ACLU-Obtained Documents Reveal Breadth of Secretive Stingray Use in Florida

The ACLU is releasing records today obtained from law enforcement agencies across Florida about their acquisition and use of sophisticated cell phone location tracking devices known as “Stingrays.” These records provide the most detailed account to date of how law enforcement agencies across a single state are relying on the technology. (The full records are available here.)

The results should be troubling for anyone who cares about privacy rights, judicial oversight of police activities, and the rule of law. The documents paint a detailed picture of police using an invasive technology — one that can follow you inside your house — in many hundreds of cases and almost entirely in secret.

The secrecy is not just from the public, but often from judges who are supposed to ensure that police are not abusing their authority. Partly relying on that secrecy, police have been getting authorization to use Stingrays based on the low standard of “relevance,” not a warrant based on probable cause as required by the Fourth Amendment.

Records Show Widespread Stingray Use

Last year, we sent public records requests to three dozen police and sheriffs’ departments in Florida seeking information about their use of Stingrays, also called “cell cite simulators” because they mimic cell phone towers and force phones in the area to broadcast information that can be used to identify and locate them. The Excerpt from Stingray document obtained by ACLUrecords we obtained document millions of dollars spent purchasing the technology and show their use in many hundreds of investigations in every corner of the state.

As we revealed last year, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has spent more than $3 million on Stingrays and related equipment since 2008. But it isn’t keeping the technology to itself. The FDLE has signed agreements with at least 11 local and regional law enforcement agencies allowing them to use the FDLE’s Stingrays and to share them with neighboring jurisdictions. (Though the version of the sharing agreement released by the FDLE is partially redacted, a local police department near Tampa provided an unredacted copy.)

Use of the FDLE’s Stingrays has been extensive. In a May 2014 email, the FDLE identified a staggering 1,835 uses of cell site simulator equipment, likely reflecting deployment in both state and local investigations throughout Florida.

The Tallahassee Police Department (TPD) provided the most extensive information about a local agency’s use of Stingrays on loan from the FDLE, including a detailed list of more than 250 investigations in which it used Stingrays from September 2007 through February 2014. Although law enforcement agencies often justify their purchase of Stingrays—and the excessive secrecy surrounding their use — on homeland security grounds, the Tallahassee list reveals not a single national security-related investigation. Robbery, burglary, and theft investigations represent nearly a third of the total, followed by “wanted person” investigations, and then a laundry list of other run-of-the-mill offenses. The list also shows that the TPD allowed other police departments to access Stingrays, even crossing state lines into Georgia on at least five occasions.

Technology Hidden From the Courts

In many of the investigations, police never sought a court order authorizing Stingray use. In others, they sought a court order on a low "relevance" standard, but not a warrant based on probable cause. Perhaps most troublingly, the records indicate a pattern of excessive secrecy, including concealment of information that should appear in investigative files and court filings. For example, the TPD provided a sample of judicial applications and orders it says were used to justify Stingray use, but not one of them contains a single mention or description of Stingray technology. This suggests that judges weren’t being fully informed about what they were approving.

The TPD also released the full investigative files from 11 cases where the agency used Stingrays.* But officers’ notes and other documentation in the files never once mention Stingrays or provide descriptions of their use. Instead, there are only fleeting references that would likely be inscrutable to a defense attorney or judge not already on the lookout for signs of covert Stingray surveillance. Two files mention use of “electronic surveillance measures” to track a cell phone. Another says only that “Confidential intelligence” indicated the location of a phone. A fourth states that “Inv Corbett [sic] arrived and determined that [the tracked] telephone was on the second floor of the apartment.” We know from a court transcript that the ACLU successfully petitioned to unseal last year that Corbitt is the TPD officer who operates Stingrays for the department.

The Tallahassee Police aren’t alone in obfuscating references to Stingray use in case files and court documents. As we have previously reported, for example, police in the Sarasota area were instructed by the U.S. Marshals Service to eliminate descriptions of Stingray cell phone tracking in court filings and replace them with the cryptic phrase “received information from a confidential source regarding the location of the suspect.”

