Mediaboss Marketing

As a crime reporter in San Francisco, I should have known better than to park my car under an overpass near the Hall of Justice, a nice stroller visible in the back seat.

And it couldnt have hurt to check that I didnt drop my keys onto the ground next to the vehicle as I scrambled to pay the meter and run to a court hearing.

Alas, the predictable outcome: As I sat in court taking notes, my phone vibrated with a text from my partner, Miguel, from our Oakland home. His phone was in communication with our Subaru Outback, which was moving.

The alarm of the car went off was it you???

I tried to respond but had no cell service in the granite-clad building. By the time I walked out of the courtroom a few minutes later, Miguel was frantic. The texts came tumbling out.

Please tell me you are in the car cause if not our car got stolen. What is going on??? So the front door is ajar now? I just hope you are ok.

My first text back to Miguel was a profanity.

That afternoon, I joined a growing category of San Francisco crime victims: Those who report a theft while simultaneously tracking what was stolen through location-based technologies such as Bluetooth and GPS.

The Subarus alarm had apparently sounded because the thief used the key rather than the key fob to unlock the door. Now, Miguel could see the location of the car through the MySubaru app.

Simultaneously, he could view the location of our car seat, which wed outfitted with an Apple AirTag in case of our childs abduction, and the location of the car keys, which also had an AirTag to prevent me from constantly misplacing them.

Standing in my now-vacant parking spot, I called 911. I told the police dispatcher that Miguel was tracking everything from Oakland.

Can someone please help me?

Megan Cassidys vehicle was stolen and then damaged.

That afternoon, May 19, was chaotic and humiliating, but it also presented a unique opportunity. For the first time in my career, I would be able to view my beat from the inside out.

In recent months, Ive spoken to many theft victims who were able to pinpoint the location of their luggage, bicycles and other stolen goods.

While this technology has been around for years, police say its spread particularly Apples introduction of the AirTag last year to compete with products like the Tile tracker and the Galaxy SmartTag has prompted a boom in calls for help like mine.

As the Washington Posts Heather Kelly wrote in an article in October, after tracking down her stolen Honda Civic in San Francisco, Apples marketing for the AirTag focuses on misplaced items and makes no mention of crime, theft or stealing in any of the ads, webpages or support documents. But in reality, the company has built a network that is ideal for that exact use case.

Tony Maozholds a gps tracker by his truck in San Francisco, Calif., on Friday, Aug. 19, 2022. Maozs truck has been stolen multiple times.

Kenny Franks holds a gps tracker next to his luggage which was stolen and later recovered in San Francisco, Calif., on Friday, Aug. 19, 2022.

Left: Rony Maoz holds holds a GPS tracker by his truck, which has been stolen multiple times. Right: Kenny Franks holds a GPS tracker next to his luggage which was stolen and later recovered. Top: Rony Maoz holds a GPS tracker by his truck, which has been stolen multiple times. Above: Kenny Franks holds a GPS tracker next to his luggage, which was stolen and later recovered.

Recent stories have documented similar recoveries in Memphis, Atlanta and Seaford Rise, a suburb of Adelaide in Australia.

In San Francisco, a city rife with gadget-lovers and plagued by high property crime, the technology would seem to be a game changer. But in reality, situations like my stolen Subaru can often be mired in unforeseen complications.

The response by police has at times been thwarted by legal constraints for example, an officer generally cant enter a home just because the Find My iPhone app says your cell is inside and at other times by what victims say feels like apathy.

Police officials say the reality is that a stolen phone, bike or even car is not as high a priority as a violent crime, so cops dont always have time to get involved and stay involved.

The result can be maddening for victims armed with case-cracking evidence. And while police say they always advise these victims against following their valuables into potentially dangerous situations, many people told me they felt they had no choice but to go cowboy.

Looking back at Miguels texts from May 19, its easy to see how the specter of danger immediately enters the equation.

