Louisville Cop Used Law Enforcement Database To Seek Female Targets To Hack For Sexually Explicit Content
from the access-without-oversight dept
Law enforcement officers have plenty of unfettered access to expansive databases containing plenty of personal information. This access is instrumental to law enforcement work, including ongoing investigations, attempts to locate wanted criminals, and the routine minutia of validating drivers licenses and registration.
The problem is there’s so little oversight of officers’ use of these databases. Over and over and over again, this access is abused for personal purposes. And abuse is far from uncommon. A 2013 audit found more than half of Minnesota’s 11,000 law enforcement officers abused their access to driver data, with the most common abuses being searching for others with the same last name and “disproportionately searching for people of one sex.”
Lack of true oversight at the local level has led to federal charges against a (now former) Louisville police officer who abused his access to other people’s personal info to seek sexually explicit material with the apparent goal of blackmailing them. Here’s Josh Wood, reporting for LEO Weekly.
According to a sentencing memorandum, Bryan Wilson used his law enforcement access to Accurint, a powerful data-combing software used by police departments to assist in investigations, to obtain information about potential victims. He would then share that information with a hacker, who would hack into private Snapchat accounts to obtain sexually explicit photos and videos.
If sexually explicit material was obtained, Wilson would then contact the women, threatening to post the photos and videos online and share them with their friends, family, employer and co-workers unless more sexually explicit material was provided to him.
Accurint is a powerful database run by LexisNexis — one that contains millions of public records, court filings, licenses, addresses, phone numbers, and (as is most relevant here) social media data. That last chunk of information was integral to Officer Wilson’s scheme. The DOJ’s sentencing memorandum [PDF] recounts one of Wilson’s conversation with a potential victim.
Wilson: I’m curious which picture you’d prefer me to use as the focal point of a collage im making . . . (pictures were attached)
Victim: Who is this?
. . .
Wilson: You cool with me posting em? Im telling you, everyone will LOVE them!
Victim: How did you get these
. . .
Wilson: . . . I had planned to send your pictures to your parents, brother, grandparents, sisters, friends, facebook, pornhub, employer, etc but I would gladly keep all of this between you and I (and tell you who sent them to me) if you promise to leave me out of the drama and show me a few more pics that way we can both benefit . . .
If he did not receive the response he liked, Wilson would post the hacked content online. He also encouraged others to send him info on other potential targets, providing them with his Kik contact info. If the hack was successful, those providing these tips were rewarded with access to the hacked content. In at least one case (the DOJ has identified 25 hacking victims), the victim’s employer was sent the sexual content, which nearly resulted in the victim’s termination.
And that’s not the only charge in the memorandum. Wilson is also being sentenced for his participation in “Slushygate.” Multiple officers (including Wilson and an officer implicated in the Breonna Taylor killing) apparently roamed the city, hurling drinks at pedestrians. Many of these assaults were captured by cops with their own phones. At least one resident was hospitalized after being hit with a thrown drink.
The Louisville Metro PD is currently being investigated by the DOJ for its pattern and practice of civil rights violations. The actions of former officer Bryan Wilson show just how little fear of reprisal the PD’s officers have. Officers facing actual oversight and accountability don’t blackmail people or randomly assault pedestrians just for fun. This officer is a symptom of much larger — and still unaddressed — problem. The same festering rot that allowed officers to lie on a warrant application before forcing their way into a home and killing an unarmed, innocent person is the same rot that bubbles to the surface in less violent, but still abhorrent, forms.
Filed Under: accurint, blackmail, bryan wilson, louisville, louisville metro police, police databases
Companies: lexisnexis
Comments on “Louisville Cop Used Law Enforcement Database To Seek Female Targets To Hack For Sexually Explicit Content”
“Slushygate”
Cute name for what it really was.
An armed gang terrorizing the streets, assaulting citizens.
Add to it the fact they were sworn to uphold the law and its much worse.
Of course the union will fight to keep them, because protecting the image of those charged with upholding the law, who get free passes to violate it, matters more.
Gee, I guess no one’s ever thought to check the logs to see who accessed what & then asked the reason.
You can’t trust them to not buy slushies and attack citizens with them… but somehow unfettered access to informational databases is something we can trust them with?
Break the contracts, any contract that allows an officer who violated the public trust in this way to keep their job/pension/benefits is unacceptable.
Has anyone done the math to see how closely linked the amount of budget shortfalls are to how much the city has paid out to get people to drop lawsuits against the cops & cities?
Re:
Of course the union will fight to keep them, because protecting the image of those charged with upholding the law, who get free passes to violate it, matters more.
I wouldn’t even give them that much as if they cared about the image of those they supposedly represent then they’d be the first in line to condemn cops who were making everyone who wears a badge look bad rather than bending over backwards to defend those people.
Re: No different than the Mid Western Cops
Hunting civilians with paint ball guns a while back. This is protecting and serving?
'Look if we punish him a LOT of us are in trouble, so...'
No worries, I’m sure the department and union will be out in force to insist it was nothing more than a ‘temporary lapse of judgement’ and decry the very idea of anything more than some paid leave to let the uppity public get over the issue before he’s right back on the force and payroll.
Re:
Oh no, no, no, no.
First there will be the argument of whether or not the officer could even possibly know that throwing a slushie at someone could be a rights violation. There would need to be some very specific precedent they would never have read that specifically identifies a partially frozen drink in a paper cup with a wax coating being thrown from a vehicle at a person would violate said person’s rights.
If such precedent exists, then we go to appeal on whether the size of the slushie is a mitigating factor.
Then we appeal on the flavor of the slushie.
Then the delta between the time the slushie was dispensed versus the time it was thrown.
Then the composition of the slushie based on the mini-mart where it was purchased from.
Then the differences between the cup that could have been chosen at any given time, based on available stock.
I’d like to think I’m being sarcastic. But I think we all know from reading Tim’s articles over the years that this is a more likely than not scenario.
OK, I guess Situs Slot Gacer’s post has to stay up in Texas and Mike will need to start filling out forms so he can remove it in California. The post says “poker,” that’s close to “Pokémon,” so that means potentially appealing to kids, right?
and i suppose he’s been granted immunity, like every other police officer for every crime they commit! so much for being there to look out for our interests!!
Which Louisville is this, exactly?
Re:
Some of the links specify Kentucky.
Both these serial dirtbags plead guilty to 1 count each of civil rights violations for the slushyygate/throwing drinks and splashing puddles on pedestrians at minimum dozens of times (40 known caught on video). The extra scummy stalker got just 1 count of attempted cyber stalking. Both got recommendations for probation from prosecutor, but the judge said hold up, fuck that noise! Judge asked them if the roles were reversed, and citizens chucked drinks at them in their patrol cars or walking a beat in uniform, if the citizen could expect mere probation? I wonder if there’s video of that b/c I cannot imagine the look on the collective courtroom’s face. Has a judge ever asked such a thing? So the one guy got 3 months, and the other 30 months, plus yada yada yada. If I had the spare cash Id send that judge some fancy bourbon.
Re:
Bloody hell does the legal system need more judges like that.