Best Buy Geek Squad geeks being paid FBI informants

[Typo_Negative]

Best Buy Geek Squad geeks being paid informants

The existence of the small cadre of informants within one of the country’s most popular computer repair services was revealed in the case of a California doctor who is facing federal charges after his hard drive was flagged by a technician. The doctor’s lawyers found that the FBI had cultivated eight “confidential human sources” in the Geek Squad over a four-year period, according to a judge’s order in the case, with all of them receiving some payment.

I will admit up front that the entirety of my Legal training comes from watching Law and Order reruns.

But my teacher has stated that the cops cannot do through a third party what they cannot do themselves. It seems clear that the geeks are searching for, rather than stumbling across, evidence for which they are paid.

“Their relationship is so cozy,” said defense attorney James D. Riddet, “and so extensive that it turns searches by Best Buy into government searches. If they’re going to set up that network between Best Buy supervisors and FBI agents, you run the risk that Best Buy is a branch of the FBI.”

Different agents handled the Geek Squad technicians, Carney wrote. In October 2009, Agent Jennifer Cardwell emailed Meade to express interest in meeting “to discuss some other ideas for collaboration,” Carney disclosed.

Best Buy says this is not company policy.

Rettenmaier signed a service order that prosecutors argue “waived any right to raise a Fourth Amendment claim” because it contained the admonition: “I am on notice that any product containing child pornography will be turned over to the authorities.”

I guess this is the issue. We know that if they see evidence of child porn, they are gonna report it. But if the FBI is having them look for it, are they acting as agents of the government?

In an internal FBI communication in July 2010, Agent Tracey L. Riley told her supervisor that “Source reported all has been quiet for about the last 5-6 months, however source agreed that once school started again, they may see an influx of CP [child pornography].” Meade was later identified as the “source.” Other internal communications show the “source” referring possible cases to Riley from computers sent to the Geek Squad from across the country.

The ‘source’ is predicting more child porn to appear. Hard to believe that ‘source’ is not searching for it.

Does this constitute a warrantless search by the FBI?

[Bricker]

@Typo_Negative

But my teacher has stated that the cops cannot do through a third party what they cannot do themselves. It seems clear that the geeks are searching for, rather than stumbling across, evidence for which they are paid.

This is a correct principle.

So, ask yourself: if you walked into the police station and asked them to repair your computer, would their subsequent report of your images be violative of the Fourth Amendment?

In other words, they are not doing through the Geeks what they could not do themselves. If you hand your system over to a third party, you typically waive the privacy interest that otherwise would protect it.

[CarnalK]

@Bricker

This is a correct principle.

So, ask yourself: if you walked into the police station and asked them to repair your computer, would their subsequent report of your images be violative of the Fourth Amendment?

In other words, they are not doing through the Geeks what they could not do themselves. If you hand your system over to a third party, you typically waive the privacy interest that otherwise would protect it.

So if the FBI agents just dressed up like Geek Squad crew and showed up before the real guys, that would be fine?

Could the DEA put some plumbers on the payroll and ask them to poke around the rest of the house looking for grow ops?

[Saint_Cad]

@Bricker

This is a correct principle.

So, ask yourself: if you walked into the police station and asked them to repair your computer, would their subsequent report of your images be violative of the Fourth Amendment?

In other words, they are not doing through the Geeks what they could not do themselves. If you hand your system over to a third party, you typically waive the privacy interest that otherwise would protect it.

Let’s ask another question, I ask the GS cops to install a program on my computer to look at cat photos. In doing so they hunt around on my computer and find a invoice buried 8 subdirectories down on my C: (not even on the desktop) labeled jhdfj7aHu889nhFGTDC.docx that is an invoice for 4 new cannabis plants. Would that be a legal search since I gave them access to my computer to perform a specific act and it is not reasonable that they would find that document performing the work I asked them to do?

Or another way. I ask an exterminator to clear out the mice in my house and I did not know he works as an undercover police officer. Are you saying I just gave the police permission to search my house for anything incriminating sans warrant?

[Just_Asking_Questions]

@Bricker

This is a correct principle.

So, ask yourself: if you walked into the police station and asked them to repair your computer, would their subsequent report of your images be violative of the Fourth Amendment?

In other words, they are not doing through the Geeks what they could not do themselves. If you hand your system over to a third party, you typically waive the privacy interest that otherwise would protect it.

But, if I invite a contracting crew to redo my kitchen, and they are FBI informants, who have been told to go into the basement, open up all my boxes, and look for my (theoretical! for hypothetical purposes only!) kiddie porn stash, is that not a better description of the actual case?

In other words, if I hire BB to fix my motherboard, how does that give them the right to look through all the files on the harddrive?

eta: we think alike, Saint Cad

[madsircool]

If an exterminator you hired to catch rats found a woman you had imprisoned in your basement, would you agree that that would be probable cause for the police to enter your home to investigate?

[Just_Asking_Questions]

@madsircool

If an exterminator you hired to catch rats found a woman you had imprisoned in your basement, would you agree that that would be probable cause for the police to enter your home to investigate?

