Thread by @AngelSDiaz_

We had some concerns about NYPD spying on #BLM and other protesters, so we wrote about them nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-ope… NYPD Deputy Commissioner Miller responded nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-ope…. Here’s a fact check of what he said @joshgreenman

As is typical, NYPD responds to any calls for transparency or accountability by saying they will make it harder for them to catch terrorists. But, we’re not talking about terrorists, we’re talking about protesters.

NYPD says info in the public square isn’t entitled to privacy protection. But Handschu places limits on social media monitoring—even on public websites. NYPD can conduct general topical research, but they can’t run online searches for protesters’ names or individual identifiers.

Just because information is available to the public doesn’t give police free reign to collect it. For example, the Supreme Court held that police need a warrant to track a person’s public movements using a GPS device. supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf…

A public records suit revealed NYPD stored photos and Twitter posts of BLM protesters for >4 years. This raises serious concerns about compliance with the Handschu Guidelines. cc @georgejoseph94 theappeal.org/years-after-pr…

A separate @NYCLU suit asked for records about NYPD’s use of Stingrays to interfere with #BLM protesters’ ability to use their phones. A judge rejected NYPD's non-response, and ordered them to confirm or deny whether any records exist. cc @aliwinston nytimes.com/2019/01/14/nyr…

Deputy Commissioner Miller says NYPD only uses Stingrays to find phones, not to listen to conversations, read texts or emails, or download other data. But some devices can do just that. And just to find 1 phone, Stingrays trick every cell in its radius to give up identifying info

During a protest, that could mean dozens of phones. What does NYPD do with data from bystander phones? The public should know what technologies NYPD uses, and what privacy protections are in place.

The truth is, NYPD can’t keep its tools secret forever. The public already knows NYPD uses everything from Stingrays and license plate readers to social media monitoring software and predictive policing algorithms.

Meanwhile, potential criminals and terrorists will be hard pressed to completely abandon the use of cell phones, modern transportation, or the Internet. Even after the Wiretap Act, criminals used phones – and cops caught them.

Ultimately, Deputy Commissioner Miller is asking the public to simply trust that the NYPD is following the law. He says that civil liberties groups unfairly paint NYPD as a shadowy org, and that we sow public mistrust. But NYPD's actions speak for themselves.

Just looking at recent history, NYPD engaged in unconstitutional surveillance of Muslims and spied on protesters during the RNC Convention, throughout Occupy Wall Street, and during #BlackLivesMatter marches. Protesters have every right to worry that they’re being watched.

Receipts: ap.org/about/awards-a… (Muslims), nytimes.com/2007/03/25/nyr… (RNC), reuters.com/article/us-new… (Occupy), theguardian.com/us-news/2017/a… (BLM)

Someone must watch the watchmen. The #POSTAct's basic transparency & accountability measures would help restore public trust. Instead of responding to lawsuits and news scandals, the NYPD would have upfront conversations about its tools and protections for New Yorkers’ privacy.

It’s time for the City Council to step in. @DRichards13 should schedule a new hearing for the #POSTAct. The bill carefully balances the need for democratic oversight and transparency with NYPD’s need for operational secrecy. @Vanessalgibson @bradlander @JumaaneWilliams

Cities across the country from Oakland CA to Somerville MA have already passed even stronger police accountability measures. New Yorkers deserve public oversight of policing done in their name. #CCOPS, cc @b_haddy, @ACLU, @EFF, @accessnow aclu.org/issues/privacy…