A new Washington Post article, based partly on the records obtained by the ACLU, provides further detail about how Stingray secrecy functions — and malfunctions — in Tallahassee. In one case detailed by the Post, prosecutors opted to offer a defendant a no-jail plea deal instead of revealing details about the Stingray as part of court-ordered pre-trial discovery. As we’ve seen elsewhere in the country, our justice system can’t properly function when judges and defense attorneys are kept in the dark about covert electronic surveillance by police.

Excessive Secrecy Persists

Below we detail our findings about Stingray use in other departments across the state, including records showing hundreds of thousands of dollars in expenditures and information on the number of cases in which they have been used. But for all these disclosures, many details about Stingray use in Florida are still shrouded in secrecy.

Several agencies refused to comply with Florida's open records laws by properly providing documents. Some acknowledged that they had responsive records, but refused to release them. The Brevard County Sheriff’s Office, for example, denied our records request in full, partly relying on a “non-disclosure agreement or requirement” with a “federal agency.” (We know the FBI has been making local agencies sign non-disclosure agreements before buying Stingrays; a fully redacted copy of the FBI agreement is likely contained in the pages released by the FDLE. The FDLE also released a copy of a non-disclosure agreement with the Harris Corporation.) The Sheriffs’ Offices in Broward and Pinellas Counties issued similar denials. Police Departments in Pembroke Pines and Port St. Lucie failed to respond to the ACLU’s request at all.

Other agencies tried to withhold records, but apparently forgot that they had already released documents on the web. The Miami Police Department responded only that it had “No departmental orders or standard operating procedures covering ‘cell site simulators,’” but did not reply to a follow-up request for other kinds of records. Documents posted on the city’s website, however, show that Miami spent tens of thousands of dollars buying and upgrading Stingrays in 2008.

And in the City of Sunrise, the police at first refused to confirm or deny whether any responsive records existed. After the ACLU pointed out that Sunrise had already posted purchase records for Stingray devices on its public website, the city saw fit to send the ACLU copies of those already-publicly available documents . . . and a request for $20,000 to cover the expense of searching for additional records.

Unanswered Questions

Not a single department produced any policies or guidelines governing use of Stingrays or restricting how and when they could be deployed, suggesting a lack of internal oversight. And no department provided evidence that it gets warrants before using the technology.

Indeed, records from Tallahassee and elsewhere indicate that police have not been getting warrants. That must change. In a strong ruling last year, the Florida Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment requires police to get a warrant before asking a phone company to track a cell phone user’s location in real time. The logic of that opinion should apply equally to cell phone tracking using Stingrays. And because Stingrays sweep up information not just about suspects, but also bystanders, the need for robust judicial oversight is all the greater.

The documents we obtained add to the growing picture of surreptitious Stingray surveillance by local police around the country. By shining a light on police practices, we hope to help bring constitutional violations and a culture of impunity to an end.

Details on Stingray Use by Departments Across Florida

Records from elsewhere in Florida show how use of the technology and secrecy about it has proliferated. Following is what we found about particular departments across the state:

