In first, U.S. judge throws out cell phone ‘stingray’ evidence


7/13/16 REUTERS 12:19:26

July 13, 2016
In first, U.S. judge throws out cell phone ‘stingray’ evidence
Nate Raymond
https://1.next.westlaw.com/Document/I14f31320488a11e6a72ad77936ae8042/View/FullText.html?transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)
NEW YORK (Reuters) – For the first time, a federal judge has suppressed evidence obtained without a warrant by U.S. law enforcement using a stingray, a surveillance device that can trick suspects’ cell phones into revealing their locations.U.S. District Judge William Pauley in Manhattan on Tuesday ruled that defendant Raymond Lambis’ rights were violated when the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration used such a device without a warrant to find his Washington Heights apartment.The DEA had used a stingray to identify Lambis’ apartment as the most likely location of a cell phone identified during a drug-trafficking probe. Pauley said doing so constituted an unreasonable search.”Absent a search warrant, the government may not turn a citizen’s cell phone into a tracking device,” Pauley wrote.The ruling marked the first time a federal judge had suppressed evidence obtained using a stingray, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, which like other privacy advocacy groups has criticized law enforcement’s use of such devices.”This opinion strongly reinforces the strength of our constitutional privacy rights in the digital age,” ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler said in a statement.It was unclear whether prosecutors would seek to appeal. A spokeswoman for Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara, whose office was prosecuting the case, declined to comment.Stingrays, also known as “cell site simulators,” mimic cell phone towers in order to force cell phones in the area to transmit “pings” back to the devices, enabling law enforcement to track a suspect’s phone and pinpoint its location.Critics of the technology call it invasive and say it has been regularly used in secret to catch suspect in violation of their rights under the U.S. Constitution.The ACLU has counted 66 agencies in 24 states and the District of Columbia that own stingrays but said that figure underrepresents the actual number of devices in use given what it called secrecy surrounding their purchases.A Maryland appeals court in March became what the ACLU said was the first state appellate court to order evidence obtained using a stingray suppressed. Pauley’s decision was the first at the federal level.The U.S. Justice Department in September changed its internal policies and required government agents to obtain a warrant before using a cell site simulator.Bernard Seidler, Lambis’ lawyer, noted that occurred a week after his client was charged. He said it was unclear if the drug case against Lambis would now be dismissed.Note: Corrects location of apartment in second paragraph to Washington Heights from the Bronx, rephrases paragraph 10 to make clear ACLU said its figure underrepresents number of devices—- Index References —-News Subject: (Civil Rights Law (1CI34); Intellectual Freedoms & Civil Liberties (1IN08); Judicial Cases & Rulings (1JU36); Legal (1LE33))Industry: (Consumer Electronics (1CO61); Consumer Products & Services (1CO62); Electronics (1EL16); Global Positioning Systems (1GL40); Mobile Phones & Pagers (1WI07); Telecom Consumer Equipment (1TE03))Region: (Americas (1AM92); Maryland (1MA47); New York (1NE72); North America (1NO39); U.S. Mid-Atlantic Region (1MI18); USA (1US73))Language: ENOther Indexing: (Bernard Seidler; Raymond Lambis; William Pauley; Mark Blinch; Nathan Freed Wessler; Mark BlinchCell)Keywords: dataprivacy (MCC:f); (N2:US); (N2:USANY); (N2:AMERS); (N2:NAMER); (N2:USA); (MCCL:OVR)Word Count: 487

In first, U.S. judge throws out cell phone ‘stingray’ evidence

Advertisements

The True Prices of Drugs


From: Sharon L. Davis
Budget Analyst
U.S. Department of Commerce

WOW… AN EYE OPENER !
Verified -snopes.com: Generic Drugs

Let’s hear it for Costco!! (This is just mind-boggling!) Make sure you
read all the way past the list of the drugs. The woman that signed
below is a Budget Analyst out of federal Washington , DC offices.