Be careful!!!!! It says the car is on! There could be someone in the car. MEGAN DO NOT CONFRONT ANYONE.

Ill admit, the possibility of vigilantism had crossed my mind. But the SFPD jumped on our case, even though it had no idea I was a member of the media.

After I reported the Outback stolen from the street outside the Hall of Justice, I connected the dispatcher to Miguel, who relayed the cars path, turn by turn, in real time.

At about 4 p.m., seven blocks from where I stood, the car stopped.

Kenny Franks with his luggage that was stolen and later recovered in San Francisco.

A little more than two weeks earlier, on May 3, Kenny Franks didnt spot his suitcase at baggage claim at San Francisco International Airport. He figured it must have been misplaced by the airline, because an AirTag he had placed inside the luggage showed it was still tracking from SFO.

Franks filed a report with Alaska Airlines and left the airport about 7 p.m.

So when Franks saw the bag travel across town about 15 minutes later, he was disappointed to learn that an airline employee wasnt delivering it to him. Rather, a thief was on the move.

Franks called police, and in multiple calls, he said, dispatchers instructed him to fill out a police report rather than try to retrieve the bag on his own.

Franks submitted a report at San Franciscos Northern Station on Fillmore Street, but despite officials insistence, told police he would seek to retrieve the luggage with or without them. A dispatcher, he said, eventually agreed to send officers to a Super 8 motel on Lombard Street where the luggage seemed to have landed, and advised Franks to wait and not confront anyone.

When the officers showed up, Franks pointed them to the room from which his suitcase was locating. The cops knocked on the door. A man who answered the door demanded a search warrant, and the officers left, explaining to Franks that they couldnt enter without one.

Franks who eventually got the bag back after it was emptied and discarded said he understood and that he empathized with the fact that they have violent crimes going on that they also need to respond to.

If one of them had gotten hurt because of my silly luggage, I would have felt bad about it, he said. But it was very, very frustrating. I feel like there could have been more done.

I also spoke to Kate Stoia, a Noe Valley resident and candidate for District Eight Supervisor, and her husband, Rony Maoz, who resorted to following his stolen truck around for hours last September.

Because it had been stolen twice before, Maoz had by then equipped it with a tracking device made by a friends startup. Driving another car, Maoz followed the signal and found the truck in the India Basin neighborhood. He called 911 and told a dispatcher he had eyes on the vehicle.

But when officers arrived and tried to pull over the suspect with lights and sirens, he sped off, police told Maoz.

Because of the inherent risks of high-speed chases, city policy doesnt allow them in many circumstances. And Maoz said he was told by officers that they didnt have time to keep following the suspects digital trail as he drove around the city. But if the man got out of the car, they told him, please call again. Help would be on the way.

So Maoz spent the day in a cat-and-mouse game. Every time the suspect parked, he said, he would call the police, who would say officers were responding and then the man would take off again.

Ultimately, the thief abandoned the truck and Maoz got it back.

Rony Maozs truck has been stolen multiple times.

Most of the people I interviewed for this story stressed that the cops they dealt with were polite and professional.

But Stoia and other victims also described what they characterized as a defeatist culture in the ranks, with officers blaming prosecutors, policy, state laws or time constraints for not performing what seemed to be standard police work.

Though most of the victims ultimately got their property back, they often did so by putting themselves at risk. Almost everyone I interviewed said its only a matter of time before a property-crime victim goes rogue and meets a tragic fate.

The thing that is problematic is ... this cannot lead to vigilantism, right? But eventually it will, Stoia said. One entity needs to have a monopoly on the use of force. And if they dont use it responsibly, people are going to take action.

According to one person, this is already happening.

The man, who spoke on condition that I not identify him, said he traced his stolen bike to tents under a freeway on Division Street, but was told by police that they couldnt respond until the next day. So he committed a crime of his own.

The thing that is problematic is ... this cannot lead to vigilantism, right? But eventually it will.