  • The Miami-Dade Police Department produced purchase records for hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of equipment from the Harris Corporation, the Florida-based maker and seller of Stingrays. The Miami-Dade PD also stated that it had used Stingrays in 59 closed criminal cases within a one-year period ending in May 2014. The total number of investigations where the agency used Stingrays is surely larger, since that figure does not include cases that were still active at the time of its response. The department has a troubling history when it comes to Stingrays: according to a document available on the internet but not among the records produced to the ACLU, the Miami-Dade PD first purchased a cell site simulator in 2003 in order to surveil protesters at a Free Trade of the Americas Agreement conference.
  • The Palm Bay Police Department provided records from a 2006 investigation where they used a Stingray to track a suspect’s phone. Instead of seeking court authorization or even asking for assistance from the FDLE, a Palm Bay officer “contacted Harris Corporation and utilized some of their technology and engineers to track the cell call.” This irregular procedure was possible because Palm Bay is just minutes away from the Harris Corporation’s headquarters in Melbourne.
  • The Pensacola Police Department identified five cases where it used Stingrays and provided investigative files for each of them; none of the files mention or describe Stingray use. The department also stated that it “has not acquired a cell site simulator” and had no records regarding agreements with the FDLE to borrow the technology. However, the FDLE sharing agreements signed by the Tallahassee Police Department and the Leon County Sheriff’s Office both cover the “Tallahassee and Pensacola Regions,” perhaps explaining where Pensacola got the devices used in these investigations.
  • The Lakeland Police Department stated that it “relies on the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to assist” in cell phone tracking cases, and produced files from three 2013 cases where it used Stingrays. Nothing in the files actually describes Stingray use. The FDLE produced a copy of its sharing agreement signed by the Lakeland PD.
  • The Orange County Sheriff’s Office stated that it had no records regarding acquisition of Stingrays, but acknowledged that it had signed an agreement with the FDLE through which it could borrow the devices. The OCSO said that between 2008 and 2014 it “conducted 558 investigations in which cell site simulators may have been used.”
  • The Jacksonville Police Department explained that it owns two Stingrays, but “neither of them is functional with the current technology. They are analog, outdated, of no value, and not used. Our agency has elected not to upgrade them due to the cost and frequency.” Records show that Jacksonville purchased its first Stingray device in 2001 (a “Triggerfish” model). In 2008 it used nearly $200,000 of federal grant funds to purchase additional devices, including a “Kingfish” handheld unit. The documents describe how the Kingfish is “capable of pinpointing a phone’s location inside buildings or other locations where a vehicle could not travel.”
  • Agencies that signed sharing agreements with the FDLE but did not produce additional records concerning Stingray use include the Lee County Sheriff’s Office, Leon County Sheriff’s Office, and Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, among others. (See the documents released by the FDLE for the full list).
  • A number of departments either explained that have not purchased Stingrays or have not used them, or stated that they did not have records responsive to the ACLU’s request, including: Cape Coral Police Department, Clearwater Police Department, Fort Lauderdale Police Department, Fort Myers Police Department, Gainesville Police Department, Hialeah Police Department, Hollywood Police Department, Lake County Sheriff’s Office, Melbourne Police Department, Orlando Police Department, Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office, Pasco County Sheriff’s Office, Plant City Police Department, St. Petersburg Police Department, Tampa Police Department, Titusville Police Department, and West Palm Beach Police Department.

* In consideration of the privacy interests of people named in the investigative files produced by several law enforcement agencies, we are releasing only those pages of the files that shed light on Stingray use, and are redacting personally identifiable information.

Add a comment (12)
Read the Terms of Use

Steve Yuhas

State and local law enforcement should never be in a position where they become participants in nondisclosure agreements (NDA) with the federal government (no matter the agency). The PEOPLE give the state tremendous power over the individual and individuals in a state should never be told they cannot know what is being done in our name. The Stingray should be more worrying than anything Snowden disclosed because Snowden's documents did not result in the forfeiture of liberty - this does and it is wrong.


