U.S. judge throws out cell phone 'stingray' evidence

This is a good step forward, but until we (the citizens) are able to say that LEOs are no longer using parallel construction[0], this is a lot less helpful than it could be. This just means LEOs have to work a bit harder to mask their illegal activities.<p>For example, say you&#x27;re talking to your friend who sells weed and drive over to pick it up. The cops know you&#x27;re buying drugs, so they pull you over for rolling through a stop sign, search your car, and &quot;stumble&quot; upon the weed. There is no way to prove they used a Stringray to get this information in the first place. Extrapolate this to other activities.<p>[0] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Parallel_construction" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Parallel_construction</a>

I hesitate to comment on topics like this for fear of coming across as ignorant, but I find myself very conflicted over this subject.<p>I am a huge advocate for privacy and am strongly against unnecessary surveillance by governments and companies. On the other hand, if the evidence is compelling it seems a waste to discard it.<p>It&#x27;s a hard question - do you think about the bigger picture: protect human rights by setting a precedence Or do you think think about the short term: convict a dangerous criminal.<p>In a more hypothetical scenario, if a dangerous serial killer was brought into court and there was only one compelling piece of evidence, but it was obtained in an extremely unlawful manner - what would a judge be expected to do?

How federal agencies act when a constitutional lawyer is president for 8 years

One thing to keep in mind is that Stingray use isn&#x27;t limited to collecting evidence to use at trial. It&#x27;s sometimes used just to make warrant service &amp; arrests easier.<p>I wonder how often it&#x27;s used as a law enforcement tool with no intent to disclose its use.

FBI made it clear to lower level law enforcement to always conceal evidence obtained through Stingrays and to never enter such evidence for this reason. Their use will be further concealed behind parallel construction for national security.

I think Stingray is here to stay. And Harris Corporation is a privately owned public company.<p>Any idea what would happen to me, if I were to design, develop, produce and sell IMSI-catching devices?<p>(serious question)