• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Kopbusters trap cops in a narcotics raid

Biff Starbuck

Critical Thinker
Biff Starbuck
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
276
A former narcotics enforcement officer who has sold videos for the past few years about how to avoid being arrested on drug charges apparently set up a sting of his own recently. To prove a point that some police still uses FLIR infrared cameras to find suspected marijuana growing operations, in spite of a Supreme Court ruling the cameras were illegally invasive for screening houses without a warrant since they can be considered to see through walls to some extent, Barry Cooper set up a Christmas tree grow room. Cooper and his team say they covertly set up the growing room in a rented house, being careful to have no other indication of a drug operation other than the hot, bright lights in the house.

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/130429.html?success=1

Is this something cops should fear?

Having written and executed search warrants on the local and federal level, I don't think so. I was so careful to make sure I had the correct location and a huge amount of evidence on the suspects. If police are doing their jobs, and prosecutors and judges doing theirs, this should not happen. Between internal affairs investigations and civil lawsuits, most law enforcement personnel are extremely cautious.

While I have seen criminals try to cash in by manipulating a police encounter, baiting an officer with threats and profanity only to turn on the recorder to get the inappropriate response, I think in this case if the activists are careful they can effectively expose illegal or improper behavior. If law enforcement does their job correctly, eventually the Kopbusters will get bored or move on to another jurisdiction.
 
I'm rather divorced from this sort of enforcement, so I haven't kept up with current case law. I know that direct observation, even from say, helicopter with binoculars was always acceptable.
I hadn't heard about the use of FLIR, though of course that makes sense as it targets heat sources.
Sufficient probable cause? Seems to me this would be a stretch, and I kind of agree with the court ruling. I know of cases where investigators checked records for purchases of specialized fertilizers, visits to seed-supply sites, and so forth before applying for a search warrant.
 
Kyllo V. United States is the main case law stating a warrantless search of a residence with a thermal imaging camera is unlawful.

Held: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a Fourth Amendment “search,” and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.​
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-8508.ZS.html

I think it is interesting though that as the price drops on thermal imaging equipment, more people will be buying them. At some point they will be "in general public use." How common do they have to be before citizens no longer have a reasonable expectation to be free from viewing by an infrared camera or imaging system?

http://www.x20.org/thermal/

And then further down the road, we will probably be able to buy inexpensive passive millimeter wave systems, which use natural radiation from the human body to illuminate items hidden under clothing. As well as those fake x-ray specs have sold out of the backs of comics books for decades, I am sure many people would buy those systems as toys if they could easily afford them.

http://www.thznetwork.org/wordpress/index.php/archives/304
 
I'm not sure I agree with Kyllo, and I don't agree with some of the things said in the article (for one example, I don't think the Supreme Court has said that using thermal imaging equipment is illegal, only that it can't legally establish probable cause), but - given that Kyllo is the law, and it is, I think this "sting" was pretty cool.

This confuses me:
The second question is, what probable cause did the police put on the affidavit to get a judge to sign off on a search warrant?
Click to expand...
Shouldn't we know this? It's my understanding that search warrant affidavits can be suppressed, but only for a good reason, and never for more than a short time. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
We are already getting information on the passive millimeter-wave devices; departmental e-mail last week had photos made with in-development equipment that was able to clearly show a concealed firearm.
No doubt this sort of thing will become standard at airports and large events....
 
Biff Starbuck said:
And then further down the road, we will probably be able to buy inexpensive passive millimeter wave systems, which use natural radiation from the human body to illuminate items hidden under clothing.

http://www.thznetwork.org/wordpress/index.php/archives/304
Click to expand...

Does this make sense to everyone, that the body emits waves that are readable to a receiver? I never heard of this, but a search brings up a bunch of different companies using this technology. What causes the body to emit millimeter waves?
 
Last edited:
I just went through the first 6 pages of Google hits on the story, and only found sensational re-posts of the same video above, and parroting of the fellow's claims of false information on the affidavit submitted by police.
I also searched local West Texas and Odessa newspaper pages, and found absolutely nothing on the incident.

In the various posts, the fellow refers to "illegal" FLIR, which is of course somewhat sensational as well. FLIR (forward-looking infra-red) devices are not illegal, rather it is the sole use of such devices to conduct a "search" of a residence that is improper.
The SCOTUS case cited was decided in 2001, and should be common knowledge with judicial personnel. They found that the device, which exceeds "normal observation", was an improper search and could not be the basis for probable cause.

Now, it's certainly proper for police to use the fact that a particular residence is radiating a lot of heat as the basis for a more involved investigation. The "Kopbusters" fellow says that the police simply lied to the issuing judge, inventing probable cause.
However, nothing in the material I was able to find details what information was presented in the affidavit.
At this point, we are getting a very one-sided view of the thing.