Page 1 of 12
February 3, 12015
The accusations of using the FDLE as a political weapon against opponents of the Governor Scott administration may not be limited to the incident involving interim Orange County Clerk of Courts Colleen Reilly. It appears another case involving retaliation, document suppression, conspiracy and unlawful imprisonment of a Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower may have occurred as local and state officials, including Governor Rick Scott, were accused of bribery for the implementation of Common Core just before Gov. Scott’s re-election in November.
Corruption in our state, county, and local governments goes very deep and wide. According to the Department of Justice (see attached chart), Florida ranks highest in Number of Convicted Public Officials.
Additionally, according to a report card from State Integrity Investigation at, Florida received an F for Ethics Enforcement Agencies, a D- for Judicial Accountability, and an overall grade of C- for Corruption Risk Report Card.
Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that our state government will put on a show when appearing to be concerned about cleaning up corruption in all branches of government. The 2010 Interim Report of the 19th Statewide Grand Jury shined a light on many issues which needed to be addressed. Instead of implementing straightforward action to clean up the criminality clearly identified by the report, the leadership of both the law enforcement community and the judiciary have successfully buried the statewide grand jury’s findings.
Clearly, outside observers can see a widespread culture of corruption throughout Florida in many of our government departments, agencies, and especially our courts, across the state.
Criminal Activity Suspected
The People of Dixie County were very concerned when the Dixie County School Board (DCSB) accepted about $1M from Race to the Top Federal funding scheme as arranged by the State to implement a new, unproven, controversial and undefined curriculum called Common Core, later renamed Florida Sunshine Standards. The People had many concerns at the time about the suitability of switching from a proven design to an untested and undefined curriculum. Their biggest concern, however, was that by accepting the $1M from the State, the DCSB was committing Dixie County taxpayers to an additional $5M incremental spending requirement once the Race To The Top funding expired.
As of result of these concerns, in July of 2014, the People of Dixie County asked their local Grand Jury to investigate these expensive decisions.
Per his responsibility, the Foreman of the Dixie County Grand Jury, Terry Trussell, once aware of these allegations, began the process of convening the Dixie County Grand Jury to look over evidence and hear testimony of witnesses as to whether or not criminal activity occurred.
Page 2 of 12
Throughout the process, however, he was met with resistance from Clerk of Court Dana Johnson and State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister.
Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower Comes Forward - Obstruction of Justice Reported
Details of the infringement upon the grand jury’s right to peaceably assemble and independently initiate investigations of possible criminal activity are detailed in a letter and Bill of Information by Grand Jury Foreman, Terry Trussell. As required under Florida’s Grand Jury Instructions, Trussell sent his report to Judge Munkittrick on August 4, 2014. When the Judge failed to respond to the report, Trussell filed with Dixie County Clerk of Court Dana Johnson in the public record, and gave a copy to Dixie County Sheriff, Dewey Hatcher.
The letter referenced violations by State Attorney Siegmeister of Florida Grand Jury Instructions as well as edicts stated in United States Supreme Court case U.S. vs. Williams (1992) that discusses the required independence of the Grand Jury.
The Whistleblower, Dixie County Grand Jury Foreman, Terry Trussell, listed a series of accusations exposing State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister’s egregious actions, including Obstruction of Justice, Jury Tampering, Contempt of Court and Deprivation of rights, among several other charges.
In conclusion of the 7-page document, the Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower stated, “Therefore, as the Grand Jury Foreman, I, Terry G. Trussell, have no confidence in the Grand Jury Process under these rules and as corrupted by State Attorney, Jeffrey Siegmeister. I, Terry Trussell, therefore declare this Grand Jury in Dixie County, Florida, un-lawful, Null and Void ab initio. Nothing has been done by State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister which complies to the Grand Jury Process as is demanded by the 5th nor 7th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution nor the explanation of Justice Scalia in U.S. v. Williams.”
Oddly enough, this letter and Bill of Information exposing criminal activity has been buried by the Clerk’s office and is not visible by the public. Copies of the official letter stamped received by Dixie County Clerk of Court Dana Johnson on August 5, 2014, at 4:27pm is attached. (Dixie County Document #201415006137).
Conspiracy, Cover-up & Retaliation
