DHS Run Police Departments are Using ‘ShotSpotter’ to Spy on Public Conversations
Location: USA, NJ, MA
Topic: Privacy Rights, Surveillance
DHS run police departments are using ‘ShotSpotter’ to spy on public conversations
Camden, NJ — Old technology has found a new use in keeping streets safe and reducing crime in Camden.
As CBS2’s Kris Van Cleave reported, police can now pinpoint locations when shots are fired.
Gun fire on the streets of Camden can be captured by ‘Shotspotter’ a series of microphones designed to detect the sound of a gunshot and pinpoint its location to within 10-feet, before alerting police.
In one of Camden’s roughest neighborhoods the police don’t want to talk about specific locations, but the Shotspotter microphones are hidden in buildings and on roof tops throughout the streets.
The technology costs between $60,000 and $100,000 a year per square mile.
A MuckRock FOIA request revealed police departments are using USAI grants otherwise known as DHS grants across the country.
DHS is using a gun-shot detector to surreptitiously spy on Americans!
Shotspotter is being used to listen & spy on citizens in Mass:
The company SST, which sells ShotSpotter technology to police departments, says on its websitethat “human voices do not trigger ShotSpotter sensors, which are placed in elevated locations in order to enhance their capability as well as ensure citizen privacy.” But when loud noises trigger the sensors, the system can and does capture nearby voices.
That’s exactly what happened here in Massachusetts, when a ShotSpotter in New Bedford recorded a shouting argument that occurred in the street subsequent to a shooting. The New York Timesreports:
In New Bedford, the ShotSpotter recording of the street argument is likely to play a role in the case against two men, Jonathan Flores and Jason Denison, who are charged with murder in the killing of Michael Pina on Dec. 2.
At a bail hearing in January, an assistant district attorney said the system had recorded arguing and yelling on the corner of Dartmouth and Matthew Streets.
Frank Camera, the lawyer for Mr. Flores, said that if the prosecution used the recording as evidence, the issue of privacy could be raised under the state’s wiretapping statute. Mr. Denison’s lawyer, Kathleen Curley, said she planned to file a motion to that effect on behalf of her client.
Mr. Camera said that whether he, too, would argue that the recording constituted a privacy violation depended on what is on the tape.
In one section, he said, a voice can be heard saying “No, Jason! No, Jason!” — a statement that could help his client — but in other parts the words cannot be easily distinguished. He said he was having the tape enhanced to try to clarify it.
In any case, Mr. Camera said, the new technology is “opening up a whole can of worms.”
“If the police are utilizing these conversations, then the issue is, where does it stop?” he said.
Sam Sutter, the district attorney in Bristol County, Mass., called ShotSpotter “an extremely valuable tool” that had helped his office bring charges in four nonfatal shootings.
“In my view legally,” he said, “what is said and picked up by the ShotSpotter recording does not have the expectation of privacy because it’s said out in public, and so I think that will turn out to be admissible evidence.”
The police in Boston, Cambridge & Springfield MA, to name a few are using ShotSpotter.
“The Cambridge Police Department announced that it will be implementing the SST’s ShotSpotter Flex solution – a new gun detection service – on June 30, 2014 to support its proactive policing strategies and deployments and ongoing commitment to improve the safety, security and quality of life for its residents.
The Cambridge Police Department will now be able to gather more detailed gunfire incident information and forensic evidence for investigations and analysis, resulting in increased prosecutions for gun-related crime, and the data will enhance crime analysis and predictive policing capabilities, leading to improved public safety and security. “
Ask yourself how can they predict crime if they’re not listening to your conversations?