https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/23/judge-grants-search-warrant-for-cambridge-analyticas-offices
Investigators from Britain’s data watchdog have spent nearly seven hours searching the London offices of Cambridge Analytica.
Eighteen enforcement officers entered the Cambridge Analytica headquarters in London’s West End on Friday night to search the premises after the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) was granted a warrant to examine its records.
The officials concluded the search at about 3am on Saturday.
“We will now need to assess and consider the evidence before deciding the next steps and coming to any conclusions,” an ICO spokesperson said in a statement.
A judge had issued the warrant on Friday evening, four days after the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, first announced plans to raid the offices.
Denham has been seeking access to records held by the London-based data analytics company, which faces allegations it may have illegally acquired the information of millions of Facebook users and used it to profile and target voters during political campaigns.Mr Justice Leonard granted the warrant after a five-hour hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, adjourned from Wednesday.
A spokesperson for the ICO said: “This is just one part of a larger investigation into the use of personal data and analytics for political purposes.”
The focus of the data watchdog’s investigation includes the acquisition and use of Facebook data by Cambridge Analytica, its parent company, SCL, and Dr Aleksandr Kogan, the academic who developed the app used to gather the data.
Earlier in the week, the culture secretary, Matt Hancock, hinted that the government would consider further strengthening the information commissioner’s powers to investigate the misuse of personal data amid criticism that it had taken so long to get a search warrant.
Following Friday’s hearing, Leonard said he would outline the reasons for his decision on Tuesday.
It took way too long to get this warrant. CA is an inherently criminal organization: they have zero scruples about destroying evidence. We gave them five days to do so.
I'll just repost this from the other thread....
https://i.redd.it/aolk78ak5nn01.jpg
uhhh, context?
CA began moving boxes from their HQ before the Search Warrant.
Y'know, I'm pretty sick of people jumping the gun when it comes to smoking crime syndicates. Like, if they had kept a lid on the whole plan to raid CA until they had the warrant, then those scum-sucking political parasites wouldn't have had a far too generous headstart at destroying evidence
We knew this would happen, and they should never have been allowed to do it. God knows how much evidence they were able to destroy. Who knows how much they'll be able to get away with now? I mean, five days? I doubt there's little left to even peg them on now.
Well in theory anything destroyed after the warrant application counts as destruction of evidence but good luck proving that unless the previous whistleblowers made copies.
You'd think there was a legal clause allowing seizure but not search for this sort of situation.
As I mentioned to BDA...Channel 4 have a reasonably good amount of investigative clout.
However, to add to that they are still a for profit group and getting this story out fast was their main concern. After all, it's not really their problem if CA get away with it. But the whole thing should have been kept under wraps until the warrants were granted at the very least.
you'd think if you're going to engage in their business practices they'd try to locate in a place where their use of data isn't illegal, like the US
Was their a reason why it took a British judge so long to approve the warrant?
I believe part of the reason is that channel 4 is technically state owned, even if it is largely self funded. There may have been some debate on whether its report qualifies as probably cause, for if it were it could open up the possibility of state owned media being used to go after political opponents in a similar fashion. I'm glad the court both came to the conclusion it did but also debated the matter seriously.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
