🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov7.133526.1682@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu>, denning@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:
	<...>
|> My understanding is that the phone companies keep an audit of all taps.
|> 
|> Section 2519 of Title 18 contains fairly elaborate reporting 
|> requirements for law enforcement.  The reports go into the annual
|> "Wiretap Report" which lists the judge, prosecutor, offense specified,
|> cost, duration, number of intercepts, persons intercepted, 
|> incriminating intercepts, arrests, trials, motions to suppress, and
|> convictions for each tap.

Look in the report and see if it lists CT State Police monitoring of
all calls in/out of their facilites for several years up to 1991, when
it was finally disclosed.  All calls from detainees to their attorneys
were recorded, as were all calls from attorneys at State Police facilites
to anywhere.  The State Police claimed they "never reviewed" the recordings.
Just recently, the CT Attorney General announced that no charges would be
filed in the case.

Now admittedly, these recordings were made on the PABX equipment at
State Police premises, not the facilities of SNET or another public
service provider.  But given the changes in telecommunications, what
unit of governemnt *doesn't* operate its own phone network these days?
CT has a private T3 network linking all state offices;  am I safe in
assumeing that any phone call I make or receive in any state office
facility is free of monitoring devices?  Recent experience here suggests
(1) you cannot trust the authorities; (2) if caught they will not be
punished (thus reinforcing item 1).
-- 
  Alan S. Watt
  Yale University			Computing and Information Systems
  Box 2112 Yale Station			(203) 432-6602
  New Haven, CT  06520-2112		Watt-Alan@Yale.Edu