I went out with a baseball bat, he said. Found it and trashed the guys tent.

Officer Kathryn Winters, a San Francisco police spokesperson, said police strongly discourage anyone from confronting a suspect over stolen property.

The best thing they can do is stop and meet with us, Winters said. If their items are tracking, then we can take over the investigation.

However, Winters said, unless the victim reports a serious crime like an accompanying robbery or assault, rather than a relatively low-level theft, police dont always have the resources to dig in.

And if the item tracks from inside a residence or hotel room as in Kenny Franks case Winters said Fourth Amendment protections require police to get a warrant.

Theres a very high probable-cause standard that we have to meet to be able to get a judge to sign off on it, Winters said. And if we simply just say its tracking to this location, unfortunately a lot of times thats just not good enough for a judge.

Car theft victim Tyler Smith experienced still further limitations. When his Chevy Spark was stolen from the Mission District on April 8, he reported to police that he was tracking it via the cars OnStar system. He said police instructed him to go to the location and call them back when he spotted the vehicle.

The tracking app led Smith to a homeless encampment under a South of Market freeway overpass.

It was a tiny one-way road, Smith said. I was pretty sketched out.

Smith said he shuffled by his car quickly, trying to peer inside.

But then (police) kept asking me questions like, Can you see whos in it? What do they look like? Can you confirm the plate? Smith said. I was like, No! I walked by, I saw it was there, and I cant believe I had to do that.

As Smith waited anxiously around the corner, he said, police arrived within about 20 minutes.

The officers and Smith approached the car again. They opened the door to find people living inside. The officers politely asked the occupants to leave, Smith said, and didnt attempt to question them.

They said they werent sure who stole the car just because those people were in it doesnt mean that they stole it, Smith said. So they couldnt do anything.

Anas Gragueb also became her own sleuth after her electric bike was swiped from her apartment buildings garage last year, and she tracked it to an encampment near City Hall.

She said she begged a dispatcher to send help, but was told there was no guarantee.

I felt like, if thats not a moment in my life where Im justified in calling the police the moment where I know Im going to be faced with somebody whos committed a crime, when are the police going to be useful?

So Gragueb borrowed her wifes bike and rode alone to the address, where she came upon a man doing drugs on the pavement next to a row of slick new bikes. Gragueb had promised her wife she wouldnt approach anyone, so she rode a little farther along, until she saw a group of construction workers.

Im so sorry, she said she told them. But theres my bike. Its right there. Im scared to go. I dont see it, but I know its there. Would you mind just being next to me while I ask questions and ask for my bike back?

Gragueb had an image of the suspected burglar on her phone, taken from her garages security camera footage. The construction workers, she said, recognized the man as someone who had vandalized their site, and one offered to escort Gragueb back to the scene.

After a brief confrontation with the suspect, Gragueb said, she spotted the tip of her bike wheel peeking out from under a tarp. With the construction workers assistance, she carried it back to the construction site and called police, who ultimately arrested the suspect.

I felt like, if thats not a moment in my life where Im justified in calling the police the moment where I know Im going to be faced with somebody whos committed a crime, Gragueb said, when are the police going to be useful?

Winters said she wasnt able to track down information on these specific incidents, but said, anecdotally, that they appeared to illustrate some of the complexities of such investigations.

Within 10 minutes of putting Miguel in touch with police, allowing him to relay information about our stolen Subaru, I received a call back from a dispatcher. Police officers had found my car, unoccupied, about four blocks away from where I had left it.

An officer waited at the location for me to arrive, and stood by as I surveyed the damage. Some of the contents of my car littered the street, including my infants tiny floral sneakers.

The stroller was gone, but the car seat which is admittedly tricky to remove was spared. Nothing else of value was there in the first place, but that didnt stop the thief from making off with a car charger and some pennies he cut out of a soda can that we shake to stop our dog from barking.

And in the few blocks of his joyride, the thief also managed to sideswipe something sturdy enough to dislodge my bumper. Im still working that out with insurance.