If I called the police and told them you had a captive woman in your basement, do you think that’s probable cause for a search?

[CarnalK]

@madsircool

If an exterminator you hired to catch rats found a woman you had imprisoned in your basement, would you agree that that would be probable cause for the police to enter your home to investigate?

This is about the FBI hiring a network of informants that have regular access to people’s private files.

[slash2k]

@madsircool

If an exterminator you hired to catch rats found a woman you had imprisoned in your basement, would you agree that that would be probable cause for the police to enter your home to investigate?

Was the exterminator hired by the FBI to look for women in your basement?

[DrCube]

Fixing a computer is not the same as searching it. Just like fixing your air conditioner is not the same as searching your house. Simply having access isn’t the same thing. If the child porn was open in a browser window on the desktop, that’s one thing. If it’s in a hidden folder, on a separate partition or password protected, that’s another thing entirely. Somewhere in between? Case by case basis. Police can’t just assume that asking someone to repair your hardware or install antivirus software gives them free rein to snoop through your entire multi-terabyte hard drive.

[Evan_Drake]

I dunno why someone fixing a computer would need to look at the contents of a hard drive.

If the operating system is at fault you would reinstall the OS; if the disk is broken there’s not that much that will fix it; if one hoovers up the data from a dying disk, you don’t have to read that which you recovered.

[Typo_Negative]

The image was located on “unallocated space,” which is where deleted items reside on a computer until they are overwritten when the space is needed. Unallocated space is not easily accessed — it requires special forensic software.

Prosecutors said that the Geek Squad technician who searched the unallocated space was merely trying to recover all the data Rettenmaier had asked to be restored. Riddet argued that the technician was going beyond the regular search to deleted material to find evidence the FBI might want.

In addition, a federal appeals court has ruled that pornography found on unallocated space is insufficient to prove that the user possessed it, since information about when it was accessed, altered or deleted is no longer available.** “There was no evidence of how the contraband got onto Dr. Rettenmaier’s hard drive,” Riddet wrote, “and it could have gotten there before he possessed the computer or against his will**.”

Bolding mine.

The ‘geek’ was doing a forensic search in unallocated space. Going where he had no business and no business reason to go (the prosecutor disputes this). He was getting money from the FBI to do this. The FBI was paying for the results.

If a tech stumbles across evidence of a crime, I have no problem with them reporting it to the authorities. Further, I would have no problem if that were Best Buy’s corporate policy. Being good citizens and all.

But I have a problem with the relationship between the informants and the FBI and I damn sure have a problem with the payments. This makes the geeks in the employ of the FBI and gives them a financial incentive to find things.

You can probably see where I am going with this.

[madsircool]

@Just_Asking_Questions

If I called the police and told them you had a captive woman in your basement, do you think that’s probable cause for a search?

If u were in my house, yes.

[madsircool]

@slash2k

Was the exterminator hired by the FBI to look for women in your basement?

But you invited them in. The elimination of kiddie porn is more important than your right to hide it.

[aldiboronti]

@Typo_Negative

This makes the geeks in the employ of the FBI and gives them a financial incentive to find things.

I think this financial incentive is the very crux of the matter. And Best Buy need to be very concerned about this too. Who is going to get their computer repaired by Best Buy knowing technicians may be snooping through every byte? You don’t have to be a pedophile to find that worrying.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Typo_Negative

Bolding mine.

The ‘geek’ was doing a forensic search in unallocated space. Going where he had no business and no business reason to go (the prosecutor disputes this). He was getting money from the FBI to do this. The FBI was paying for the results.

If a tech stumbles across evidence of a crime, I have no problem with them reporting it to the authorities. Further, I would have no problem if that were Best Buy’s corporate policy. Being good citizens and all.

But I have a problem with the relationship between the informants and the FBI and I damn sure have a problem with the payments. This makes the geeks in the employ of the FBI and gives them a financial incentive to find things.

You can probably see where I am going with this.

Yup, tech-savvy operatives who get paid if they can ‘find’ child-porn on the computer of whatever poor fool needed to call Geek Squad to fix their computer problem. I can’t imagine how that might possibly be abused. :rolleyes:

[usedtobe]

Nominated for “All Time Best Example of ‘Slippery Slope’”:

Because it is Kiddy Porn, we get to expand the right of searching everything, no matter how far removed from the ostensible action requested.

Such as a Warrant for searching for a hostage resulting in opening kitchen cabinets.
Hostages rarely are very rarely held in kitchen cabinets.

[Just_Asking_Questions]

@madsircool

The elimination of kiddie porn is more important than your right to hide it.

More important than the Constitution?

[madsircool]

@Just_Asking_Questions

More important than the Constitution?

What Constitutional Right protects kiddie porn? And the government isn’t randomly searching all computers. Constitutional rights ate constantly balanced against the greater good. The government doesn’t need a search warrent to search your financial records in an audit.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

How do we know these secret informants are not putting stuff on computers in order to earn more money? These spies have a perverse incentive to turn in as many people as possible.