Government obligations pertaining responding to reports surveillance and targeting crimes.

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Jurisdiction

Missouri

Hello,

I'm not sure I'm on the right thread exactly but couldn't find a specific topic that related to my issue. Regardless, over the past several years I've been the victim of an advanced radar/radio home surveillance. It's a rather extensive system of tracking, audio and video-like surveillance that I stumbled into that has left me the target of a network or criminals. I've made multiple attempts to report this to the FBI and each time was turned away with either disinterest or responses of, "We are unaware of any such technologies." I've since then made some headway in my understanding of how said surveillance is being accomplished and fully intend to return to them with another attempt to receive help.

All that said, I believe that they are utilizing Ground Penetrating Radar and other wall permeating radio frequency technologies. Sparing you all the technical specifics, the technology itself isn't something that is "unknown." I've attempted to find any reports or complaints or anything and have found nothing on the internet, save a topic about police having a handheld which could accomplish this (though this, I'm certain, can be accomplished with a transceiver, a computer and the right software at home). Their mysterious lack of knowledge, lack of information and disinterested in my reports are frustrating, as this has been a rather large issue in my personal life.

Which brings me to my question. Legally, what obligations, if any, are there that the government/law enforcement (of any branch etc.) that require them to address reported crimes and either fix or explain how they find it not worth-while to look into. I feel I may need to pressure them with the law themselves, if possible, to actually get them to do what it is their supposed to do.

Also, any other advice/information/tips on the matter would be welcome.

Thanks.

 

[Zigner]

Please understand that I am not saying this to be dismissive of your claim. You really need to speak to a psychiatric professional before you proceed any further with law enforcement. This will allow you to show that you are not suffering from some sort of psychiatric/psychological abnormality and will give greater credence to your claims.

 

[zddoodah]

You really need to speak to a psychiatric professional

Agree.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

And if I did. Then would you take my claims serious? Why is it so hard to believe?

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

UNITED STATES v. JONES | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu) - Tracking case.

Legality and Reasons of Landlords Put Security Cameras in Rental Property - Reolink Blog - Human tendency to want to record illegally.

What's so crazy? With technology where it is today, who wouldn't be concerned with the potential for new forms to emerge? I find your immediate concerns with my stability over legitmate concerns for your own and anyone else's privacy as suspicious as a lack of interest of information on the internet regarding the potential for misuse of GPR technology.

It can look through solid objects. Uhh, even houses? Why does no one ask that question? Lol

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Are you guys legit lawyers, officials? If so point me to a psych and I'll pass and then be back with the same problem.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

So, no legal tips, huh? How about just accountability of law enforcement to take matters seriously? I could pull them to court and then let the judge decide things. Any laws or legal advice for that?

Seems like regardless of if I'm crazy or not, that'll work itself out in court.

 

[army judge]

Then would you take my claims serious? Why is it so hard to believe?

Hmmmm.....



What is electronic surveillance?
Electronic surveillance is a broad term used to describe when someone watches another person's actions or monitors a person's conversations without his/her knowledge or consent by using one or more electronic devices or platforms. In a relationship where there is domestic violence or stalking, an abuser may use recording and surveillance technology to "keep tabs" on you (the victim) by monitoring your whereabouts and conversations. The motive for using electronic surveillance may be to maintain power and control over you, to make it hard for you to have any privacy or a life separate from the abuser, and/or to try to discover (and stop) any plans you may be making to leave the abuser.

Electronic surveillance can be done by misusing cameras, recorders, wiretaps, social media, or email. It can also include the misuse of monitoring software (also known as spyware), which can be installed on a computer, tablet, or a smartphone to secretly monitor the device activity without the user's knowledge. Spyware can allow the abusive person access to everything on the phone, as well as the ability to intercept and listen in on phone calls. To learn more about spyware, visit the Safety Net's Toolkit for Survivors or go to our Crimes page to see if there is a specific spyware law in your state.

Is electronic surveillance illegal?
It depends on whether the person doing the recording is part of the activity or conversation and, if so, if state law then allows that recording. In most circumstances, what is generally referred to as "spying," meaning someone who is not a part of your personal/private activities or conversations monitoring or records them without your knowledge, is usually illegal. The differences between these two are explained more below.

If the person is part of the activity or conversation:
Many states allow someone to record a phone call or conversation as long as one person (including the person doing the recording) consents to the recording. Other states require that all parties to the communication consent.

For example, if Jane calls Bob, Jane may legally be able to record the conversation without telling Bob under state X's law, which allows one-party consent for recordings. However, if state Y requires that each person involved in the conversation know about and consent to the recording, Jane will have to first ask Bob if it is OK with him if she records their conversation in order for the recording to be legal. To learn more about the laws in your state, you can check the state-by-state guide of recording laws from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

If the person is not part of the activity or conversation:
There are several criminal laws that address the act of listening in on a private conversation, electronically recording a person's conversation, or videotaping a person's activities. The names of these laws vary across the country, but they often include wiretap, voyeurism, interception, and other recording laws. When deciding which law(s) may apply to your situation, this may often depend on the circumstances of the surveillance and whether you had a "reasonable expectation of privacy" while the abuser recorded or observed you. Legally, a reasonable expectation of privacy exists when you are in a situation where an average person would expect to not be seen or spied on.1 For example, a person in certain public places such as in a football stadium or on a main street may not reasonably have an expectation of privacy, but a person in his/her bedroom or in a public restroom stall generally would.