Once the letter and Bill of Information by the Whistleblower was filed, a series of communications must have taken place that involve conspiracy to cover up what was filed, and retaliation against the Grand Jury Foreman. To this date, it is not known how the Clerk of Court was instructed nor by whom, to hide these documents from public view. The public can still see the documents posted online but all pages are “Intentionally Left Blank”, according the website.
In addition, the presiding Judge, Cynthia Munkittrick, was mysteriously replaced by Judge Parker without appropriate notification to the Grand Jury Foreman.
“The Right of the People to Peaceably Assemble - Petition Government for Redress of Grievances”
Page 3 of 12
As protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution and as the Dixie County Grand Jury lacked the public’s trust, the ‘People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County’ met on August 14, 2014 at the Dixie County court house to elect 25 jurors, in accordance with Common Law, hear testimony and look at evidence of criminal activity affecting Dixie County.
On the 15th of August, Foreman Trussell filed two True Bills of Presentment with Dixie County Clerk of Court, Dana Johnson. These documents were stamped received at 4:30pm, Documents #201415006245 & 6256.
These documents are also “Intentionally Left Blank” as they have been removed from public view.
The Fifth Amendment states that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless by a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.” An indictment is initiated by a state attorney or prosecutor while a presentment is derived by a grand jury’s own initiative, unobstructed by the institutional branches of government.
A True Bill of Presentment is a report, resulting from a grand jury investigation of an issue which lists informal recommendations for corrective actions, and has no weight of law. True Bills of Presentment can cover the complete range of government or non-government issues and include criminal and non-criminal activities by public officials and results when a grand jury decides the evidence is sufficient to decide probable cause does exist. See attached Manatee County Grand Jury Presentment from 1901.
True Bill of Presentment 1 - Charges State Attorney Siegmeister with Obstruction of Justice, Jury Tampering
In a lengthy list of accusations and charges, the first True Bill of Presentment by ‘The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County’ targets the actions taken by State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister as he obstructed the rightful independence of the Dixie County Grand Jury leading up to and including the meeting on August 1, 2014.
True Bill of Presentment 2 - Charges Local School Board, State Board of Education and Governors Crist and Scott with Bribery for Implementation of Common Core
As justice was not served upon requesting the Dixie County Grand Jury look into criminal activity surrounding the acceptance of “federal” money in exchange for the implementation of the controversial common core standards and curriculum, the People of Dixie County assembled as ‘The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County’ and petitioned their government for redress of grievances in the form of a second True Bill of Presentment.
Terry Trussell, the Foreman of the Dixie County Grand Jury who exposed the criminal actions by State Attorney Jeffrey Siegmeister, was elected as interim foreman and volunteered to sign
Page 4 of 12
and file the paperwork issued by The People’s Grand Jury under Common Law of Dixie County as an effort to protect members of the assembly of People.
Enter Bailey’s FDLE - Election Season Cover-up - Intimidation & Retaliation
As the People of Lee County gathered by the hundreds to demand their school board stand up against state and federal encroachment in their children’s education, and as their vote was mysteriously reversed just a week later, the People of Dixie County were fighting the same battle. Once Governor Scott was mentioned in the True Bill of Presentment, however, suggesting Bribery for the Implementation of Common Core, the FDLE apparently got word and inserted themselves into the case.
FDLE is supposed to be a law enforcement agency whose mission is to investigate internal government corruption. Although they still may uncover internal corruption, it seems under Bailey's watch, they became attack dogs used to protect government officials against any charges of corruption. FDLE was somehow notified of alleged corruption with two True Bills of Presentment filed at the Dixie County Clerk of Courts as submitted by The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County and instead of investigating the alleged criminal activity, FDLE launched a full blown attack against the courageous Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower, Terry Trussell.
To this date, it is not known how the FDLE was notified of the local activity in Dixie County.
Two FDLE agents met with “investigators” of ‘The People’s Grand Jury under Common Law in Dixie County’ in two separate meetings. The agents showed zero interested in looking at the alleged criminal activity surrounding the obstruction of justice, jury tampering or bribery. Instead, they seemed more interested in investigating who was involved in making those accusations.
Since the activity during grand jury proceedings are to remain confidential to protect witnesses and members of the jury, Terry Trussell, the one who filed the paperwork on behalf of the People, quickly became the target.
None of the paperwork filed by Terry as the Foreman of the Dixie County Grand Jury, or the filings on behalf of ‘The People’s Grand Jury under Common Law in Dixie County’ has been acted upon or released to the public. The Grand Jury’s filings have been ignored by all local and state officials and buried from public view.
Retaliation Conspiracy Begins - Siegmeister Petition to Remove Trussell as Grand Jury Foreman, Granted
State Attorney Jeffrey A. Siegmeister, in an obvious retaliation against Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower, Terry Trussell, petitioned Judge Parker to remove Terry from the Grand Jury.
The petition was granted by Judge Parker, Chief Judge Third Judicial Circuit Florida, on August 25, 2014.
Page 5 of 12
Further Retaliation - Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower Arrested
On September 2, 2014, Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower, Terry Trussell, was arrested and taken into custody, charged with violating an obscure statue 843.055 - Criminal actions under color of law or through use of simulated legal process.
Conflict of Interest – Gov. Scott Appoints Judge Hankinson to Case in Dixie County
On September 3, 2014, 24 hours after being incarcerated, Terry Trussell’s first hearing is with Judge Hankinson who admits to being appointed by Governor Rick Scott to the case. Hankinson is a Second Circuit judge, which does not include Dixie County. As defendant in the Grand Jury’s True Bill Presentment, Gov. Scott had a direct conflict of interest in initiating Trussell’s prosecution. Additionally, this move by Scott breached Florida Constitution Article 1, Section 5 (right to assemble); Article 1, Section 9 (due process); and Article 2, Section 3 (separation of powers). Anyone breaching a Constitutional provision is committing treason against the Constitution. Any person, once made aware of credible charges of treason, has an obligation to take appropriate corrective actions. No action after awareness is a felony called misprision of treason.
Gov. Scott Executive Order - State Attorney Removed from Case - Replaced with State Prosecutor Willie Meggs
On September 4, 2015, still weeks away from his re-election bid, the full weight of the State of Florida via Governor Rick Scott zeroed in on Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower Terry Trussell as the Governor signed an Executive Order removing State Attorney Siegmeister from the case and was replaced by experienced heavyweight Second Circuit State Prosecutor Willie Meggs, a long-time friend of Scott’s (at the time, now former) Chief Counsel, Peter Antonacci. In naming Meggs, Scott again breached Constitutional provisions.
Steamrolled - Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower Appears in Court - Gets Arrested On the Spot for “Failure to Appear” - Released 21 Days Later
Page 6 of 12
On October 9, 2014, Grand Jury Foreman Whistleblower, Terry Trussell, was taken away in handcuffs arrested for “Failure to Appear” while at his arraignment.
Upon being asked if Terry George Trussell was in the room by Judge Hankinson who met Mr. Trussell on September 3rd at his first hearing, Terry stood up and responded that he was there to speak on the matter. Judge Hankinson, in a bizarre move that left the courtroom attendees from all over the state in absolute shock, acted as if he did not know Terry and ordered him arrested for “Failure to Appear.” Sheriff deputies, in an act of sheepish capitulation, while knowing full-well who Terry was, refused to assist the judge in identifying the defendant, walked a mere five feet to where Mr. Trussell was standing and arrested him and took him away.
More than 25 people witnessed this treason against our Constitution by a judge who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitutions. This move by Hankinson breached many laws, the U.S. Constitution and Florida Constitutions, including but not limited to the People’s First Amendment Right to Assemble, Speak, and Petition their Government for Redress of Grievances.
Terry then spent the next 21 days, including his 71st Birthday, in jail — minus one night in the hospital for injuries as a result of being drugged. Why?
Reporting a Crime is Now Considered Criminal Activity
Since the True Bill of Presentment issued by The People’s Grand Jury Under Common Law in Dixie County regarding Common Core included Gov. Rick Scott as a target, and because Scott was in a tight reelection campaign, something had to be done to protect Siegmeister and Scott from the public scrutiny that would occur if the public became aware of these True Bills. Under Scott’s direction, FDLE under Gerald Bailey, three judges, and two State Attorneys, a county sheriff, numerous FDLE Agents, and a Clerk of Court, (at minimum) started an effort to execute a complete cover-up, trying to protect Scott from bad press during his important reelection effort. This began a serious criminal conspiracy to cover-up criminal acts by government officials. To implement the cover-up, they simply had to suppress the evidence and retaliate against the innocent Grand Jury Foreman.
Suppressing Evidence
Once the True Bill Presentments were handed down by the People's Grand Jury with Terry Trussell’s signature on them, these documents became clear targets. First, they had to suppress all the evidence that had been properly placed into the public record. POOF!! The True Bills in the Dixie County Public records somehow disappeared. Removing documents from the public record is a felony. Who committed this felony? Who ordered this felony to be committed?
