Podcasts & RSS Feeds
Most Active Stories
- No, Chinese investors aren't 'buying up Detroit' – but they do have an eye on the Motor City
- The average Michigan family needs $52,330 a year to 'make ends meet'
- Here are our 10 favorite photos of what your winter looks like
- Michigan's Attorney General is risking his political future over the gay marriage case
- What all the snow and ice will mean for Great Lakes water levels
Thu April 21, 2011
State Police respond to questions about data extraction devices
For close to three years, the ACLU says it has been asking the Michigan State Police for more information about the use of "data extraction devices" that can be used to get information from personal cell phones.
Using the device is "kind of like copying all the papers in your locked briefcase while your back is turned," according to a report released yesterday by Michigan Radio's Lester Graham.
Graham reports "if [the devices] are being used, it could be construed as illegal search and seizure."
Now, the officals at the Michigan State Police (MSP) have issued a statement saying they only use the date extraction devices (DEDs) in certain circumstances. From the statement:
The MSP only uses the DEDs if a search warrant is obtained or if the person possessing the mobile device gives consent. The department's internal directive is that the DEDs only be used by MSP specialty teams on criminal cases, such as crimes against children.
The DEDs are not being used to extract citizens' personal information during routine traffic stops.
The MSP statement said the ACLU's press release caused "speculation and caused inaccurate information to be reported about data extraction devices (DEDs) owned by the Michigan State Police (MSP)."
They might be referring to an article by CNET titled "Michigan cops stealing drivers' phone data."
The ACLU didn't accuse the Michigan State Police of improperly using the devices. They were pointing out the fact that the devices could be used improperly and wanted more information.
The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request. The response... send us $544,680 in processing fees and we'll give you the information.