Also, in the various articles, it is apparent that Kopbusters ran this particular "sting" in Odessa with the intent of freeing a local young woman who had been convicted of "manufacturing with intent to distribute". Again, with no input from the law enforcement people involved, we are told that an informant planted evidence on the woman.
The only other person interviewed was the woman's father, who is convinced of her innocence. He offers no actual information.

So, this appears on the face of it to be a rather sensationalized incident by the vigorously self-promoting Kopbusters crew. Now, they might well be entirely correct; I've commented before on the unhealthy relationship between small-town police departments and drug-seizure money.
But I'd wait for a more detailed report including the actual affidavit presented to the judge for the search warrant before I'd make any judgment.
 
Ok, take 2:
Careyp74 said:
Does this make sense to everyone, that the body emits waves that are readable to a receiver? I never heard of this, but a search brings up a bunch of different companies using this technology. What causes the body to emit millimeter waves?
Click to expand...
Every object above absolute zero emits black-body (electromagnetic) radiation. The same property that makes stove coils, lava, or molten metal glow when you heat them up. The same thing that allows FLIR systems to detect infrared radiation given off by the human body. It's just that not every wavelength of light is visible to us humans. Millimeter waves, or T-rays, are merely another wavelength of light.
 
Last edited:
Shadowdweller said:
Ok, take 2:

Every object above absolute zero emits black-body (electromagnetic) radiation. The same property that makes stove coils, lava, or molten metal glow when you heat them up. The same thing that allows FLIR systems to detect infrared radiation given off by the human body. It's just that not every wavelength of light is visible to us humans. Millimeter waves, or T-rays, are merely another wavelength of light.
Click to expand...

thanks. Here is a follow up question. If two different materials are at the same temperature, do they give off different frequencies of waves?

I have seen thermal images with a color/temp legend, so I was under the impression that they would be the same wavelength. If so, how would this information be useful in detecting guns in a passive way?
 
The claim, as I understand it, is that the "Kopbusters" tricked the Odessa PD into falsifying the affidavit for a search warrant. Since FLIR would be insufficient to establish probable cause, they would have had to make something up to get a search warrant.

Texas has had one bad case of a small town PD bending/breaking rules when it comes to prosecuting drug cases. See Tulia.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulia,_Texas
 
That's the claim being made; that the Odessa police simply lied on the affidavit. Entirely possible; who knows what sort of cozy relationship the department has with the issuing judge?
Still, "Kopbusters" offers no evidence of such subterfuge; no copy of the affidavit or anything else.
In the video, "Barry" goes into some detail about how secretly they put together their phony grow-house. Using encrypted e-mails, coded cell phone messages, etc.
One might surmise that if police were conducting a proper investigation, that such activity would look exactly to a reasonable person (the standard for search warrants) that some illegal activity were taking place.
Although accusations from Kopbusters are many, little evidence has yet to be produced.
 
I didn´t see the "faking of warrant" make it into the newsclip.
To me that is the whole point, how could they miss it?

Does the war on drugs make police immune to criticism?
 
Careyp74 said:
thanks. Here is a follow up question. If two different materials are at the same temperature, do they give off different frequencies of waves?
Click to expand...
According to an acquaintance with an MS in physics, the spectrum should be the same for a given temperature, but the intensity can vary. Black objects tend to emit more radiation, while reflective objects emit less. (Though I've no idea whether this effect is functionally significant). On the other hand, completely separate from "black-body" radiation, different materials reflect or absorb light that hits them at different rates. For instance, X-rays can pass through flesh, but not so well through bone. As I understand it, T-ray technology is very recent because until the past few years we (humans) were unable to effectively produce large quantities of them.

Careyp74 said:
I have seen thermal images with a color/temp legend, so I was under the impression that they would be the same wavelength.
Click to expand...
Not sure what exactly you mean by this. Two objects at different temperatures may both emit black-body radiation of the same wavelength/frequency, but at different intensities because of the temperature difference. Presumably this is or could be used to calculate a temperature approximation/legend.
 
Last edited:
Indeed; if their complaint is that police assume a crime based on nothing more than IR readings, it's a bit ironic that they assume the police used false information to obtain their warrant based on nothing more than their insistence that they left no kind of evidence aside from IR.
 
The police could easily put such speculation to rest by showing the search warrant.
It should show a valid reason based on legal investigation.

That did not make it to the newsclip either.
 
I know only of one charge where suspicion is proof, it is suspicion that a jugde is incompetent* in a specific case. He would then be removed from that case.
It is so, in order to maintain respect/trust in the legal system.

The damage this case does to police credibility could be much worse than revealing some new technique that will like be showed off on discovery anyway.
And they have to weigh the priorities pretty quickly.

* as in biased, I am not sure about the translation

Unless of cource thay ARE a bunch of liars with no public trust to loose anyway.
That would change the objective from maintaining public trust to avoid getting charged for anything.
Then you would classify the warrant and make up some charge against kopbuster to show who is boss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom