Mass Witness Intimidation via Instagram
November 11, 2013 4:11 PM Subscribe
Philadelphia police investigate online account which revealed court documents and witnesses
With 7,900 followers, the "rats215" account highlights an ongoing epidemic of "anti-snitching culture" gone digital.
However, this is far from the first instance of a public anti-snitching campaign, which has been featured in popular culture.
For many, the question of who snitching really betrays still remains.
With 7,900 followers, the "rats215" account highlights an ongoing epidemic of "anti-snitching culture" gone digital.
However, this is far from the first instance of a public anti-snitching campaign, which has been featured in popular culture.
For many, the question of who snitching really betrays still remains.
Some snitches apparently pay good money for information in a bid to reduce their sentences.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 4:32 PM on November 11, 2013
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 4:32 PM on November 11, 2013
I think there is an important distinction between asking someone to testify about a crime they happen to know about, perhaps committed by someone they know, and rewarding people with money, reduced sentences, and being allowed to continue to commit crimes in return for the information they are providing. The former is good citizenship; the latter leads to nothing but evil.
posted by localroger at 4:35 PM on November 11, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by localroger at 4:35 PM on November 11, 2013 [3 favorites]
I hate this city sometimes.
Social media enabling old-school gangland intimidation tactics on a horrific scale.
posted by supercres at 4:43 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
Social media enabling old-school gangland intimidation tactics on a horrific scale.
posted by supercres at 4:43 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
localroger: I think there is an important distinction between asking someone to testify about a crime they happen to know about, perhaps committed by someone they know, and rewarding people with money, reduced sentences, and being allowed to continue to commit crimes in return for the information they are providing. The former is good citizenship; the latter leads to nothing but evil.
I don't think it's quite as simple as that. While there have been many misuses of informants, such as threatening minor criminals with ridiculous sentences, sending in unprepared informants to die, convicting innocent people based on dishonest jailhouse informants, and using them against peaceful groups, it's one of law enforcement's only tools against large-scale criminal organizations. In particular, it's been used to do serious damage to hate groups and the mafia. So while I'm not sure we can really give the technique up completely, it does need to be managed a hell of a lot better.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:47 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think it's quite as simple as that. While there have been many misuses of informants, such as threatening minor criminals with ridiculous sentences, sending in unprepared informants to die, convicting innocent people based on dishonest jailhouse informants, and using them against peaceful groups, it's one of law enforcement's only tools against large-scale criminal organizations. In particular, it's been used to do serious damage to hate groups and the mafia. So while I'm not sure we can really give the technique up completely, it does need to be managed a hell of a lot better.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:47 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
From the last linked article:
"In these areas, residents must contend with the knowledge that friends, family and neighbors may be committing crimes with impunity or seeking information to work off their own liability. This is a destructive phenomenon, threatening social networks and bonds of trust, and undermining residents' perceptions of the police."
As for the person posting all that information on the internet - yikes! But the problem isn't really that person, the problem is that apparently they have a ton of supposedly secret information that is walking out their doors. As long as this is the case someone will figure a way to distribute it online.
posted by el io at 4:57 PM on November 11, 2013
"In these areas, residents must contend with the knowledge that friends, family and neighbors may be committing crimes with impunity or seeking information to work off their own liability. This is a destructive phenomenon, threatening social networks and bonds of trust, and undermining residents' perceptions of the police."
As for the person posting all that information on the internet - yikes! But the problem isn't really that person, the problem is that apparently they have a ton of supposedly secret information that is walking out their doors. As long as this is the case someone will figure a way to distribute it online.
posted by el io at 4:57 PM on November 11, 2013
Mitrovarr, law enforcement at all levels has demonstrated a serious problem with this particular hammer making every problem look like a nail. At what point do we decide the ruse must be abandoned? I'm fairly sure I remember a case (too much Google noise to find it alas) where an undercover cop stood by and watched a brutal gang-rape because intervening would have risked his cover. Are you OK with that? What about murder? The plot of the film The Amateur revolves around a snitch planted in a terrorist cell; in order to legitimize himself his handlers tell him to kill one of the hostages. He picks the protagonist's fiance, and hilarity ensues.
The litany of real world crimes and outrages which occurred because of the snitch trade is very, very long. The fact that a tool is useful does not mean it should be used. Dynamite is very effective at harvesting fish, but there are good reasons you're not allowed to use it for that.
posted by localroger at 5:00 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
The litany of real world crimes and outrages which occurred because of the snitch trade is very, very long. The fact that a tool is useful does not mean it should be used. Dynamite is very effective at harvesting fish, but there are good reasons you're not allowed to use it for that.
posted by localroger at 5:00 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
localroger, I'm not sure that an undercover operation is morally or legally in the same area as snitching for a lighter sentence (and if you want an example of such an operation going awry, you need only point to the biker assault on Alex Lien in New York, where multiple cops apparently violated their orders and/or policy regarding checking in, blowing their cover for the purpose of public safety, or otherwise; one exception to that behavior is not facing charges).
This is a destructive phenomenon, threatening social networks and bonds of trust, and undermining residents' perceptions of the police
Eh. The neighborhood I live in is full of people who only call the cops when they want to create trouble for somebody they don't like. I have actually been told this by a cop -- that they know when they get a report from me it isn't some sort of petty tit-for-tat thing where they're being used. The moral hazard is inherent, it isn't something that is brought into existence by law enforcement.
I would say the ideal way to solve it would be a less Puritan-punishment-model approach to justice, especially one that leans toward restorative justice. Change the model, change the incentives, change the behavior.
posted by dhartung at 5:26 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
This is a destructive phenomenon, threatening social networks and bonds of trust, and undermining residents' perceptions of the police
Eh. The neighborhood I live in is full of people who only call the cops when they want to create trouble for somebody they don't like. I have actually been told this by a cop -- that they know when they get a report from me it isn't some sort of petty tit-for-tat thing where they're being used. The moral hazard is inherent, it isn't something that is brought into existence by law enforcement.
I would say the ideal way to solve it would be a less Puritan-punishment-model approach to justice, especially one that leans toward restorative justice. Change the model, change the incentives, change the behavior.
posted by dhartung at 5:26 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah dhartung there is something of a spectrum of activity here and the OP does a poor job of discrimination.
I personally have no problem with, say, turning a Mafia asset by promising a light sentence and whisking them away to Witness Protection in return for their help. However, what looks like the same thing is actually very different when you apply it to offering some local junkie the chance to stay out and feed his habit instead of getting locked up and going into withdrawal. The Mafia guy presumably doesn't have much incentive (or need) to invent shit to hang on the people he names.
And I have a very, very big problem with sending people into situations where they are allowed to commit crimes or encouraged to stand around and not intervene (particularly if they are law officers) to maintain the deception while crimes are being committed. And if you look at the moral justifications being offered the line between that sort of thing and the less reprehensible activities is really razor thin.
The bottom line is that all forms of this tool are dangerous and easily abused, and it's a thing that should be used occasionally if at all, not as the all-spark of crime reduction.
posted by localroger at 5:38 PM on November 11, 2013
I personally have no problem with, say, turning a Mafia asset by promising a light sentence and whisking them away to Witness Protection in return for their help. However, what looks like the same thing is actually very different when you apply it to offering some local junkie the chance to stay out and feed his habit instead of getting locked up and going into withdrawal. The Mafia guy presumably doesn't have much incentive (or need) to invent shit to hang on the people he names.
And I have a very, very big problem with sending people into situations where they are allowed to commit crimes or encouraged to stand around and not intervene (particularly if they are law officers) to maintain the deception while crimes are being committed. And if you look at the moral justifications being offered the line between that sort of thing and the less reprehensible activities is really razor thin.
The bottom line is that all forms of this tool are dangerous and easily abused, and it's a thing that should be used occasionally if at all, not as the all-spark of crime reduction.
posted by localroger at 5:38 PM on November 11, 2013
Yes, thank you for the distinctions in your comments, localroger. I was trying to get "more in depth" with the last link, but seem to have failed. This is obviously a much larger issue but is mostly being played on one-note in the media, and I wasn't sure which other resources could point to a better discussion.
posted by warm_planet at 6:02 PM on November 11, 2013
posted by warm_planet at 6:02 PM on November 11, 2013
Where the hell are our internet crime professionals? Probably wasting their time going after file sharers or website defacers instead of dealing with serious things like this.
