
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

How many would be your break-even point, say next year spring in DC or Baltimore?

God willing, i am changing jobs and will have an access to people who would be interested.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/09/2012 11:04 am
jhup
 jhup
(@jhup)
Community Legend

How many would be your break-even point, say next year spring in DC or Baltimore?

God willing, i am changing jobs and will have an access to people who would be interested.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/09/2012 11:04 am
hcso1510
(@hcso1510)
Active Member

Count me in !

ReplyQuote
Posted : 16/09/2012 3:29 am
armresl
(@armresl)
Community Legend

I would also be in.

I'd like to add though that this type of material could likely be over all of our heads, or be to the point of not needing to be used.

The course outline would need to cover issues that one can be grasped by people who are not RF engineers, and two have a short time to grasp it.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : 16/09/2012 4:54 am
Page 1 / 2
Share:
Share to...