FBI's 'We're From The Cable Company' Ruse Not Convincing To Magistrate Judge
from the we-can't-fix-the-problem-but-we-can-look-through-all-your-stuff dept
The FBI's decision to impersonate repair technicians in order to perform a warrantless search is backfiring. Last July, FBI agents investigating an illegal gambling operation worked with Caesars Palace Casino to cut the internet connection to three villas it believed were the operation's ad hoc headquarters. It then sent agents disguised as repairmen to "fix" the problem. Once inside, these agents took photos, recorded video and otherwise observed what they believed to be an illegal bookmaking operation.
Shortly after this warrantless search, the FBI decided it was time to get a search warrant. In its warrant request, it conveniently left out the part where it cut the DSL connection and sent in agents dressed as repairmen. Because of this "fatally flawed" application, a Nevada magistrate judge is recommending the federal district court toss the warrant and suppress the evidence. [Decision pdf link]
Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen ruled that the failure to mention that the original case was born from the "ruse" meant the judge who signed a search warrant this summer didn't have all of the facts. Nowhere in the search warrant request, however, did the authorities mention that they allegedly saw illegal wagering on computers after posing as technicians who in reality briefly disconnected the DSL.The material omission of the probable cause's origin (a warrantless search using agents posing as repairmen) should have been enough to get this warrant tossed. The FBI, of course, claimed it omitted this information because it was "law enforcement sensitive." One would think a magistrate judge should have access to sensitive material because it's part of the "law enforcement" field, but the FBI apparently felt otherwise.
"The investigators' suspicions that Phua was engaged in illegal sports betting at Caesars Palace may be borne out by the evidence recovered in the execution of the warrant," Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen ruled "However, a search warrant is never validated by what its execution recovers."
Beyond that, there were several flaws in the application -- flaws Judge Leen says weren't intentional but "reckless." The FBI skewed the minimal amount of information it had collected from its illegal entry to make it seem as though it had actually acquired much more damning evidence.
The affidavit was written in a way to suggest investigators had much more information linking Phua to an illegal sports betting operation or wire room connected with the occupants of villa 8888. The affidavit’s repeated use of the phrase “Phua’s and his associates” or “Phua’s associates” or “at the behest of Phua or one of his associates” suggests that Phua was making requests and engaging in conduct which he was not.And that's only one small part of the affidavit. According to Judge Leen, nearly everything the FBI stated in support of its warrant request completely misrepresented what was actually happening at the Caesar's Palace villas. (Keep the following in mind the next time you visit Las Vegas. In an FBI agent's vivid imagination, your normal, lawful gambling can easily acquire very sinister connotations.)
The application failed to disclose to the issuing magistrate judge that Wood and SA Lopez defied the butler’s instruction to remain in the butler’s pantry and entered the villa in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The application also falsely stated that Wood was fearful for his safety and was too afraid to accompany SA Lopez on a subsequent entry into villa 8882. A video of Wood’s interaction with the butler taken on July 4, 2014, and produced by the government in discovery reveals this claim is false.And then there's the testimony of Special Agent Minh Pham, which contains an interesting statement caught by Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel.
[...]
The affidavit falsely stated that an unidentified “associates” of Paul Phua reserved all three villas and that the residents of the villas arrived close in time to each other. In fact, the principal resident of villa 8888, Hui Tang, made his own arrangements with Caesars and arrived several days later than the warrant application claims…
[...]
The application is grossly misleading in claiming that eight separate internet lines were installed, and by omitting the fact that the only unusual amount of computer equipment was in villa 8888 and was installed at the request of that villa’s occupants. Caesars installed a single line in each of the six villas in the building, including three villas whose occupants were unrelated to this case.
[...]
The agents were working with Caesars’ DSL contractor, Wood TMS, and knew by July 4, 2014, that Caesars had decided to install DSL internet service in each villa as an alternative means of internet access because of pervasive problems with the internet service provided by Cox Communications. The installation of a single DSL line in 8882 did not signify any unusually large amount of internet traffic, and there was no evidence that the residents of 8882 made any unusual requests for equipment or technical support.
[...]
The affidavit described deposits to Caesars and transactions between Phua and his associates through Caesars which grossly distorted the nature of those transactions…[T]here is nothing suspicious about gamblers transferring money to their casino accounts. “Front money” deposits are common, and the casino frequently requires a deposit to extend credit. The application omitted references to these facts and attempted to characterize the deposits as suspicious.
[...]
The application represents that Phua transferred $3 million to Gyouye Huang. Huang was a guest in villa 8882. Caesars’ record actually indicates “signed marker MKR for $3Mil trans to 4266598 [Huang Caesars player number] Chen Husan per MG/Bing.” The search warrant application omitted reference to the fact that that it is common for gamblers to share credit lines and that specific individuals involved in this investigation had done so in prior years on prior gambling trips. Even assuming the agents were “confused,” confusion is not probable cause, and the credit line was not fairly characterized to the issuing magistrate judge.