Nothing personal, but most people have little clue about the massive problem of online crime currently underway. It is not precocious geeky teenagers in the basement anymore. They still exist of course, but it's professional crime that is far bigger than law enforcement can handle. FBI of course can get anyone with enough time and resources, but most online crime goes unsolved because of the lack of resources. And I'm talking bank theft in the millions, ATM theft, ID theft, etc. it goes and on and on. One of the best books I read on this topic is America the Vulnerable: Inside the New Threat Matrix of Digital Espionage, Crime, and Warfare by Joel Brenner (former NSA). Like you can trust the NSA right? Yeah. Ignore at peril because things are different now than they were even 5 years ago in terms of the scale and sophistication of online crime. This witness intimidation stuff is just one more example of how the power of the Internet is leveraged in ways no one could foresee.
posted by stbalbach at 6:16 PM on November 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
Nothing personal, but most people have little clue about the massive problem of online crime currently underway. It is not precocious geeky teenagers in the basement anymore. They still exist of course, but it's professional crime that is far bigger than law enforcement can handle. FBI of course can get anyone with enough time and resources, but most online crime goes unsolved because of the lack of resources. And I'm talking bank theft in the millions, ATM theft, ID theft, etc. it goes and on and on. One of the best books I read on this topic is America the Vulnerable: Inside the New Threat Matrix of Digital Espionage, Crime, and Warfare by Joel Brenner (former NSA). Like you can trust the NSA right? Yeah. Ignore at peril because things are different now than they were even 5 years ago in terms of the scale and sophistication of online crime. This witness intimidation stuff is just one more example of how the power of the Internet is leveraged in ways no one could foresee.
posted by stbalbach at 6:16 PM on November 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
Ah my fucking city.
posted by Mister_A at 6:23 PM on November 11, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Mister_A at 6:23 PM on November 11, 2013 [3 favorites]
And if you look at the moral justifications being offered the line between that sort of thing and the less reprehensible activities is really razor thin.
I believe the moral justification is "drugs'r bad. M'kay."
But there's so much money in drug crime enforcement (and corruption) the activity is self-justifying. How else can you look like you're making progress while keeping drug operations going?
Sudhir Venkatesh writes in "Off the Books" about the underground economy of trade for services and shopkeepers. One of the things local pastors did was to have community meetings to discuss gang-related problems (one of the things CeaseFire does well) and stop violence. It's funny that the police have not been given much official capacity to deal with these things in this way.
And in some ways the gangs have taken the initiative to control security for that underground economy.
In many ways this is what the Tongs, the Mafia, the Triads, and other organized crime groups did. The same association for (underground) community support and protection and the same anti-informant mentality.
Funly enough, most of those groups grew and thrived because they were formed under oppressive and ineffectual governments. The Chechen mafia is organized enough to be political FFS. Ruslan Labazanov is practically a folk hero.
We really need to look at why enough people are plugged into the no-snitching thing.
Reminds me of a quote from No Country for Old Men.
Sheriff: "Drugs. They sell that stuff to kids."
Bell: "It's worse than that."
Sheriff: "How's that?"
Bell: "Kids buy it."
posted by Smedleyman at 6:38 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
I believe the moral justification is "drugs'r bad. M'kay."
But there's so much money in drug crime enforcement (and corruption) the activity is self-justifying. How else can you look like you're making progress while keeping drug operations going?
Sudhir Venkatesh writes in "Off the Books" about the underground economy of trade for services and shopkeepers. One of the things local pastors did was to have community meetings to discuss gang-related problems (one of the things CeaseFire does well) and stop violence. It's funny that the police have not been given much official capacity to deal with these things in this way.
And in some ways the gangs have taken the initiative to control security for that underground economy.
In many ways this is what the Tongs, the Mafia, the Triads, and other organized crime groups did. The same association for (underground) community support and protection and the same anti-informant mentality.
Funly enough, most of those groups grew and thrived because they were formed under oppressive and ineffectual governments. The Chechen mafia is organized enough to be political FFS. Ruslan Labazanov is practically a folk hero.
We really need to look at why enough people are plugged into the no-snitching thing.
Reminds me of a quote from No Country for Old Men.
Sheriff: "Drugs. They sell that stuff to kids."
Bell: "It's worse than that."
Sheriff: "How's that?"
Bell: "Kids buy it."
posted by Smedleyman at 6:38 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
FWIW, other news sources are reporting that Instagram has shuttered the account.
posted by jason's_planet at 7:04 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by jason's_planet at 7:04 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
Unless the account-holder is an absolute security master, it shouldn't be too hard to track him down, and the mentality here really doesn't go along with a security expert.
I believe they already have identified the teen responsible and have started to track down the process of how the documents made their way to the suspect-- this article is a couple of days out of date. To be honest, I'm just glad they did find this and shut it down, even if presumably the info will migrate elsewhere.
posted by jetlagaddict at 7:10 PM on November 11, 2013
I believe they already have identified the teen responsible and have started to track down the process of how the documents made their way to the suspect-- this article is a couple of days out of date. To be honest, I'm just glad they did find this and shut it down, even if presumably the info will migrate elsewhere.
posted by jetlagaddict at 7:10 PM on November 11, 2013
Louis Theroux, as part of his Law & Disorder in Philadelphia documentary, discusses "no snitchin'" with a bunch of young men on the corner, as well as the beat cop he's been rolling with, who has something to say about what "no snitchin'" results in on the street.
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:42 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 7:42 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
How is "no snitching" that different from "don't talk to cops?" Guys on the street won't lock you in a cage.
posted by oceanjesse at 7:59 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by oceanjesse at 7:59 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
Every phone call you make is listened to by the NSA, but actual terrorism like this goes on and they can't bother.
posted by humanfont at 8:10 PM on November 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 8:10 PM on November 11, 2013 [2 favorites]
Nothing personal, but most people have little clue about the massive problem of online crime currently underway.
It shouldn't be such a hard-to-imagine concept for cops here in Philly, considering their enthusiastic use (some of them) of the Domelights online message forum to proudly spew blisteringly horrendous racism under the guise of being "the good guys" (until the site shuttered in the wake of a lawsuit by black cops.) How hard is it to imagine that "bad guys" could be equally arrogant?
posted by desuetude at 9:54 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
It shouldn't be such a hard-to-imagine concept for cops here in Philly, considering their enthusiastic use (some of them) of the Domelights online message forum to proudly spew blisteringly horrendous racism under the guise of being "the good guys" (until the site shuttered in the wake of a lawsuit by black cops.) How hard is it to imagine that "bad guys" could be equally arrogant?
posted by desuetude at 9:54 PM on November 11, 2013 [1 favorite]
"How is "no snitching" that different from "don't talk to cops?" Guys on the street won't lock you in a cage."
Sounds like the kind of thing someone who has never had to live on a street that was really indistinguishable from a cage with a skin color/accent/level of education that might as well be an orange jumpsuit would say. Just how impotent the judicial system is for removing truly poisonous dealers and thugs from the streets in a lot of cities like Philly, largely because its the most violent and fucked up who can enforce bullshit like this, destroys communities and locks people in them. Its not the fuckers who take deals to continue being the big kings of little kingdoms without police interference who get fucked over by this mentality but the otherwise powerless who want justice for their relatives or just a safe walk home.
posted by Blasdelb at 12:41 AM on November 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
Sounds like the kind of thing someone who has never had to live on a street that was really indistinguishable from a cage with a skin color/accent/level of education that might as well be an orange jumpsuit would say. Just how impotent the judicial system is for removing truly poisonous dealers and thugs from the streets in a lot of cities like Philly, largely because its the most violent and fucked up who can enforce bullshit like this, destroys communities and locks people in them. Its not the fuckers who take deals to continue being the big kings of little kingdoms without police interference who get fucked over by this mentality but the otherwise powerless who want justice for their relatives or just a safe walk home.
posted by Blasdelb at 12:41 AM on November 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
Blasdelb I think you're missing the point of that comment. Everyone wants to see "truly poisonous dealers and thugs" gone from the streets. Some of us would also like to see punks with cans of spray paint, shoplifters, petty dealers, youth gangs who beat you up for walking down the wrong block, and pimps gone from the streets too, but the juvenile ethos of "don't talk top the cops" and the attitude that all cops are racist thugs keeps this from happening. I grew up in Philly in the 1970s when it wasn't the friendly, nice, safe place it is today and a lot of bullshit crime was tolerated because you know "don't talk to the cops." It was as stupid then as it is today. It's a good thing in a way there are criminals who are bad enough that even liberals are willing to talk to the racist thug cops so maybe they might see the harm "don't talk to the cops" brings down on everyone else.