I got the car towed, because the officer couldnt wait for my partner to arrive with the spare keys. He also didnt want to leave me there alone, in case the thief came back. I understood.

Before we parted ways, the officer did a quick search for my keys, which were tracking from the same block. He poked his head into a tent and talked to a few apparent witnesses, but said the keys might have been inside a nearby building and, if so, he couldnt go in.

I felt relieved and thankful for the officers swift response.

The next day, Miguel and I returned to the scene. The keys, or at least the AirTag affixed to them, seemingly hadnt moved since the day before. We debated asking police to escort us, but figured they probably had better things to do.

A group of people was smoking on the curb. We feared what might happen if we sent a signal to the tracker and it beeped from inside someones pocket. We tried anyway and played dumb, saying wed dropped or keys in the area. Had anyone seen them?

Fortunately, the alert instead led us to a tree. There were the keys, hanging from a branch.

Originally posted here:
SF police and car thefts: What they can and can't do to help you - San Francisco Chronicle

Fox News and other right-wing media outlets have claimed that the FBI and the Justice Department violated former President Donald Trump's Fourth Amendment rights during the August 8 search of his Mar-a-Lago residence, but legal experts dispute this claim.

On August 8, the FBI executed a judge-approved search warrant as part of ongoing investigations into Trumps possible mishandling of classified documents and presidential records. Earlier this year, reports surfaced that the National Archives and Records Administration had retrieved 15 boxes of White House records from Mar-a-Lago in January, some of which contained classified materials. After months of back and forth between the FBI and Trump which includedFBI and DOJ investigators visiting Mar-a-Lago and the issuance of a subpoena to Trump in pursuit of documents that federal investigators believed he had failed to turn over earlier in the year the agency finally got a search warrant approved by a Florida judge, which led to the August 8 search.

In response to these events, right-wing media have downplayed the seriousness of Trumps potential wrongdoing, pushed false claims and baseless conspiracy theories, fearmongered that the Justice Department and the FBI have been weaponized against Trump, and now are claiming that law enforcement violated the former presidents Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, despite the fact that the FBI had a warrant for the search.

Read the original:
Right-wing media claim Trump's Fourth Amendment rights were violated in Mar-a-Lago search - Media Matters for America

(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Two weeks ago, the FBI executed a search warrant at the former presidents private club to retrieve government property wrongfully retained after American voters sent Donald Trump packing. Since then, weve seen conservative group Judicial Watch sue to gain access to the search documents, followed by every major media outlet in the country piling on to successfully kick loose the warrant, inventory, and soon a redacted version of the underlying affidavit.

What we havent seen is Donald Trumps lawyers do anything at all besides yell on TV and make wild accusations that the FBI planted evidence. But last week Fox Newss Laura Ingraham seems to have lit a fire under Team Trump, so now were getting a major motion pertaining to the Fourth Amendment.

As usual, the former president is vague on exactly which statutes the scammers supposedly violated. Nor is he clear how this grievous wrong will be vindicated. But hes sure that his rights, together with the rights of all Americans, have been violated at a level rarely seen before in our Country. And hes not going to put up with it!

Trumps lawyer Lindsey Halligan, whose primary practice area appears to be landlord-tenant disputes, promised that Trumps illustrious legal team was taking the matter seriously if not expeditiously but said she was not going to talk about it until its actually filed.

Dr. Gina has neither a medical degree nor a degree in psychology, and shes not a licensed therapist. She does have a PhD in human and organization systems from an online university, though, and she did write a book claiming Trump was the most sound-minded person to ever occupy the White House. So you know this conversation was on the highest level all ways round.

James Trusty, a former federal prosecutor and one of Trumps only attorneys with relevant experience, was more specific on Fox this weekend.

The Fourth Amendment requires particularity. It requires narrowness to the intrusion on the persons home, he said, going on to describe the warrant as authorizing the functional equivalent of a general search.

