As US Marshals director resigns amid scandal, questions mount over agency's cell phone tracking

coderman coderman@gmail.com
Sun Jun 14 17:25:36 PDT 2015


https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2015/jun/12/us-marshals-director-resigning-amid-scandal-questi/

---

As US Marshals director resigns amid scandal, questions mount over
agency's cell phone tracking
Agents instructed to hide StingRay details “to the greatest extent
legally possible”

This week, the director of the US Marshals, Stacia Hylton, announced
that she will step down within the year. As reported by The Hill on
Tuesday, Director Hylton’s resignation follows increased scrutiny
regarding allegations of fiscal mismanagement, cronyism and dubious
surveillance practices.

But unlike Michele Leonhart, who resigned as director of the Drug
Enforcement Administration last month after an awkward hearing over
sexual misconduct by DEA agents, Director Hylton’s announcement did
not ride the wake of any dramatic findings or even a hearing to review
potential impropriety.

A handful of members of Congress — most vocally Senator Chuck Grassley
of Idaho — have voiced concerns over USMS management and called for
independent investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector
general. No findings will be published for several months, at least,
but the USMS director has now announced her resignation even before
results from this new investigation are in.

As Director Hylton winds down her tenure, what few documents we have
regarding surveillance practices by the US Marshals leave many
questions unanswered.

The US Marshals Service has spent millions of dollars on StingRays and
similar devices to track cell phones. Policy directives released by
the agency confirm that its investigators — like their counterparts at
the FBI and other law enforcement agencies — are instructed to go to
lengths to keep details of cell phone trackers out of courtroom
testimony and legal filings.

Over the past year, key details have emerged regarding deployment of
cell site simulators by USMS investigators and deputy marshals. A Wall
Street Journal investigation published last November uncovered a USMS
program that uses airplanes outfitted with cell site simulators in
nationwide fugitive manhunts.

The Justice Department refused to confirm or deny the program’s
existence, but insisted the undertaking was legal.

Last summer, the US Marshals physically removed documents regarding
StingRays used by one Florida police department. Two weeks later, the
ACLU obtained emails indicating that the USMS asked the same agency to
phrase court filings so as to obscure the role cell phone trackers
played in an investigation.

One April 2009 email chain details an agreement among the U.S.
Marshals, an assistant state attorney and local police regarding the
wording of probable cause affidavits (PCA) for a case where a StingRay
was deployed to locate a suspect.

“In the past, and at the request of the U.S. Marshalls (sic),” Sgt.
Ken Castro of the Sarasota Police Department wrote, “the investigative
means utilized to locate the suspect have not been revealed so that we
may continue to utilize this technology without the knowledge of the
criminal element.”

“In reports or depositions,” the sergeant further explained, “we
simply refer to the assistance as ‘received information from a
confidential source regarding the location of the suspect.’”

Notably, the US Marshals replied it was unable to locate any
communications with Sarasota police or its Florida regional task force
regarding cell site simulators, despite considerable media coverage
and litigation over the rapid document transfer. The Justice
Department upheld the agency’s response upon appeal last August.

Forty-one pages of undated policy directives released in February by
USMS in response to a Freedom of Information Act request include
instructions to keep details of StingRays and similar surveillance
tactics out of courtroom filings.

One of the broad directives indicates that the US Marshals must obtain
a pen/trap order from a judge in order to capture “signaling
information” from wireless devices. This information includes numbers
dialed and the signals a cell phone exchanges with nearby network
towers.

StingRays and similar cell phone tracking equipment use this
information to triangulate a particular device’s location or record
communications activity. To capture the content of communications, US
Marshals must request a “Title III” or wiretap court order, which
demands a higher evidentiary burden.

The FBI told legislators last year that its new StingRay policy
requires agents to secure a warrant to deploy StingRays, rather than
simply a pen/trap order, except under particular circumstances. The
Justice Department also recently announced that it is reviewing
policies across all of its components, including the US Marshals, when
it comes to cell phone tracking. MuckRock is seeking documents related
to both announcements.

Another USMS directive — entitled “Security and Protection” — stresses
that surveillance division agents must be kept off the stand, if
possible, and disclosure of techniques minimized “throughout the
judicial process.”

“It is imperative that investigators understand,” reads the directive
in part, “that they must minimize, to the greatest extent legally
possible, any testimony by [surveillance division] personnel or the
disclosure of [surveillance division] techniques throughout the
judicial process.”

“Such disclosure could significantly impair the future effectiveness
of the technique and jeopardize the safety of ongoing and future
surveillance operations by both the USMS and other investigative
agencies.”

A spokesperson for the US Marshals indicated by email that the
directive is current.

The USMS policy documents do not, however, define what constitutes the
“greatest extent legally possible” or the limits of such efforts.

MuckRock will be monitoring these proceedings closely - please email
all tips to info@muckrock.com.



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list