electronic eavesdropping

▪ police science

      the act of electronically intercepting conversations without the knowledge or consent of at least one of the participants. Historically, the most common form of electronic eavesdropping has been wiretapping, which monitors telephonic and telegraphic communication. It is legally prohibited in virtually all jurisdictions for commercial or private purposes.

      Great controversy has evolved over the use of this technique to detect crime or to gather evidence for criminal (criminal investigation) prosecution. Opponents assert that the legitimate governmental interest in curtailing crime does not outweigh the great potential for infringing upon constitutional or fundamental guarantees of citizenship, such as individual privacy (privacy, rights of) and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (search and seizure).

      Wiretapping activities date back to the beginnings of telegraphic communication. In the United States, state statutes forbidding the interception of messages were enacted as early as 1862. The tapping of telephone lines began in the 1890s and was approved for use by police officials in the Supreme Court case of Olmstead v. United States (1928). Federal investigative authorities continue to engage in wiretapping, although in 1934 Congress enacted restraints that severely limited the use of intercepted material as admissible evidence in judicial proceedings. In the 1960s and '70s the Supreme Court sought to protect individuals from “unreasonable searches and seizures” by circumscribing prosecution based on electronic surveillance. Some U.S. states prohibit wiretapping completely, whereas others authorize its use pursuant to a valid court order. With the adoption of the Crime Control Act of 1968, Congress authorized the use of electronic surveillance for a variety of serious crimes, subject to strict judicial control.

      In England permission to employ a wiretap is granted only in cases of serious offense when interceptions are likely to result in conviction and other methods of investigation have failed. In most other jurisdictions wiretapping is authorized under prescribed circumstances at the request of judicial, prosecuting, or police officials. A court order is ordinarily required, but in some countries, such as Denmark and Sweden, exceptions are recognized in urgent cases.

      The typically vague standards governing the use of wiretapping have also provoked controversy with regard to other listening devices. Transistors, microcircuits, and lasers, all products of space-age technology, have revolutionized the art of electronic eavesdropping. One group of the new investigative tools takes the shape of a ray gun that transmits radio waves or laser beams. The ray is directed at the object of the investigation from hundreds of feet away and can imperceptibly pick up a conversation and return it to the listener. The power necessary to transmit a laser beam for carrying voices many miles is extremely small, and a laser beam is more difficult to detect than radio signals.

      The most efficient and least expensive form of listening device is a radio transmitter made out of integrated microcircuits. One hundred typical microcircuits can be made on a piece of material smaller and thinner than a postage stamp. A transmitter so constructed can be concealed in a playing card or behind wallpaper.

* * *