Subject: scp clipping service Status: RO X-Status: 1. Wilmington, Delaware, gets more surveillance cameras (USA) 2. Washington DC City Council Action (USA) 3. Traffic cameras denounced (USA) 4. Satellites over (Iraq) 5. Police surveillance (Chicago) 1. Wilmington gets more surveillance cameras city program among nation's toughest By ADAM TAYLOR Staff reporter 11/09/2002 The addition of more than a dozen cameras to those already recording people on downtown Wilmington's streets and sidewalks has helped make the city's camera surveillance among the most intensive on the East Coast, experts say. A private, nonprofit group called Downtown Visions, which works with area businesses to prevent crime there, has installed a total of 25 cameras throughout the 69-square-block area. Eleven of the cameras were activated in April 2001 and the others were turned on about a month ago, Martin P. Hageman, the group's executive director, said Friday. The second batch of cameras gives the group the ability to view 65 of the 69 blocks, said Dean Vietri, the group's safety director. Downtown Visions also communicates with private businesses that have more than 100 cameras, which gives the group blanket surveillance coverage. Hageman said he thinks Wilmington is the only city in the country to have its entire downtown district covered by surveillance cameras. The coverage area is bounded roughly by South Park Drive, Adams Street, Walnut Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. A 1999 survey of more than 100 cities with camera programs by the Security Industry Association in Alexandria, Va., showed that most of them are not as advanced as Wilmington's, said the group's executive director, Richard Chace. Tom Yeager, a vice president of Downtown Partnership of Baltimore, said Wilmington's system is more sophisticated than that city's. There are 64 cameras in Baltimore's 106-block downtown, Yeager said. "We have big gaps downtown," he said. "And we don't use the types of cameras they do because of potential civil liberties challenges and Big Brother concerns of the public." In the George Orwell novel "1984," Big Brother is a euphemism used by the government for its monitoring of society. The novel is frequently cited in discussions about whether government intrudes on individual privacy. In Wilmington, the cameras are used as a tool to help police prevent crime or catch criminals in the act, Hageman said. "We patrol the streets with joysticks," he said. "The criminals cannot outrun the cameras." But neither can law-abiding residents, which American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware President Lawrence Hamermesh said is troubling. "There are no obvious constitutional objections, but the cameras do raise questions about privacy," he said. Mayor James M. Baker, however, said Big Brother concerns are "garbage." "Nineteen-eighty-four has already passed," he said. "We have to protect people." Wilmington's cameras record images around the clock, and are monitored for 16 hours each day by three Downtown Visions employees. The videotapes are kept for 10 to 12 days, unless a crime is detected. In that case, the images are put onto a computer disc and saved indefinitely, Vietri said. The "pan, tilt and zoom" cameras can view people up to 12 blocks away, Vietri said. A TV monitor in the Wilmington Police Department's dispatch room can receive images from any of the Downtown Visions cameras when workers spot a crime in progress. Also, the Downtown Visions staff has access to the police computer dispatch system so it can pan in on crimes seconds after they are reported. The staff has reported 150 incidents that police have investigated since April 2001, Vietri said. Those calls resulted in 32 arrests, he said. The cameras also have been used 270 times to help police with crimes in progress. Arrests were made in 110 of those incidents. Police Chief Michael Szczerba said downtown crime decreased in the 18 months the cameras have been used, compared with the previous 18 months. Burglaries are down by 32 percent, vehicle thefts are down 20 percent, and robberies are down 5 percent. Hageman said he thinks the cameras prevent as much crime as they catch on videotape. Signs are posted on the streets alerting people to the ongoing surveillance. He gave city officials and others a slide presentation Friday of crimes caught by the cameras in recent months. The cameras cost $800,000. The city provided $210,000, the state government contributed $150,000 and New Castle County gave $100,000. Private contributions paid for the rest. Downtown Visions has an annual budget of $1.4 million. It gets its money from payments from the 775 taxable properties in the 69-block area. The group employs about 60 people, including a "Clean and Safe" team of workers who patrol the streets. Wilmington also has 10 traffic cameras that catch people who run red lights. The police have several surveillance cameras on the East Side, but the city's money crunch has left them mostly unused. Baker said he would like to make the downtown camera program a citywide initiative. http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2002/11/09wilmingtongetsm.html 2. Limits on cop cameras