Right. The scope of this violation of wiretap laws is breathtaking.
There's no need for conspiracy theories anymore; we've got conspiracy
theorems, complete with proof and everything.
There's one amazing paragraph that deserves quotation here:
[...] The [LAPD] engage in two totally different types of
court-authorized wiretap operations. One appears to comply with
the requirements of exhaustion, specificity, lawful execution, and
notice. The other, however, is broad-based, widespread, clandestine
and illegal. Notice, inventory, and production of these wiretaps are
never provided. Defendants intercepted by the latter type of wiretap,
who are not immediately arrested, subsequently become the target
of what appears to be a lawful wiretap. While the [LAPD] readily
disclose the apparently lawful wiretap, they intentionally fail to
provide notice, inventory, and production in the other.
The LAPD brazenly call this their "hand-off procedure".
What a scam. The LAPD avoids any oversight by "laundering" the results
of their wiretaps -- they've been taking lessons from the crooks.
See also <http://pd.co.la.ca.us/CACJ.htm>.
It is worth noting that the actual number of telephones illegally
wiretapped exceeded the number reported by _more than an order of
magnitude_, according to the LA public defenders. One of those unreported
LA wiretaps ended up intercepting the calls of 130,000 LA residents
(with no attempt at minimization and no arrests made), which beats the
reported _nation-wide total_ of 75,000. (For reference, that's about 1%
of LA's metro-area population.) Another unreported wiretap was for an
_entire cellphone service provider_. Holy shit!
This brings a new perspective on law enforcement's initial requests for
CALEA capacity to tap 1% of the population's phones. Maybe they weren't
joking after all...
Note also that California has one of the strictest wiretap oversight laws
in the nation. If this type of everyday, streamlined illegal wiretapping
was routine practice for the LAPD since 1989 (as the LA public defenders
demonstrate), in a state with unusually restrictive wiretap laws, what
will happen if the CESA bill---which essentially removes all courtroom
oversight on electronic wiretaps---passes?