After Pham submitted and obtained the search warrant, he learned the affidavit contained errors. Specifically, it stated that Paul Phua wired $4 million into a Caesars account to secure a credit line. Pham later discovered it was actually Seng Chen “Richard” Yong that requested the wire to secure both their lines of credit. However, at the time Pham submitted the search warrant affidavit, he believed it was correct that Paul Phua had initiated this transfer.As Wheeler notes, the FBI seems to have a malleable baseline when it comes to font sizes. What Caesars turned over voluntarily was "very small and difficult to read." But the agents used it without demanding something more legible. Compare that to the high-profile government takedown of encrypted email developer Ladar Levison.
The affidavit also stated Paul Phua had transferred approximately $900,000 from a casino in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, to the Caesars account. However, Pham later learned that Paul Phua had been only one of the individuals who signed the consent to have that money wire-transferred into Yong’s account. At the time Pham submitted the affidavit, he believed the statement was true based on documents from Caesars concerning monetary transfers that he had received. Pham referred to the spreadsheet contained in government’s Exhibit 2F as a document he relied upon to support his statement in the affidavit. The font size was very small and difficult to read.
He also discovered another error in the affidavit days later. There were transfers for $3 million between individuals in the villas. He looked at the spreadsheet, and it was off by one or two lines,” which caused him to associate the wrong name with the transfer.
You’ll recall that when the FBI went after Lavabit to get its crypto key, Lavar Levison tried to comply by providing a printout of the key. But the government complained it was illegible, and got Levison held in contempt.So, Levison's 4-point printout of his encryption key was too small for the FBI, which complained to the court until it got its way. In this case, a "too small" printout was used without complaint, ultimately resulting in several flawed assertions being made in a warrant affidavit. "Too small" must be another part of the FBI's double standards -- one that makes concessions to third parties more amenable to the agency's aims.
A district court judge will make the final decision as to whether this warrant remains tossed. The saddest part about this is that the FBI gave itself an (illegal) head start and still managed to hand in a warrant request loaded with bad detective work and worse conjecture.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 4th amendment, cable company, cutting internet access, doj, fbi, hotel, paul phua, peggy leen, warrant
Companies: caesers
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The FBI should have said . . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ARS coverage
The judge basically said that getting in by pretending to be who you are not was okay, but not telling the judge while you were getting your warrant was a no-no.
That troubles me in so many ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ARS coverage
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ARS coverage
However, I think the point being made here is that, had the FBI told the judge they lied to gain entry, the judge could have made an informed decision of whether their immoral conduct rose to the level of unlawful search. As is, they wrote the warrant application in a way that implied they had gathered the evidence in a way that was already definitely lawful, so there was no need for the judge even to consider the question of lawful entry, only the question of whether the circumstances reported on the warrant application rose to the level of illegal conduct. (As Techdirt points out, there is also a serious question of whether the circumstances reported on the warrant have much basis in reality.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's an idea....So many many ways..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Charges
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Charges
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But the reality is that there are numerous websites that offer this same service online, apparently in direct violation of US federal law (Unless perhaps "wire communication" does not include internet?)
http://www.onlinesportsbetting.net/usa/caesars-palace-las-vegas-sportsbook.html
But this all comes down to one frequently asked question: Why does the US federal government spend so much money and resources enforcing antiquated laws and cracking down on activities that most people feel should be perfectly legal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A - The religious zealots who hold sway over conservative politicians don't like gambling.
B - Casino owners don't want competition from online gambling sites, so they buy off politicians to pass laws making it illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FBI bogus warrant
But it was Federal agents who did the lying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Next up, manufacturing the evidence
Because doing it right is too hard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
home grown betting laws?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"We're from the cable company" not a good introduction line
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pros and cons of "We're from the cable company"
- Cable companies have conditioned everyone to expect poor customer service and inadequate training, so the agents pretending to be cable technicians can pull off their cover with minimal training.
- Likewise, cable companies have conditioned everyone to expect poor internal communications about technical problems, so faking a cable outage is a good cover. Even if the victim gets through to the real cable company and the cable company denies there is a problem in the area, it'll just be written off as the cable company not knowing their own network.
- Everyone expects the technicians to be late, so agents have plenty of slack time to get their gear in order before walking in. On the other hand, this could work against them if they are too punctual.
Cons:
- As parent suggested
- Real cable company technicians will be unhappy and/or be unjustly targeted. Just ask Doctors Without Borders how their vaccine efforts are going thanks to the CIA...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FBI mentality..
To the FBI, maintaining the *illusion* that they are catching bad guys is equally if not more important than ACTUALLY catching REAL bad guys.
It's all a game of chess and if there are no moves on the board they resort to throwing the board away..
Once the FBI is involved the only thing you can be certain of is that they will find something to pin on you - valid or not.. Additionally, all law enforcement has the misguided belief that "you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride"
Moral of the story? Take it to trial.. But there's nothing to be done about how you ended up there except riding it out. At least in a trial you have a small chance of exposing them for what they truly are..
Organized crime funded with federal dollars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]