1 See Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (noting that "what a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected.")

What specific crimes come under the category of "electronic surveillance?"
There are various laws that an abuser may be breaking by electronically surveilling someone or by recording someone's private conversation without their consent.

Some states have specific laws that address the recording of telephone, online, or in-person conversations. If someone who is not a part of your conversation records the conversation without your consent, it may be illegal even if you know that person is listening to you speak. Below, we give general definitions of various types of crimes. To read the specific language of the laws in your state, go to our Crimes page.

WIRETAP

Wiretap is a form of electronic surveillance where a person monitors or records telephone communications. Most typically, people think of wiretapping as a way that law enforcement tracks criminals or gets access to incriminating evidence. However, wiretaps are also something that abusers and stalkers have misused to listen in on and record telephone conversations. Many states have laws that criminalize wiretapping. In addition, most state wiretap laws also address whether someone who is part of a conversation is allowed to record that conversation without the permission of others.

INTERCEPTION

Interception occurs when someone who is not part of a conversation uses technology to interfere with the communication so that s/he can overhear or record the conversation. Interception laws usually apply to communication other than telephone conversations, such as email and text messages. Many states may have either an interception law or a wiretap law; so, if you don't find one in your state, look for the other.

EAVESDROPPING

Eavesdropping is the crime of listening in on or recording another person's private conversation without the consent of one or both of the parties. Eavesdropping can be done in various ways, some of which may not involve complex technology. For example, if you are talking on a landline at home, someone else can pick up another receiver in your home and listen in. If someone wants to record your conversations, this could be done on a basic tape recorder or by using an app or software to monitor and record conversations on your smartphone. Eavesdropping laws generally apply when the parties have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

INVASION OF PRIVACY / VOYEURISM

Invasion of privacy laws can apply to situations where an abuser misuses technology, such as a surveillance device, in order to observe, monitor, or record your personal or private activities. This may include taking nude or partially nude photos or videos without your consent. It can also include when an intimate partner secretly videotapes sexual acts without the consent of his/her partner. Voyeurism refers to the act of spying on someone for sexual pleasure. Voyeurism does not always include videotaping or the use of electronic devices (it may apply to physically spying on someone), but the act of videotaping your sexual activity (or nudity) without your consent and knowledge could fall under the crime of voyeurism if there is no "invasion of privacy" law in your state.

What is spyware?
Spyware is monitoring software that can be used to secretly monitor a device's activity without the user's knowledge. Spyware can be installed on a:

computer;
tablet;
smartphone; or
other device.
Spyware can allow an abuser access to everything on your device, as well as the ability to record and listen in on phone calls or other communications. Spyware software may be hidden on a device, and generally does not give a notification that the software has been installed or is in use. It can be hard to find spyware once it is installed and also hard to remove from a device.

If the abuser is using spyware, s/he may be breaking the law in your state. Installing and using spyware could be illegal based on stalking or harassment laws, computer laws, wiretapping, or eavesdropping laws. You may want to speak with a lawyer in your state for legal advice. To read the specific language of the laws in your state, go to our Crimes page.

Electronic Surveillance ("spying")
...

 

[army judge]

Are you guys legit lawyers, officials? If so point me to a psych and I'll pass and then be back with the same problem.

You never know who to trust, mate.

Heck, be careful, you never know just which individual(s) are in cahoots with your tormentors.

If THEY'RE out to get you, eventually you'll GET GOT!!!

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

How about just accountability of law enforcement to take matters seriously?

What makes you think for a second that law enforcement has to take all matters seriously?
They don't. In fact, the courts, including they Supreme Court, have ruled that law enforcement has no duty to protect any individual.

If you think this is all happening gather up your evidence and sue those involved.

P.S. I too think your time and money would be better spent on mental health.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Army Judge, none of that answered my question, but it answered PayrollHRguys question in regard to what makes me think law enforcement should take things seriously.

HRguy can you link where that's stated, Law enforcement having no obligations to protect, supreme courts ruling?

The evidence is intangible hence permeating radio/radar frequencies. Any advice how to get evidence on those?

ArmyJudge if you're in cahoots like I don't know who is, tell them my doors always open. Come on over.

And what if I need to sue the FBI for not taking matters seriously. See - Understanding the complaints from Simone Biles and others seeking $1B from FBI : NPR for similar instances.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Also HR guy

"My fellow survivors and I were betrayed by every institution that was supposed to protect us - the US Olympic Committee, USA Gymnastics, the FBI and now the Department of Justice," Olympic gold medalist McKayla Maroney said in a statement.

