LEGAL WIRETAPS ON RISE IN COLORADO

Help in Drug Busts Lauded, But Critics Decry Privacy Loss

The number of phones secretly wiretapped by Colorado law enforcement hit a
10-year high last year, leading to large drug busts statewide while raising
concerns about the privacy of innocent people.

The increase in the court-authorized wiretaps was led by the U.S.
Attorney's Office, which used 108 wiretaps in its first year under U.S.
Attorney for Colorado Troy Eid. That's four times the number used in the 12
months prior to Eid's August 2006 arrival, according to data from his office.

State prosecutors, meanwhile, got permission to use 43 wiretaps in 2006 -
more than in the previous nine years combined, according to an annual
report by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

For Eid, the reason to rely on wiretaps is simple.

"The wiretap does not lie," he said. Eid, an appointee of President Bush,
also said using wiretaps is safer than sending an undercover agent or
informant to buy drugs.

Wiretaps also may be the only way to reach the highest-level dealers -
people who wouldn't talk to or sell drugs to strangers, said Mesa County
District Attorney Pete Hautzinger, whose office, with the help of wiretaps,
charged 31 people with selling methamphetamine last year.

But the increase is alarming to others, who note it's not just the targets
of investigations, but anyone who makes a call to those targets, who may be
recorded.

"You do have people with no connection whatsoever with crime whose
conversations are scrutinized," said Cathryn Hazouri, executive director of
the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado. "That is a serious invasion
of their privacy."

'Substantial Checks'

Court-authorized wiretaps are different from the controversial warrantless
eavesdropping the National Security Agency has used in its war on terror.

These legal wiretaps require a judge's approval. Prosecutors must show that
there is probable cause to believe the target is breaking the law and that
other investigative methods aren't working, are too dangerous or are
unlikely to work.

The U.S. Attorney's Office also must get approval of a deputy attorney
general in Washington, D.C., before taking a wiretap application to a
federal judge.

Once the application is granted, attorneys must provide regular updates to
the judge. If they want to continue a wiretap beyond the standard 30 days,
they must provide justification.

And once the wiretaps are "live," the officers or federal agents listening
in are required by law to stop listening if the discussion isn't related to
the criminal investigation.

"I can't overemphasize the number of hoops we have to jump through,"
Hautzinger said. "It is not something we do willy-nilly."

But defense attorneys say it's still far too easy to get authorization. The
judge hears only from one side - the prosecution - and relies on an
investigator's version of events to determine whether there is probable cause.

Last year, no state or federal judge denied a request for a wiretap, the
report from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts showed. Of the
more than 15,000 applications filed in the past decade, only five were denied.

That leads Denver attorney Mari Newman to question whether judges are
scrutinizing the applications as much as they should.

"You really do have to wonder if it's a rubber stamp," she said.

Hazouri said she is particularly concerned because the Democratic National
Convention will be in Denver next August. Prior to the 2004 conventions,
FBI agents and members of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Forces questioned
people they thought might engage in crime at the events.

"There could easily be a tendency to overuse wiretaps and justify them as
preventing violence at the convention, when they're really intercepting
calls among nonviolent protesters," Hazouri said. "The track record is not
great."

Jeff Dorschner, spokesman for Eid, said there is no cause for alarm.

"This process has substantial checks in place to ensure that they are done
right," he said.

Meanwhile, the number of wiretaps authorized nationwide is climbing.
Federal and state judges approved 1,839 wiretaps last year - a 54 percent
increase over a decade ago.

Drug Investigations

Of the 1,839 wiretaps authorized last year, 80 percent were for drug
investigations. In Colorado, those investigations brought big results,
authorities say.

In April, Eid announced federal indictments against more than 50 people. In
addition to those already arrested or charged in state court, the total
number of defendants was more than 100, making it the largest gang and drug
bust in state history.

Many of those defendants were caught up in the more than 50 wiretaps
federal authorities used during the 18-month investigation.

Eid's office also said it's no coincidence that as the number of wiretaps
has increased, so has the amount of drugs seized.

Since he took office, federal agents have seized 1,151 kilograms of
marijuana and 126 kilograms of cocaine. That's up from 122 kilograms of
marijuana and 13 kilograms of cocaine in the 12 months preceding Eid's tenure.

El Paso County authorities said they used wiretaps in recent Colorado
Springs drug busts, including one in which the area's drug task force
seized about 20 pounds of methamphetamine worth more than $3 million.

And in Grand Junction, wiretaps were "absolutely irreplaceable" in
arresting and convicting 31 people for selling methamphetamine, Hautzinger
said.

According to the report from the courts office, the 31 convictions were the
most resulting from wiretaps reported by any state district attorney's
office nationwide last year.

The arrests never could have been made without the wiretaps, Hautzinger said.

"With increasingly sophisticated dealers, I think wiretaps are virtually
the only way to break up big dealers," he added.

It also helps get a conviction, Eid and Hautzinger said. A wiretap, if it
survives a legal challenge from defense attorneys, is much more reliable
and believable than another person's recollection of an event or a
conversation.

"There's not much better evidence than a defendant's own words," Hautzinger
said.

Listening In

Federal and state authorities are eavesdropping on a record number of
Colorado phones.

108 wiretaps were used by the Office of the U.S. Attorney for Colorado
between Aug. 1, 2006, and July 31, 2007.*

27 wiretaps were used between Aug. 1, 2005, and July 31, 2006.

• Wiretaps authorized by state judges for local district attorneys

2006......43 Four in Jefferson County; seven in Denver; 24 in El Paso; six
in Mesa; two in the 9th District (Garfield, Pitkin and Rio Blanco counties)

2005......12

One in Denver; 11 in El Paso

2004......0

2003......2

One in Denver; one in Weld County

2002......0

2001......2

2000......5

1999......2

1998......1

1997......4

• Wiretaps authorized nationwide (all states and federal)

2006......1,839

2005......1,773

2004......1,710

2003......1,442

2002......1,358

35% increase in authorized wiretaps over the past five years.

92% of wiretaps authorized nationwide in 2006 were for portable devices,
such as cell phones or pagers.

80% were for suspected drug offenses. $52,551 is the average cost of each
wiretap. This includes the cost of installing the devices and monitoring
communications.*Troy Eid Became U.S. Attorney For Colorado In August 2006.
Source: U.S. Attorney'S Office, Administrative Office Of The U.S. Courts