Register, Donate or Volunteer & make a difference!

Detail Page


Require court order for wiretap or phone data

Require court order for wiretap or phone data

It is illegal for the government/police, the manufacturer of any phone, or any other entity to wiretap/listen to any person over the age of 18, to that  person’s cell phone conversation/surf through their cell phone data, without a judicial court order, (except for the police in an “immediate” life or death manner, and the police must publicly post after 90 days any and all non-judicial wiretapping/eavesdropping that they performed without a court order) as such wiretapping/eavesdropping by any entity may only be done so if a person gives clear and concise consent by way of

electronic confirmation with a mandatory separate, secondary/and unattached confirmation/with signature and other necessary additional words submitted/as stated herein, to any other agreement. It is authorized to use such confirmation by way of electronic signature, and, the person giving consent must also type a 30 word or more statement accompanied in that electronic signature agreement stating their specified consent in 30 words or more/if consent is given, by way of a hand written permission statement or, by handwriting, and, or, personally typing out such consent, this approval (non-electronic) document must also contain more than a 30 word self-typed/hand written permission statement, along with a hand written signature, and must be notarized. Any entity that violates this legislation shall face an automatic minimum of $100,000 fine, with no maximum limit, per person.  Whistleblowers are eligible to pursue these funds. The offender will either be payroll deducted/garnished if still employed/and all assets shall be frozen until the whistleblowers monies are paid in full/if applicable, also, these fines and fees against the offender is not eligible to be discharged in bankruptcy, or any other manner, there is no statute of limitations, there are no bank accounts, monies, property, retirement accounts, trust funds, or other property or accounts that can be protected, as all these accounts are subject to be frozen/seized/sold if necessary, until such time as all fines, fees, costs, legal and other, are fully satisfied. The government/tax payers shall not pay for the legal defense of the person alleged to have violated this legislation. Any attorney working for or representing the government shall not be permitted to represent the person(s)(government employee/elected official/appointee) accused of violating this legislation.  This action can be brought in local, State, and or Federal court, of the relevant region, for enforceable court action. A small claims court, shall now have an exception for these whistleblower type cases as included/defined herein, to expand the limit to $200,000, including all costs/fees/ legal fees/interest/penalties/ damages/etc…whereby a whistleblower could have their matter heard. All small claim whistleblower matters shall be heard, in 4 months or less for the trial. Whistleblowers receive their 50% of the monies/as it comes in/half is continually diverted to the whistleblower. Whistleblowers receive their 50% of the monies/as it comes in/half is continually diverted to the whistleblower. Whistleblowers receive their 50% of the monies/as it comes in/half is continually diverted to the whistleblower. If the (whistleblower and or plaintiff loses – the whistleblower is only at risk if they were the sole plaintiff/if the whistleblower was not the sole plaintiff/the solely direct injured party/then the whistleblower has qualified immunity protection from all costs, fees, of any sort, in any capacity), the defendant and or government employee (herein defendant) fully prevails by judicial verdict/is victorious/found not to be liable in any capacity, by a judge’s order and verdict/jury verdict, then the defendant is entitled to be awarded all of their legal fees, costs, and all eligible awards and monies that they were facing/at risk to pay/in this legislation/and, the judge shall be eligible to award these monies to the defendant/and, fine these costs upon the Plaintiff. (government employee only)  The government may reimburse solely the government employee’s legal fees/legal fees only/nothing else of any sort, so long as the government employee prevailed by judicial verdict as described herein. The Plaintiff in this same scenario/if the judicial verdict is in favor of the government employee/the plaintiff would face all the same collectability risk(these monies/debts/ shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy, all bank accounts and pensions are subject to being seized and or garnished, etc…). The onus for the defendant to prevail, to be awarded monies, is a burden of proof upon the government employee, therefore a verdict/decision, signed by a judge, declaring that the defendant/government employee was absolutely free of all liability/wrong doing, is required for the defendant to be eligible to be awarded and collect monies. Any form of settlement, does not meet this threshold for any award of monies on either side beyond the terms and conditions agreed upon in the executed settlement agreement.

What do you think?

Should it be legal for phone manufacturers or police/government to access and/or use your phone contents, including private conversations and data/web habits, without a warrant?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

We cannot make this happen without your help – get involved and make a difference now.

Copyright 2021 All Rights Reserved. A 501(c)(4) non-profit and non-partisan organization. Privacy Policy