Why would a True Bill of Presentment be so important that Scott would risk felonies to get it removed from the public records, launch a cover-up of criminal acts by government officials, and seek retribution against the innocent grand jury foreman? Scott was in a tough re-election
Page 7 of 12
campaign which was expected to be a close election. In order to obtain Jeb Bush's support, and especially gain access to Jeb’s donor network, Scott had to make a deal with Jeb to support the deployment of Common Core curriculum across the public school system Florida. So the True Bill Presentment, which alleged bribery of the Dixie County School Board, had to be hidden from public view because if it became public knowledge, it probably would have meant the defendants would have to stand trial, thereby hurting Scott's chances for re-election.
In preparation for deploying Common Core, the state Dept. of Education held meetings to solicit public opinion feedback. In a meeting in Orlando, approximately 80 people from all over the state showed up and got a chance to speak. Only about 3 people spoke positively about Common Core and the vast majority spoke negatively. So Scott knew that there was strongly negative public sentiment, but he had to ignore it and continue forward with his support of deploying Common Core in order to maintain Jeb's support for his re-election campaign
Further Retaliation against Grand Jury Foreman
Based upon Linton's defective affidavit, Hankinson signed a defective warrant for the arrest of the statutory Grand Jury Foreman Terry Trussell, who is a veteran and an honest citizen with NO criminal record (see bio attached). Like ALL members of the grand jury, unless he perjured himself or trampled on a witness's rights, Trussell has complete immunity according to Florida Supreme Court rules, and the all judges and State Attorneys know about this immunity.
Trussell is now under false charges by Willie Meggs for 14 felony counts totaling 70 years in prison if convicted on all counts. All he did was his sworn duty as Foreman of the Dixie County Grand Jury, and the Foreman of the People's Grand Jury under Common Law in Dixie County. He had the courage to sign the True Bills produced by the People’s Grand Jury. He followed every law and statute that applied to him doing his job as foreman of the Grand Jury. In return, he has been targeted by a concerted effort of malicious prosecution to cover up the corruption that the People have found in their public servants.
Investigation Launched by statewide Unified People's Grand Jury
Clearly in the Trussell case, the Reilly case, and who knows how many more cases, the corruption reaches into the Governor’s office, FDLE, and our Florida judicial system. Therefore, no state official can effectively investigate these issues because Scott is the highest ranking officer in the government of our State. This means no existing state attorney nor Inspector General, or any other officer can impartially investigate these issues. Instead they all have a conflict of interest and must therefore recuse themselves.
There is only one independent grand jury which can and will investigate these issues, the statewide Unified People's Grand Jury in Florida. This is a Grand Jury that is completely compatible with US Supreme Court decisions as well as both the Florida and the US Constitutions while at the same time being completely independent of government manipulation.
Page 8 of 12
One reason why Florida is ranked so poorly is because the government has unconstitutionally taken over complete control of the grand jury system. State Attorneys select the jurors they want, only give them the evidence they want them to see, and tell the jurors they can only judge the facts, not the law. This is how overzealous prosecutors unconstitutionally and illegally convicts innocent people of victimless offenses, which by definition are not crimes. Our Founders designed our system so that juries are to be completely independent, acting as a sword and a shield for the People to keep our public officials centered under our Constitutions. [See US Supreme Court decision US v Williams (1992)].
No authority has ever been delegated to any branch of the Florida Government to impanel or control our grand jury. Even more clearly, there are no laws, statutes, or rules prohibiting the People from forming their own grand juries to investigate any public body, if for no other reason to assure there is no corruption. Instead, it has been a powerfully retained by the People. Both the First and Fifth Amendments to our US Constitution, the Supreme Law of our Land, protect the people's right to impanel and run their grand jury any time and place they want to. Article 1 Section 5 of the Florida Constitution clearly states “The people shall have the right peaceably to assemble to instruct their representatives, and to petition for redress of grievances."
Evidence of Florida corruption articles
Copies of True Bills of Presentment about Common Core; Siegmeister
See for more background reports on coverup against Trussell.
Book: “Whatever Happened To Justice” by Maybury”
19th Florida Statewide Grand Jury
Attached: True Bill Presentments
Page 9 of 12
Page 10 of 12
Page 11 of 12
Page 12 of 12


This particular device (Stingray) is used by law enforcement. Just like the initial use of cell phone spying software was only used by law enforcement there are now other manufacturers devices similar to the Stingray and it is not used only by law enforcement.

You can protect your cell phone privacy. A cell phone can be stopped from tracking if it is placed in a Faraday Cage. A Faraday cage is a metal or conductive envelope that completely surrounds the electronic device and stops signals from going into or out of the cage.This can be accomplished by making a pouch out of a metallized ie conductive fabric. Search youtube for detracktor for a demonstration


City of Sunrise's 2015 police budget for Vice, Intelligence, Narcotics has a $69,000 capital outlay for "Investigative Technology to be used during investigations." Are they getting another one?


City of Sunrise 2015 budget for Vice, Intelligence, Narcotics includes a $69,000 capital outlay for Investigative Technology to be used for investigations. Perhaps they are getting another one.


Would it not be useful to describe what they do in order to inform the reader of their significance? I've read half the article and still no description of their function.


My understanding is that that is precisely the problem the ACLU is complaining of: the manufacturers and law enforcement would rather make plea deals and even drop charges (see ) than disclose details of the technology. About all we know is that they are cell tower simulators.


They act as a cell tower, sending a signal that masquerades as a "closer" cell tower than the one already in the area. Calls are rerouted into the actual cell tower, but location information and other information as required can be tapped/copied/duplicated from the signal as it transits the fake cell. It's simply a legalized instance of the classic "man in the middle" attack on security.


The reason why their is no description of their function is no one wants to say how they work.

As lay people let us look at the most probable way that they do work. Hints and suggestions given by law enforcement.
The most probable way that stingray works is simple voice recognition.

For this discussion it is important to note a difference between voice recognition and interpretation. An example. When you turn SIRI on on an iPhone and do the training you are doing two things. SIRI is learning to recognise your voice and interpret what you say. The second one is by far the hardest. The first one not so much in fact the first one is done by the phone while the second one is done at a server level. That is why SIRI does not work without internet. If you walk up to someone with an iPhone with SIRI on and it is not trained to your voice no matter how you try you will not get SIRI to respond. That is the recognition. SIRI does not recognize your voice. If you tell your SIRI to call home and it calls your Grandma that is an example of misinterpretation of a recognized voice.

To put stingray simply, from a voice print of a suspect and a known geographical area the suspect "hangs out" in the police can easily find, record, and track that suspect. It also gives the police and easy way to say "we keep nothing that is not part of the surveillance". Stingray discards all voices that do not match the suspects. Burner phones, borrowed phones, etc do not matter. As long as the suspect uses a cell phone and the cell call goes through stingray it will identify the suspect by their voice print. Stingray will record the suspects phone number, IMEI number, the phone numbers they call, and the frequency of calls. The more you talk the more accurate stingray gets. Stingray probably does zero interpretation though.

Why does law enforcement not want to divulge this? When you have your fingerprints taken you know it. When you have your DNA taken you know it. When you get your picture taken for identification purposes you know it. If law enforcement has the ability to take reliable identification of you and you don't know about it, they have power.


No, you are way off the mark. The Stingray, and other cell site simulators do not analyze your voice. Here's how it works, in a nutshell...

Law enforcement asks a judge to sign a subpoena which forces the cellular provider to give information to law enforcement. The three pieces of information provided which are relevant to the Stingray are: 1) What is the subscriber number? 2) What is the cell phone's serial number? 3) Which cell tower is the cell phone currently connected to, and approximately how far is the cell phone from the cell tower?

Once law enforcement has those three pieces of info, they drive to the location near the cell tower and type the serial number and subscriber number into the Stingray device. The device then searches for that cell phone. If located, it will do two things: 1) It forces the cell phone to switch to the cell site simulator, as if the Stingray was a real cell tower. 2) It indicates the direction from the police car to the cell phone, and also the signal strength.

When the officer arrives near the cell phone, he can then use a handheld device (Kingfish) to walk around and do the same thing that the car-mounted Stingray does. This allows him/her to accurately locate the cell phone, right down to the room where it is located.


Stay Informed