cleared By Brian DeBose THE WASHINGTON TIMES The council initially opposed the legislation on a 7-6 vote. But late into the evening it reversed its position and voted 7-6 to allow the Metropolitan Police Department to use its 14 closed-circuit television cameras but with legislative restrictions. Council member Sandy Allen, Ward 8 Democrat, changed her mind and moved to reconsider the original vote. "I came to feel that if we didn't do something today, we would have cameras in our back yard," Mrs. Allen said. Several members had strong reservations about the restrictions and the cameras themselves. Some, referring to protests, special events and marches downtown, said the surveillance invaded people's right to privacy and freedom of speech. Others said the regulations were suspect and didn't sufficiently limit installation of additional cameras. Council member Kathy Patterson, Ward 3 Democrat and chairman of the Judiciary Committee that has oversight of the police, insisted that her colleagues pass the restrictions she sponsored. "I urge you all to take this opportunity now to put some restrictions on the police," Mrs. Patterson said. "If any members want to draft legislation to outlaw the cameras, please do so in the future but do not leave the police department unregulated today." The regulations allow the cameras to be used only for special events, such as scheduled rallies, protests and marches. The cameras cannot be used to target any individual, unless an individual is seen committing a crime. In addition, the system will be used only to observe locations that are in public view and where there is no general expectation of privacy. No recordings are to be made without public knowledge or without a court order. Any recordings made will be stored for only 72 hours, unless the tape is needed as evidence. The addition of new cameras was the council's greatest concern. The regulations say the police must give the public notice if any new cameras are installed. Additions may be made only under "exigent circumstances," a stipulation most members said was too vague. The issue split the council down the middle. At noon, Mrs. Patterson had enough votes to pass the regulations, said council member Phil Mendelson, at-large Democrat, who led the charge against them. By 4 p.m., six members had changed their minds, refusing to make the cameras a matter of law. But by 7 p.m., a second and final vote was taken and the legislation passed. "These regulations are unclear, vague and, if passed, the police will be given regulations that can be interpreted in many ways," Mr. Mendelson said. D.C. Council member Carol Schwartz, an at-large Republican who opposed the measure, said the fact that the police department had agreed to operate the cameras using the regulations made them moot, and that it was not imperative to make them law. The Washington Times first reported on the use of surveillance cameras in February. The department at that time announced plans to link hundreds of cameras already in use by various agencies to the Joint Operations Command Center at its headquarters on Indiana Avenue NW in addition to the 14 that police had been using since September 11, 2001. The report prompted civil liberties groups to raise concerns that the vast surveillance was an invasion of privacy and a Big Brotherlike encroachment on personal freedoms. Council member Kevin Chavous, Ward 7 Democrat, who initially said he would vote to pass the regulations, said he wanted to send a message to the police department and the mayor that their activation of the cameras without public knowledge would not be tolerated. "I think you will see a group of us introduce a companion piece saying we want no cameras," Mr. Chavous told The Times. 3. The day the red-light ticket machine got wrecked. BY PATRICK BEDARD DECEMBER 2002 They've got the traffic-ticket machine cranked up now, and the cash flow has turned deliriously blurry. In Washington, D.C., the take from "camera enforcement" is $63,000 a day. Let's zoom in: That's $44 a minute, day and night, seven days a week. Since a modest start in August 1999 with two red-light cameras, D.C. has expanded to 39 camera intersections and five photo-radar teams. And the loot keeps piling up, over $25 million at last summer's start. So far, all camera-enforcement schemes in the U.S. require at least some involvement by the local police. Somebody has to put down his Krispy Kreme and rubber-stamp the citations already written up by a profit-making contractor. But if the most enthusiastic camera cheerleader, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, has its way, the first fingers to touch your next ticket will be yours. In a recent issue of its Status Report, it wistfully dreamed about "fully automated systems . . . that can recognize license plates, link to motor-vehicle registration databases, and issue tickets." "Judge, jury, and executioner, all in one convenient box," says Richard Diamond, staffer in Congressman Dick Armey's office. Cashier, too, let me add. Instamatic enforcement is unquestionably about revenues. Some folks think it's about safety, too, but the pile of evidence to the contrary grows as fast as the revenues. Here's my favorite example, this from San Diego's red-light camera program: On ABC's Nightline, police chief David Bejarano said that "it's true in a few intersections we found a few more accidents than prior to the red-light photo enforcement. At some intersections we saw no change at all, and at several intersections we actually saw an increase in traffic accidents." An analyst with San Diego's Police Department traffic division, Elizabeth Yard, told the same story in an interview with the San Diego Union-Tribune: "I would have to say that the cameras themselves have not reduced the number of [injury] collisions that have happened at these intersections." Here's another thing the cameras aren't about: justice. The argument for them starts out with one foot on a banana peel and the other on a fast freight. On the one foot, it maintains, speeding and red-light infractions are so serious they need 24/7 enforcement with an unblinking eye. On the other, they're so insignificant that we needn't bother with the usual constitutional niceties such as right to a trial and innocent until proven guilty and the right to be confronted by your accuser. Just send in your check, and don't bother us with your sniveling "yes, buts." I could make intellectual arguments. Common sense says if the offense is grievous enough to need surveillance by electronic means, then it's also threatening enough that the perp ought to be stopped immediately. That's what an officer does when he hands a ticket in through your lowered window. But sending out a notice in bulk mail, to be opened a few weeks later, has too much in common with credit-card billing to be confused with law enforcement. Moreover, if these traffic transgressions are truly dire, then authorities are obligated to grab the right guy. The officer at your window performs that service, too. But Instamatic justice doesn't even try. The car owner gets the ticket, no matter who is driving. And if the owner didn't do it, and can prove same by showing his face is not the one in the photo, most jurisdictions still make him pay. They let him off only if he rats out the actual driver. But why make principled arguments against camera enforcement when it indicts itself with its own fumbling? "We don't need no stinkin' trials," camera enthusiasts say, "because the meter is always right." The everyday stories of Washington, D.C., say otherwise. There, about 45 percent of red-light and 41 percent of photo-radar infractions get tossed before they get mailed. That's because of "irregularities." Regular screw-ups, on the other hand, go through the system like water in a hose. About two years ago the camera at H and North Capitol NE was removed after police decided it had been wrongly positioned, according to the Washington Post. But some 13,000 innocents had already paid up. Tough. There are no plans for refunds. The paper went on to detail just how faulty the system really is. In another example, about 330 innocents received photo-radar tickets because, it was later discovered, the camera had been improperly calibrated. "'Officers occasionally do enter an incorrect speed limit,' [Lt. Pat Burke] said, 'and some erroneously issued tickets slip through the review process.'" "'Fairly often,' according to one examiner at the DMV's Bureau of Traffic Adjudication, 'motorists bring in separate speeding tickets showing their vehicles were cited at two different places in the cityat the same time. "'Those ones we don't even delve into,' she said. 'We just dismiss.'" The examiner went on to say that many motorists, preparing their own defense, ask to see the camera's maintenance records. "'It's a request that is denied,' she said, and when it is, 'most people are upset.'" Typical of the photo cities, Washington, D.C., throws plenty of boulders in the path of anyone attempting to exercise his constitutional right to defense. "Regina Williams, a DMV spokeswoman, said those who appeal their tickets also have to pay a $10 appeal fee and $10 for each page of any hearing transcript, both nonrefundable. In addition, motorists must pay the fine until the appeal is resolved, which usually takes two months." One Gotcha! piles on another. "William Roberts of Fort Washington got a speeding ticket in October. His citation said he was photographed in the 900 block of Southern Avenue SE going 44 mph in a 30-mph zone. He contested the ticket and was given an April 10 hearing. "'In the meantime, they wrote me a letter telling me that my fine had doubled while I was appealing it,' Roberts said." D.C. police defend their ticket machine by saying red-light running has dropped 64 percent since they cranked it up. Congressman Armey, a skeptic, observes that all those violations that were dismissed due to irregularities are back in the count to make "before" look worse that it was. If reducing violations were really the point, then D.C. would follow the example of nearby Fairfax County, Virginia, which chopped red-light running to less than 1/10th its former rate at the corner of U.S. 50 and Fair Ridge Drive. The miracle was accomplished by lengthening the yellow to 5.5 seconds from 4.0. No civil rights were trampled in the process. But there was a casualty. With