According to the letter:
'The FBI uses UAVs in very limited circumstances to conduct surveillance when there is a specific, operational need. UAVs have been used for surveillance to support missions relating to kidnappings, search and rescue operations, drug interdictions, and fugitive investigations.'
It continued:
'Since late 2006, the FBI has conducted surveillance using UAVs in eight criminal cases and two national secutity cases.'
The letter also confirmed that drones had also been authorized for deployment in three other cases, but had not actually been flown.
The date of the correspondence could prove to be significant. If the FBI claims it has only ever used drones for surveillance twice in cases of 'national security', one of those cases is likely to be Ibragim Todashev's. Again, what was so particular about Todashev and why did the Bureau feel it was necessary to monitor him in such a way?
New records emerged this week that, although heavily redacted, shed further light on some of the cases of drone surveillance listed above.
The date of the correspondence could prove to be significant. If the FBI claims it has only ever used drones for surveillance twice in cases of 'national security', one of those cases is likely to be Ibragim Todashev's. Again, what was so particular about Todashev and why did the Bureau feel it was necessary to monitor him in such a way?
New records emerged this week that, although heavily redacted, shed further light on some of the cases of drone surveillance listed above.
Muckrock gains some insight...
The documents were obtained by Muckrock as part of its drone census project. They revealed how drones had been deployed to a monitor a 'large scale dog fighting operation' and a child kidnapping/hostage crisis case in Alabama. They were also considered for use as part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation into Mexican cartels, although no confirmation exists as to whether they were deployed in that case or not.
On May 9 2012, a UAV deployment was actioned at short notice to assist with a kidnapping, murder and unlawful flight investigation. The mission was lauded as a 'signal achievement in the history of the FBI':
On May 9 2012, a UAV deployment was actioned at short notice to assist with a kidnapping, murder and unlawful flight investigation. The mission was lauded as a 'signal achievement in the history of the FBI':
The case is thought to be that of Adam Mayes, who had been placed on the FBI's 'ten most wanted' list on the same day.
The FBI and state investigators found Mayes and two young girls on May 10 - the day after a drone was deployed to a kidnap/murder/unlawful-flight investigation - in the woods a few miles from Mayes's home in Mississippi.
Media reports all noted that the search was only brought to fruition when a Highway Patrol officer 'spotted a small blonde child peeking over a ridge'. The use of a drone to assist with the manhunt was never reported, and the Bureau refused to confirm whether their 'signal achievement' ever came from the Mayes case.
If all that wasn't enough, Muckrock's records also revealed something else: something very disturbing. Despite the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) having urged the FBI to inform it of drone deployments in US domestic airspace, the Bureau may forego that request in 'exigent circumstances.' In other words, certain drones which the FAA describe as 'the same as manned fixed-wing aircraft' - aeroplanes - can be secretly deployed without informing the relevant authorities of any safety details surrounding flight paths/altitudes etc.
Under such circumstances, what could possibly go wrong?
The FBI and state investigators found Mayes and two young girls on May 10 - the day after a drone was deployed to a kidnap/murder/unlawful-flight investigation - in the woods a few miles from Mayes's home in Mississippi.
Media reports all noted that the search was only brought to fruition when a Highway Patrol officer 'spotted a small blonde child peeking over a ridge'. The use of a drone to assist with the manhunt was never reported, and the Bureau refused to confirm whether their 'signal achievement' ever came from the Mayes case.
If all that wasn't enough, Muckrock's records also revealed something else: something very disturbing. Despite the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) having urged the FBI to inform it of drone deployments in US domestic airspace, the Bureau may forego that request in 'exigent circumstances.' In other words, certain drones which the FAA describe as 'the same as manned fixed-wing aircraft' - aeroplanes - can be secretly deployed without informing the relevant authorities of any safety details surrounding flight paths/altitudes etc.
Under such circumstances, what could possibly go wrong?
Todashev waits...
While the FBI admits to its use of UAVs in 'very limited circumstances,' precisely what some of those circumstances are still remains a mystery. When Motherboard asked the Bureau to clarify details surrounding the latest batch of records, Special Agent Ann Todd confusingly stated:
'Other than the hostage crisis site in Alabama, we have not publicly identified specific cases where we have used unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)'
The FBI appears to have forgotten some of the very information it has already made public.
None of the documents released in the last six months provide any details about drone deployments in the two cases of 'national security,' and if history is anything to go by, obtaining that information will not be easy.
The FBI has resisted all reasonable attempts to discover more about the Bureau's drone program, and continues to remain secretive and highly selective in the information it does release. The ACLU has a chance, but will the Bureau play ball?
Unfortunately, the likelihood of discovering why a drone was used to monitor Ibragim Todashev seems further away than ever.
None of the documents released in the last six months provide any details about drone deployments in the two cases of 'national security,' and if history is anything to go by, obtaining that information will not be easy.
The FBI has resisted all reasonable attempts to discover more about the Bureau's drone program, and continues to remain secretive and highly selective in the information it does release. The ACLU has a chance, but will the Bureau play ball?
Unfortunately, the likelihood of discovering why a drone was used to monitor Ibragim Todashev seems further away than ever.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
