Reason: The Feds Are Dropping Child Porn Cases Instead of Revealing Info on Their Surveillance Systems

The Department of Justice has been dismissing child pornography cases in order to not reveal information about the software programs used as the basis for the charges.

An array of cases suggest serious problems with the tech tools used by federal authorities. But the private entities who developed these tools won’t submit them for independent inspection or hand over hardly any information about how they work, their error rates, or other critical information. As a result, potentially innocent people are being smeared as pedophiles and prosecuted as child porn collectors, while potentially guilty people are going free so these companies can protect “trade secrets.”

The situation suggests some of the many problems that can arise around public-private partnerships in catching criminals and the secretive digital surveillance software that it entails (software that’s being employed for far more than catching child predators).

With the child pornography cases, “the defendants are hardly the most sympathetic,” notes Tim Cushing at Techdirt. Yet that’s all the more reason why the government’s antics here are disturbing. Either the feds initially brought bad cases against people whom they just didn’t think would fight back, or they’re willing to let bad behavior go rather than face some public scrutiny.

READ MORE


Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

9 thoughts on “Reason: The Feds Are Dropping Child Porn Cases Instead of Revealing Info on Their Surveillance Systems

  • April 26, 2019

    Wish my attorney had this info when i was charged

    Reply
  • April 26, 2019

    I think the odds are better than average that the software in question actually plants the CP on the targeted computer in one of those caches that can’t be viewed or deleted. It’s the very definition of entrapment.

    Bringing this up in my group next week. Suggesting all who got popped for CP in one of these stings really fight to get their case reheard.

    Reply
  • April 25, 2019

    Well, this is NOT surprising at all considering that the FBI ran website sharing thousands of child porn images.

    It would appear that the United States Government’s “Law Enforcement” is in fact actually assisting in the distribution of child pornography on the internet.

    Reply
    • April 26, 2019

      The fact they have been sending it out to catch people has been known for years. its like keeping an open running vacant new car in a bad neighborhood waiting for someone to steal it.

      Reply
  • April 25, 2019

    On April 19th, 1775, the first shot was fired in the Revolutionary War.
    We have just past April 19th…. when are we going to stand up for our rights?
    Everyone says “handle it thru the courts” You all know thats bull-crap (whoever has the most $$$$ gets what he wants)
    THE TREE OF LIBERTY MUST BE REFRESHED FROM TIME TO TIME WITH THE BLOOD OF PATRIOT AND TYRANTS………..

    Reply
  • April 25, 2019

    If I were that person who was arrested with the case being dropped, i’d be looking into suing for damages and using discovery to learn about the method(s) used to surveil.

    Reply
  • April 25, 2019

    The software was developed by a university, which means it was funded by government grants, which makes it public information unless that information has been classified by the government.

    Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *