emptywheel

Any person whose comms were acquired under 702, whether or not he was a target of acquisition or is a USP, must be notified by the govt before any info obtained/derived from 702 is used against him in any legal proceeding in the U.S. Paraphrase from PCLOB report, citing 1806c&d.

Thank you!!! Just as I said, entirely different than the standard you just suggested. Glad you corrected yourself. Anything else I can help you with?

This is exactly what I said. Notice is actually broader than I suggested above ( I only mentioned prosecution of USP). If 702 is used in court, the defendant gets notice. You are saying they are not being given notice.

No. You said if a case came from 702 it had to be noticed in court. That is incorrect. Nor is it the standard. Of course if that happened we'd have 1000 of 702 notices rather than ... 8.

What I said is what the PCLOB statement says. How are you not getting that 702 gets noticed in court from that statement? What is the standard you believe applies?

Wait, you're working off PCLOB, not actual knowledge of any court cases? Also, no, that's not what PCLOB says. I could explain what happened w/the 8 defendants who got noticed, bc standard changed, but in perhaps just once case was it bc a suspect was first IDed via 702.

I'm referencing current std because that's relevant to 702 reauth - what we're talking about. I think you are missing the "derived from" part. I'm not sure if it is an honest mistake or willful blindness. The snark suggests the latter, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

So your suggestion is current standard, in which ZERO people are getting notice, is finally using the derived from language in better faith than the standard when a whopping 8 people were. This is not snark. It is disbelief you're saying this w/any experience or good faith.