How fun for Fox viewers to discover that civil liberties are good, actually!

Were going to come out swinging and say, look, you know, this cannot be just with a wink and a nod from DOJ that we are supposed to trust them, he went on. Under these circumstances, were going to have to get court involved, judicial intervention at the District Court level, to get somebody in the mix here that can help vindicate the Fourth Amendment rights of the president.

Simply as a matter of linear time, it is already too late for the former presidents legal team to come out swinging. But if he wants to file a Rule 41 motion for the return of property, as his former lawyer John Eastman did recently, he may have a bit of a bit of a problem since the FBI went in there to seize government property wrongly retained, and most of the stuff taken doesnt belong to him.

In fact, as Politico notes, while Trump threw a massive online tantrum about agents seizing his three passports, he appears to have been unaware that they were even taken and only alerted to the fact when the FBIs filter team flagged them as improperly seized and returned them.

In later comments to conservative host Mark Levin, Trusty elaborated on his theme of government overreach and promised to seek a special master to intervene to protect documents which are attorney-client privileged, although it appears that the Department is already employing its own filter team. The irony of a lawyer going on television to broadcast Trumps legal strategy while complaining that the government is illegally prying into his Trumps legal strategies appears to be lost on Trusty. But his client appears to be far more concerned with what goes on in front of the camera than in the actual courtroom.

And PS, while Trusty promised Levin that he would be filing within hours, as of this writing, nothing has hit the docket.

United States v. Sealed Search Warrant [Docket via Court Listener]

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Read the rest here:
Trump Lawyers Promise To 'Come Out Swinging' And It Only Took Them Two Short Weeks! - Above the Law

The execution of the search warrant at former President Donald Trumps home in Florida caused consternation for some who think the warrant was politically driven. Serving a search warrant on Trump has political implications, but that does not mean it was done without a proper constitutional basis.

As an initial matter, the individuals seeking the search warrant made a determination that Trumps home contained evidence of a crime or items that were illegally possessed. In other words, officials with the FBI, in conjunction with attorneys at the U.S. Department of Justice, concluded that such evidence probably was inside the home. Given that this search warrant was unprecedented, it is hard to imagine those officials and attorneys made the decision lightly.

Even if one believes those officials and attorneys engaged in rampant political misconduct, an external check exists. For federal law enforcement officials to obtain a search warrant, they had to get authorization from a neutral U.S. magistrate judge. The FBI agent had to present an affidavit, swearing under oath and penalty of perjury to all the details in the affidavit that supported the assertion there probably is evidence of crime. There cannot be any vague assertion that some crime happened. Instead, the affidavit must have information that describes the expected evidence in support of the allegations related to the specific crime.

In order for the magistrate judge to sign the search warrant, that person had to find that probable cause existed based on the totality of the circumstances. Federal magistrate judges are not political nominees; they are highly trained legal experts who are selected to work for a federal court based on merit.

As a former U.S. magistrate judge, I signed countless search warrants, but never one as high profile as this one. Each time I reviewed an application for a search warrant, I read and analyzed all the documents carefully, ensuring there was full compliance with the Fourth Amendment before I signed the warrant. I can only imagine if I were reviewing a warrant application for a former president that my high level of diligence would have somehow been even higher. I would expect whoever signed this search warrant exercised a similar exacting level of legal analysis.

If somehow the oversight and review by the FBI, the Department of Justice and the magistrate judges analysis all failed, Trump still had options. He could have gone to federal court seeking to quash the search warrant with arguments that it violated the Fourth Amendment. Another federal judge would have reviewed the search warrant to ensure it complied with Fourth Amendment requirements. Trump, with his legal resources, did not choose to have a federal judge immediately review the warrants constitutionality, which likely indicates nothing readily appeared to be unconstitutional.