"It is clear that the only path to justice and healing is through the legal process," she added.

Quotes in FBI lawsuit. "every institution that was supposed to protect us"

 

[adjusterjack]

over the past several years I've been the victim of an advanced radar/radio home surveillance.

I have two questions for you.

1 - What EVIDENCE do you have that this surveillance is actually happening?

2 - Why would anybody (authorities or otherwise) care enough about you to engage in surveillance? In other words, are you doing something that brings you to someone's attention? Manufacturing meth in your house? Building bombs for a terrorist cell? Growing marijuana? Printing counterfeit money? Kidnapping children? Stockpiling firearms? Something else?

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Again, evidence, if acquired, is intangible. And again any ideas on how to accomplish detecting, individualizing, tracing frequencies in the air? That'd be helpful, unlike all this so far. The means by which I know is various people following me and expressing that know intimate details about what goes on in my house, but they'll just lie though, which is why I need to address the tech to accomplish anything. The reason they're harrassing is because they want me to be quiet about what I know. This situation has involved multiple threats etc. etc.

Given the level of access the have into my home via the means they are utilizing, I reckon the number of potential sex crimes, maybe looking at underage girls etc. is the reason they are adamant to keep me quiet. The reason is the means, in terms of being targeted.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Back to my original question. Which I'm still waiting on a response to if you guys actually have one. HRguy said the supreme court said something about no obligations, I'm just wondering how that fits next to the Simon Biles case.

Too much focus on the legitimacy and not legal advice. Strange.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Also, AdjusterJack. Snowden?

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

Addressing the tech is the end-all to whether I'm right or not, the way to catch and prevent etc. But my claims haven't been taken seriously thus far which, again, takes us back to my orignal question. Any advice on how to get enforcement to legally have to help, or that proof that they don't have to that I'm still waiting on (HRguy)? If not, then this board has proven to be as useless as the FBI and other organizations. Unsurprising.

 

[Thatguyyouheardabout]

I shouldn't have to do all the forensics to prove it. I figure that's what they collect taxes from me to do. I should report and they do it, I'm thinking.

 

[adjusterjack]

Again, evidence, if acquired, is intangible.

That says delusion.

various people following me and expressing that know intimate details about what goes on in my house,

Who are these people? No need to name names. Just describe them and say what the details are. Something like "My next door neighbor says "________." Like that.

The reason they're harrassing is because they want me to be quiet about what I know.

What do you know that you need to stay quiet about? Answer something like this "I saw my next door neighbor molest neighborhood children." Like that.

This situation has involved multiple threats etc. etc.

Describe the threats, as in "Joe Blow threatened to kill me."

I reckon the number of potential sex crimes, maybe looking at underage girls etc. is the reason they are adamant to keep me quiet.

Are you the one committing sex crimes? If not, then who?

my claims haven't been taken seriously thus far

Because you are coming across as a paranoid lunatic. Several times a year we get posts from people like you who make vague allegations with no evidence and turn out to be trolls who just repeat the same drivel each time anybody responds. They seem to get satisfaction from wasting everybody's time.

 

[army judge]

Army Judge, none of that answered my question, but it answered PayrollHRguys question in regard to what makes me think law enforcement should take things seriously.

HRguy can you link where that's stated, Law enforcement having no obligations to protect, supreme courts ruling?

The evidence is intangible hence permeating radio/radar frequencies. Any advice how to get evidence on those?

ArmyJudge if you're in cahoots like I don't know who is, tell them my doors always open. Come on over.

And what if I need to sue the FBI for not taking matters seriously. See - Understanding the complaints from Simone Biles and others seeking $1B from FBI : NPR for similar instances.

Some questions are too dangerous to be asked in public, especially over the internet.

THEY are observing, snooping, listening, investigating 24/7/365 in perpetuity.

DANGER WILL ROBINSON, DANGER!!!!

Don't alarm, annoy, alert, discuss, criticize THEM!!!!

Doing so MIGHT cause one to ABRUPTLY and PERMANENTLY assume room temperature!!!!

This is known. This is being done all throughout the USA states and territories.


Sneak and Peek Warrants: Legal Issues Regarding Surreptitious Searches

Sneak and Peek Warrants: Legal Issues Regarding Surreptitious Searches | Office of Justice Programs
...

This too...


Surreptitious Entries (Black Bag Jobs)

Surreptitious Entries (Black Bag Jobs)
...

The "Patriot Act" and "Sneak & Peek" surreptitious searches!!!!

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10652
....

Be smart, be cautious, don't discuss this, even the local law enforcement.

These "sneaky Pete", black ops types play for KEEPS.

Certain former and even a current sitting President has their homes searched.

Pole Cameras and Surreptitious Surveillance | Office of Justice Programs
...

COINTELPRO Docs - Warrantless Surreptitious Entries: FBI "Black Bag" Break-ins And Microphone Installations
...

Black bag operation - Wikipedia
...