posted by three blind mice at 3:10 AM on November 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by three blind mice at 3:10 AM on November 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yesterday, when I saw that story, I sucked my breath and said, 'They weren't kidding.' Students tell me all the time that snitches get stitches, and I had always been, 'Oh, okay (inner eye roll)'
posted by angrycat at 3:33 AM on November 12, 2013
posted by angrycat at 3:33 AM on November 12, 2013
Blasdelb, my comment comes from a place of understanding that there is more complexity in the city of Philedelphia than could possibly be portrayed by a cop and an English reporter asking some black guys why they won't acquiesce their survival mechanism "just" because they or their friend got shot. It's pretty rude to frame the assumption that even on the verge of death these guys didn't have a good reason to think this was a good approach. In 1985, the Philedelphia police department bombed its own city. There is a heritage of brutality in Philedelphia, and I think it's extremely relevant here. That man was obviously uncomfortable talking to Louis Theroux in front of that officer, and if I were him, I wouldn't even have said hello. There is a huge crime problem in Philedelphia, and I don't think this sort of confrontational borderline harassment constitutes an analysis. For fucks sake, Louis is wearing a bulletproof vest. What does that say about the power dynamics of their conversation? I'm not trying to be reductive here and I'm not going to pretend like I know what's best for anybody in these situations, but I do see that fear, and I can't blame them for being scared. I'll bet you a hundred bucks that all of those guys on the corner have a friend or family member behind bars.
posted by oceanjesse at 6:02 AM on November 12, 2013
posted by oceanjesse at 6:02 AM on November 12, 2013
The bullet-proof vest was a requirement from Louis' BBC handlers. They didn't make him wear one when for Law & Disorder in Johannesburg.
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 6:09 AM on November 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 6:09 AM on November 12, 2013 [1 favorite]
60 Minutes on "Stop Snitchin'"
Omerta used to only apply to criminals and their associates, not the community as a whole.
We got a fucked up, understaffed police force here in Oakland of which 90%+ live not in town but out in the suburbs. And still I would rather have that than whatever autocthonous people's vigilante militia would arise to replace it should OPD somehow be abolished, as some of my more politically radical associates might aspire to.
Because then the strongest group of local thugs will be the police.
"That describes my local law enforcement right now".
Blither, blather, blah. Even the most corrupt, fucked-up police force is held statutorily responsible to a higher legal authority, and in the end they can be held accountable as legally sworn officers of the peace.
Never talk to cops without a lawyer is one thing. "We as a community espouse the values of the criminal/predatory element within our population" is a radically different thing.
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 6:42 AM on November 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
Omerta used to only apply to criminals and their associates, not the community as a whole.
We got a fucked up, understaffed police force here in Oakland of which 90%+ live not in town but out in the suburbs. And still I would rather have that than whatever autocthonous people's vigilante militia would arise to replace it should OPD somehow be abolished, as some of my more politically radical associates might aspire to.
Because then the strongest group of local thugs will be the police.
"That describes my local law enforcement right now".
Blither, blather, blah. Even the most corrupt, fucked-up police force is held statutorily responsible to a higher legal authority, and in the end they can be held accountable as legally sworn officers of the peace.
Never talk to cops without a lawyer is one thing. "We as a community espouse the values of the criminal/predatory element within our population" is a radically different thing.
posted by Pirate-Bartender-Zombie-Monkey at 6:42 AM on November 12, 2013 [2 favorites]
"We as a community espouse the values of the criminal/predatory element within our population" is not radically different if you also consider cops to be a predatory element.
It's different, but it's not radically different. That's what I was getting at.
Anyway, I've never even been to Philly, I'm just offering that perspective. No snitch is a tough culture, and I agree that stonewalling doesn't help. But trying to understand the stonewalling will help, I think. My perspective on that Louis Theroux documentary has shifted over the past few years since I watched it circa 2010 as I've learned more about national scale things like the prison industrial complex, and regional level things like the MOVE bombing and the Mumia Abu-Jamal case. Hope it doesn't seem like I'm stifling anyone's experiences here because that isn't my intention.
posted by oceanjesse at 7:23 AM on November 12, 2013
It's different, but it's not radically different. That's what I was getting at.
Anyway, I've never even been to Philly, I'm just offering that perspective. No snitch is a tough culture, and I agree that stonewalling doesn't help. But trying to understand the stonewalling will help, I think. My perspective on that Louis Theroux documentary has shifted over the past few years since I watched it circa 2010 as I've learned more about national scale things like the prison industrial complex, and regional level things like the MOVE bombing and the Mumia Abu-Jamal case. Hope it doesn't seem like I'm stifling anyone's experiences here because that isn't my intention.
posted by oceanjesse at 7:23 AM on November 12, 2013
« Older No one should have to die alone | Hey Bro – you’re being insensitive Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Unless the account-holder is an absolute security master, it shouldn't be too hard to track him down, and the mentality here really doesn't go along with a security expert.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:27 PM on November 11, 2013 [3 favorites]