Monthly Archives: March 2005

The Future is Here and Your DNA Has Been Subpoenaed

Declan McCullagh has finally fixed the RSS for his Politechbot list so I guess I'm reading it again. Here's a fascinating item originating from an email from Ethan Ackerman that I'm taking the liberty of quoting in full because it raises so many issues.

Cops covertly acquired tissue of BTK suspect's relative — from medical lab: In developments straight out of GATTACA's handshake scene, A Kansas City Star report indicates that the suspected “BTK” killer was tentatively linked to crime scene evidence by acquiring genetic material from the suspect's daughter's medical records – the tissue samples being taken without her knowledge.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/11035826.htm

The article goes on to give a brief but factually accurate explanation of how a request for “medical records” is entirely within the framework of the federal medical privacy laws (HIPAA), and also gives a likely source of the tissue – a routine pap smear. The article suggests that a judge issued a secret order for the records, though the article does not state if it was a formal 4th Amendment “probable cause” warrant, or some lesser standard subpoena, or even go into whether the police were required to acquire an order under HIPAA (there are circumstances where agents can just the recordholder.)

BUT the article also doesn't raise the fact that what was apparently requested was NOT “health information” – what HIPAA protects – but actual tissue from the suspect's daughter's file samples.

I'm operating on a few words from one article here, so the facts aren't definitive, but this seems quite an interesting breach of privacy expectations, independent of how it may legally turn out.

On one hand, court-compelled physical examinations have been ruled Constitutionally sound (thus, you can be compelled to give a tissue sample, or even forcibly sampled.) On the other hand, how many American women even know labs keep pap smear samples, much less would think it reasonable that their pap smears would one day be turned over to police to tentatively connect their sons or daughters to crimes?

Posted in Law: Privacy | 2 Comments

YATA (Froze to Death in Detention)

Yet Another Torture Allegation: Dana Priest, CIA Avoids Scrutiny of Detainee Treatment.

In November 2002, a newly minted CIA case officer in charge of a secret prison just north of Kabul allegedly ordered guards to strip naked an uncooperative young Afghan detainee, chain him to the concrete floor and leave him there overnight without blankets, according to four U.S. government officials aware of the case.

The Afghan guards — paid by the CIA and working under CIA supervision in an abandoned warehouse code-named the Salt Pit — dragged their captive around on the concrete floor, bruising and scraping his skin, before putting him in his cell, two of the officials said.

As night fell, so, predictably, did the temperature.

By morning, the Afghan man had frozen to death.

The CIA says it's investigating — two years after the fact. Which is an odd claim, since the first reaction was coverup,

[The victim] is on no one's registry of captives, not even as a “ghost detainee,” the term for CIA captives held in military prisons but not registered on the books, they said.

And the second reaction was just as predictable with this crew:

The CIA case officer, meanwhile, has been promoted.

Of course the whole thing was rotten from the start as the CIA took the official view that US rules didn't apply to what it called an Afghan facility. Never mind that the CIA paid for it, paid all the salaries, decided who would be held there, and pretty much ran it. The CIA still claimed it was a “foreign facility”. Deniability and all that (including deniability towards Congress).

The only vaguely good news here is that apparently torture is considered a low-status activity in the CIA.

“A first-tour officer was put in charge because there were not enough senior-level volunteers,” said one intelligence officer familiar with the case. “It's not a job just anyone would want. More senior people said, 'I don't want to do that.'

Posted in Torture | 1 Comment

UM Global Governance Symposium

Here's an interesting conference that I will be attending right here at UM: The Global Governance Symposium coming up this Friday. Full details below — come join us! If you can't make it in person, there's a high likelihood that it will be webcast; I'll post the details if and when they become available.

Continue reading

Posted in Talks & Conferences | Comments Off on UM Global Governance Symposium

People Who Don’t Get It

Received from FPL_Correspondence@fpl.com:

Dear Customer,

Thank you for using www.FPL.com …

You may also be interested in FPL's other billing and payment options.
FPL E-Mail Bill allows you to receive your bills online; like getting an
e-mail from a friend.

Um, no.

Posted in Internet | 1 Comment

Wallace and Gromit Ride Again

Wallace and Gromit have a movie coming out this fall, The Curse of the WereRabbit!

There's a trailer and also a short about the making of the movie accessible via clicking “video” at this site. The short is spoiled by some pretty dorky narration, but it will interest true fans.

Er, Helena Bonham Carter has a part? Well Gromet, that's almost as good as cheese.

Posted in Kultcha | Comments Off on Wallace and Gromit Ride Again

Smiles Have Accents

(via Boing-Boing) The Times (UK): The smile that says where you’re from

While we British smile by pulling our lips back and upwards and exposing our lower teeth, Americans are more likely simply to part their lips and stretch the corners of their mouths.

So distinct is the difference that the scientist behind the research was able last week to pick out Britons from Americans from close-cropped pictures of their smiles alone, with an accuracy of more than 90%.

The study by Dacher Keltner, a psychology professor at the University of California in Berkeley, near San Francisco, analysed the 43 facial muscles used by humans to charm, smirk and appease.

He found the British were also more likely to raise their cheeks when they smile, showing the crow’s feet at the corners of the eyes. This produces a more sincere, hard-to-fake smile.

But what happens when Irish eyes are smiling?

Posted in UK | 1 Comment