As search warrants are a law enforcement tool in criminal investigations, the Fourth Amendment authorizes their issuance provided they meet a number of parameters, including particularity and reasonableness. The execution of the warrant may not lead to any charges against any individual, including Trump, as there is no certainty that the FBI agents will find evidence of a crime. Probable cause based on a totality of the circumstances is the standard, as opposed to certainty.

However, if Trump is charged with a crime based on any evidence obtained from the search of his home, he will have another chance to challenge the search warrant. He can file a motion to suppress with the federal judge overseeing the charges against him that could challenge the allegations and information in the agents sworn affidavit, any shortcomings in the magistrate judges review of the warrant application, or any problems with the execution of the warrant at his home. Finally, Trump can appeal any unsuccessful motion to suppress to the federal appellate court, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many of Trumps supporters decried the execution of the search warrant. None of these supporters, however, pointed to any concrete Fourth Amendment violations in the warrant. Trump chose to forgo filing a motion to quash. A number of constitutional safeguards exists. Ultimately, the search warrant, while shocking given its target, appears to comply with the Fourth Amendment based on what we currently know.

Brian L. Owsley is an associate professor of law at UNT Dallas College of Law, where he teaches, among other topics, federal criminal procedure, which concerns the Fourth Amendment. He served as federal magistrate judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas from 2005 until 2013.

See more here:
Commentary: 'I signed countless warrants. Search of Trump's house is shocking and constitutional.' - San Antonio Express-News

Three Arkansas police officers have been suspended pending an investigation by state police after a video taken by a bystander showed them brutally beating a shoeless man outside of a convenience store.

The video, first posted Sunday afternoon on Twitter, shows two Crawford County sheriff's deputies and an officer with the Mulberry Police Department holding down and battering a man later identified by state police as Randal Worcester, 27, of Goose Creek, South Carolina. The officers knee, punch, and slam Worcester's head into the ground.

Arkansas news outlet KSFM-TV reports that, according to Crawford County Sheriff Jimmy Damante, officers were dispatched on Sunday after receiving a call about a man threatening and allegedly spitting on a convenience store employee:

Sheriff Damante says Worcester then traveled on a bike to Mulberry, near Exit 20, where the Mulberry officer and the deputies met with him. The conversation began calm and Worcester handed them a pocket knife, but the sheriff says Worcester then began attacking one of the deputies by pushing him to the ground and punching the back of his head, leading to what was seen in the video.

Worcester has been charged with second-degree battery, resisting arrest, refusal to submit, possessing an instrument of crime, criminal trespass, criminal mischief, terroristic threatening, and second-degree assault.

There is no bright-line test for when legal use of force by police crosses over into excessive force. Rather, excessive force claims are evaluated under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard, which judges incidents based on individual factors and from the perspective of a reasonable police officer on the scene. However, slamming a person's head into the pavement is not a standard technique to gain compliance.

"Certainly the blows to the head at the same time you're trying to get a person to put their hands behind their backthink about it," former Philadelphia police Commissioner Charles Ramsey told CNN. "It doesn't make sense. If you're getting hit in the face, you're going to lift your hands to try to protect your face."

"In reference to the video circulating on social media involving two Crawford County Deputies, we have requested that Arkansas State Police conduct the investigation and the Deputies have been suspended pending the outcome of the investigation," Damante said in a Facebook statement. "I hold all my employees accountable for their actions and will take appropriate measures in this matter."

Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson has confirmed that the Arkansas State Police are investigating the incident, and in a statement to The New York Times, the agency said its investigation "will be limited to the use of physical force by the deputies and the police officer."

The incident is just the latest video of apparently excessive force to go viral and lead to police being investigated. In April, bodycam footage of Tulsa police violently arresting an elderly woman with bipolar disorder drew widespread outrage. Last month, a video went viral of a 2016 incident where a Colorado police officer chased and tased a man for holding a "fuck bad cops" sign.

See the article here:
Arkansas Cops Suspended After Video of Beating Goes Viral - Reason