Did you ever wonder how much it costs a drug company for the active
ingredient in prescription medications? Some people think it must cost
a lot, since many drugs sell for more than $2.00 per tablet. We did a
search of offshore chemical synthesizers that supply the active
ingredients found in drugs approved by the FDA. As we have revealed in
past issues of Life Extension, a significant percentage of drugs sold
in the United States contain active ingredients made in other
countries. In our independent investigation of how much profit drug
companies really make, we obtained the actual price of active
ingredients used in some of the most popular drugs sold in America .
The data below speaks for itself.

Celebrex: 100 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $130.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.60
Percent markup: 21,712%

Claritin: 10 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $215.17
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.71
Percent markup: 30,306%

Keflex: 250 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $157.39
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.88
Percent markup: 8,372%

Lipitor:20 mg
Consumer Price (100 tablets): $272.37
Cost of general active ingredients: $5.80
Percent markup: 4,696%

Norvasc:10 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $188.29
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.14
Percent markup: 134,493%

Paxil: 20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $220.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $7.60
Percent markup: 2,898%

Prevacid:30 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $44.77
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.01
Percent markup: 34,136%

Prilosec:20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $360.97
Cost of general active ingredients $0.52
Percent markup: 69,417%

Prozac:20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) : $247.47
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.11
Percent markup: 224,973%

Tenormin:50 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $104.47
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.13
Percent markup: 80,362%

Vasotec: 10 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $102.37
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.20
Percent markup: 51,185%

Xanax: 1 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) : $136.79
Cost of general active ingredients: $0.024
Percent markup: 569,958%

Zestril:20 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets) $89.89
Cost of general active ingredients $3.20
Percent markup: 2,809%

Zithromax:600 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $1,482.19
Cost of general active ingredients: $18.78
Percent markup: 7,892%

Zocor:40 mg
Consumer price (100 tablets): $350.27
Cost of general active ingredients: $8.63
Percent markup: 4,059%

Zoloft: 50 mg
Consumer price: $206.87
Cost of general active ingredients: $1.75
Percent markup: 11,821%

Since the cost of prescription drugs is so outrageous, I thought
everyone should know about this. Please read the following and pass it
on. It pays to shop around. This helps to solve the mystery as to why
they can afford to put a Walgreen’s on every corner.On Monday night,
Steve Wilson, an investigative reporter for Channel 7 News in Detroit
, did a story on generic drug price gouging by pharmacies. He found in
his investigation, that some of these generic drugs were marked up as
much as 3,000% or more. Yes, that’s not a typo: three thousand
percent! So often, we blame the drug companies for the high cost of
drugs, and usually rightfully so. But in this case, the fault clearly
lies with the pharmacies themselves.For example, if you had to buy a
prescription drug, and bought the name brand, you might pay $100 for
100 pills.

The pharmacist might tell you that if you get the generic equivalent,
they would only cost $80, making you think you are ‘saving’ $20. What
the pharmacist is not telling you is that those 100 generic pills may
have only cost him $10!

At the end of the report, one of the anchors asked Mr. Wilson whether,
or not there were any pharmacies that did not adhere to this practice,
and he said that Costco consistently charged little over their cost
for the generic drugs.

I went to the Costco site, where you can look up any drug, and get its
online price. It says that the in-store prices are consistent with the
online prices. I was appalled.Just to give you one example from my own
experience, I had to use the drug, Compazine, which helps prevent
nausea in chemo patients.

I used the generic equivalent, which cost $54.99 for 60 pills at CVS.
I checked the price at Costco, and I could have bought 100 pills for
$19.89. For 145 of my pain pills, I paid $72.57. I could have got 150
at Costco for $28.08.

I would like to mention, that although Costco is a ‘membership’ type store, you do NOT have to be a member to buy prescriptions there, as it is a federally regulated substance. You just tell them at the door that you wish to use the pharmacy, and they will let you in. (This is true)

This is true in Canada, too. I went there this past Thursday and asked them.

I am asking each of you to please help me by copying this letter, and passing it into your own e-mail, and send it to everyone you know with an e-mail address.

Sharon L. Davis
Budget Analyst
U.S. Department of Commerce