citations dropping to less than one a day, the ticket machine is a total wreck. http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/columns/2002/december/200212_columns_bedard.xml 4. Spy satellites scanning targets every two hours http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/11-11-19102-0-4-6.html IAN BRUCE AMERICAN spy satellites are scanning key targets throughout Iraq at least once every two hours in a concentrated surveillance operation which can pick out objects as small as six inches across in daylight and two to three feet wide at night. The US national reconnaissance office controls three advanced KH-11 "Keyhole" satellites weighing 15 tons apiece and the size of a single-decker bus equipped with optical and infra-red cameras, and three Lacrosse imaging radar satellites with sensors which can detect signs of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons development. The giant craft orbit over Iraq at regular, predictable intervals, snapping high-resolution digital pictures of "sites of military interest" and providing the Pentagon and the CIA with continually updated records of major ground and air activity. All of the spysats operate on polar orbits to enable regular passes, and several missions a day can be geared towards obtaining specific imagery of areas around Baghdad, the western desert Scud missile launch points within range of Israel, and the southern sector around the strategic port of Basra. The only problem is that most of the passes can be timed by Iraq's military, and efforts to hide or camouflage weapons of mass destruction are carried out in the brief periods when the surveillance window closes. One KH-11 passes over Baghdad at about 2am, then again at 3pm. On its nighttime sweep, it uses infra-red scanners and low-light cameras. On the second, it can employ its full range of sensors. Another sweeps the capital in late morning and again just before midnight. The third and oldest KH-11 overflies the gap period. One Lacrosse goes over central Iraq and Baghdad at 11am and then again at 8.30pm. The second follows the same track at 3pm and 10pm. The third has the 3am and 5.30pm slots. While the 700m KH-11s are in orbits slaved to the sun's cycle, the Lacrosse craft have more flexibility and slightly more room for manoeuvre in their quest for raw intelligence. The Lacrosse can also build a computer-generated three-dimensional image of terrain or buildings using its radar. These are essential for mapping and for giving special forces' teams a realistic briefing for covert operations. The bottom line, however, is less than 10 minutes' "loiter time" over any target until the orbit takes the satellites out of camera range. In recent months, high-flying U2 manned spy planes dating back to the 1960s and Predator unmanned drones have been drafted in to plug some of the surveillance gaps. In recent years, the Serbs, Indians, Pakistanis and North Koreans all managed to dupe US intelligence by taking advantage of these gaps to move nuclear material, troops and equipment. The US has now authorised an 18 billion programme to create a new network of satellites orbiting at more than 2000 miles above the earth which could have three times the scanning period and 20 times the image capability of current KH-11s. The plan is to create a system which could be targeted anywhere on the globe at two hours' notice and be able to pick out an object the size of a tennis ball. - Nov 11th 5. POLICE SURVEILLANCE UNSHACKLED IN CHICAGO Chicago police said they will videotape anti-globalization demonstrators Nov. 7 under intelligence-gathering powers they have regained from the courts after a two-decade ban. Department rules that took effect Oct. 25 also permit officers to pose as members of groups and surf the Internet to scan groups' web sites. "In the past, you could only turn on the camera after a crime was committed, and you could only film the commission of a crime," said Larry Rosenthal, a deputy corporation counsel for the city. "Now, we will have cameras out there to document demonstrators' misconduct, as well as police misconduct if it occurs. The expanded police powers stem from the easing of the so-called "Red Squad" consent decree in January 2001. The 1982 federal decree had barred the city from gathering information on political groups. The 7th Circuit US Court of Appeals modified the decree, giving the city more freedom to collect intelligence. Chief Judge Richard A. Posner wrote that the decree "rendered the police helpless to do anything to protect the public." The Red Squad was a secret police unit launched in the 1920s and notorious for spying on anti-war activists in the 1960s, when it even infiltrated church groups. "Somebody in the Police Department can't remember 1968," said Harvey Grossman, of the Illinois American Civil Libertieis Union. Mayor Richard Daley--whose father was mayor during the violent anti-war protests in 1968--has argued for years that the decree needed to be lifted. (Chicago Sun-Times, Nov. 7) (http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-red07.html)
By e-mail SCP@notbored.org
By snail mail: SCP c/o NOT BORED! POB 1115, Stuyvesant Station, New York City 10009-9998