9 October 1998
Thanks to EJ


To: jy@jya.com
Subject: Wiretapping in LA
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 16:54:29 -0500 


http://www.abcnews.com/sections/tech/DailyNews/privacyla981007.html	

By John Miller ABCNEWS.com

There are 6.5 million telephones in Los Angeles.
For years in California it was illegal, even for the
police, to listen in. 

     Then in 1989, California passed a law targeting drug
dealers that allows police to use wiretaps when all other
investigative techniques have failed. 

     Since then, law enforcement officials in the City of
Angels have followed what Deputy Public Defender Kathy Quant
calls a policy to "wiretap a lot, and to wiretap everybody."

     Quant charges that police in Los Angeles are using wiretaps
as a first step, not a last resort as required by law-and that
many thousands of people are being overheard improperly. 

     Listening to Pay Phones

     The district attorney's office in Los Angeles claims
otherwise.

     "Every wire, everything we've sought, has all been
judicially authorized," says Bill Hodgeman. 

     The district attorney's office says that since 1993,
they have only applied for 90 wiretap orders. But the number of
wiretap orders does not reflect the actual number of people
being overheard. One particular wiretap order allowed police
to listen in on 350 different telephones for what turned out
to be an unusually extended period. As Quant says, "the average
wiretap lasts 30 days. [But] not in Los Angeles. It lasted
almost two years." 

     Prosecutors say that some of the taps lead them to
drugs and drug money, but most of the taps seem to lead nowhere
while grossly violating privacy. In one case, five public
pay phones were tapped. Police listened to 131,000 conversations
without making a single arrest. 

     A Critical Oversight

     California law requires that when a wiretap is concluded,
the authorities have to notify everyone who was
overheard-especially people who were not suspects. Now
the district attorney's office admits that, in most cases,
they never told anyone. "It was indeed an oversight," Hodgeman
says. "There's no question about it." This oversight could
bring privacy lawsuits and cause convictions to be overturned. 

     While prosecutors and defense lawyers grapple over the
legality of thousands of intercepted conversations, no branch 
of government seems too eager to take the lead in getting to
the bottom of all this-not the attorney general, not the judges,
not the legislature. Right now, Los Angeles' Big Brother story
seems to be a political hot potato. 

-----------------------
"Any time that you're developing a new product, you will be 
working closely with the NSA," Ira Rubenstein, Microsoft attorney 
and a top lieutenant to Bill Gates
----------------------