• Categories

  • Pages

  • Archives

Ancestry Sites – The Start of a Very Bitter Relationship.

During the holiday season, we often run into relatives that we rarely see, might never have known and recap the year’s changes re: births, deaths… within the family.  We make promises to be in touch and oftentimes, we now turn to technology – in the form of ancestry sites, to help us maintain our family ties.

There are many ancestry sites online that help us reconnect with our lost, or find unknown, family members.  A majority of these sites can disappoint by posting  incomplete, mismatched records, dubious source information… The most popular ancestry site, Ancestry,  rises above  these issues by operating on a legitimate, comprehensive, matched data verification system. Annual registration for Ancestry starts at roughly $150 year and, of course, there are buy-ons you can add to your account.

Regardless of the perceived security of  ancestral online database membership, these sites often, inadvertently provide a gateway for gathering  personal information by  identity thieves.  While phishing (hacking) is still the preferred method of anonymously obtaining personal data,  our savvy thieves realize that they can potentially legally get away with obtaining the information they seek by carefully selecting their victims. 

The general M.O. of an i.d. theft criminal is to locate a “mark”, someone who appears isolated from the rest of the family, generally someone old, lonely, naive, confined or infirm.  The use of an ancestry site allows the thief to gain insider information on the victim’s family.  Perceived familiarity can put an innocent, unsuspecting person at ease.

From there, it is simple for an i.d. thief to run a background check on his target on any number of the data providers now available online.  This search can yield hard information; ranging from current address, address histories, mortgages, voter registration, professional licenses, email addresses, phone number, relatives,  neighbors…

If a criminal takes the time, he can form a  fairly accurate profile of his target before the victim is even aware that anyone is looking into his/her background.

Some helpful hints to keep identity thieves off-base. 

If a site demands your SSN, do not provide it.

DOBs are optional. (Most legitimate sites will allow you to simply click off that you are over 13 y.o.)

In filling out promotional offers (and we all do this!), use a middle initial not associated with your real name.  It’ll allow you to keep track of how your personal information is being distributed.

If  you wish to add pictures on the site you wish to join, a) elect for the pictures are to be available only to those you chose to opt in and b) upload a generic pic that does not have  your house number or vehicle plate or other identifiers in the photo.

If you’ve taken as many preventative measures as possible and still get “phished” or have your identity stolen, you need to contact your local police immediately as well as your banking institutions, medical, driver’s insurance companies and alert your friends and family so that they will be aware and not inadvertently release additional  personal information.

Good luck and as they say in poker, keep your cards close to your vest.

BNI Operatives: Street smart; Web savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Celebrity v. Average Joe/Jane Offenders and Police 10 codes

The recent Tiger Woods’ driving “incident” at his Florida estate has sparked quite the discourse among friends in the law enforcement, investigative and legal professions, focusing on:

Are celebrity offenders treated differently from the “average Jane/Joe” offenders? If so, how and why?

There was a general consensus (Congress: take note) amongst us that celebrity offenders are treated differently.  Weaving this agreement, with the how and why,  is no more a perfect example than the  past Friday Tiger Woods incident.  The facts, as we know them to be at this time, are:

1. Tiger Woods was driving his Lincoln Escalade SUV on his property at approx. 2:35 a.m. Friday and somehow hit a fire hydrant and his neighbor’s tree.  His wife, swinging a handy golf club, smashed out the vehicle’s window(s) to, purportedly, rescue her husband.

2. Although police arrived on the scene shortly after the incident, as reported by the Associated Press,  Florida State Troopers have been denied follow-up access to Mr. Woods three times, thus far.

3. At 2:00 p.m. today, via Twitter and his Web site, Mr. Woods, vaguely commented that he had embarrassed his family and “it” would never happen again.

4. His privately retained attorney, Mark NeJame, stated that Mr. Woods had complied with Florida requirements for this type of incident, which calls only for the presentation for review by police of the driver’s license, vehicle’s registration and proof of insurance.

Points 1, 2 and 3, while curious indulgences, don’t raise the questions that Point 4 smacks one over the head with.  I.e.  a) The tree was not on Mr. Woods’ property; the damage, thusly,  was to another’s property.   Did the neighbor simply accept the loss?  b) The on scene police investigation yielded that Mr. Woods was in serious condition and at times unconscious.  An RMA was obviously accepted by police, then why has the follow-up investigation by FSP not been allowed? (We may do things a bit differently here in NY but even as a CYA measure, a detective would have gotten a sign off on that issue.)  and c) Can a private citizen own a fire hydrant in Florida? If not, can Mr. Woods simply blow off the Florida State Police when municipal property is involved?

The voyeuristic appeal of the Tiger Woods case aside, it comes down to a call for fairness.  Had you or your neighbor or your son’s teacher, presumably all “average Joes and Janes”, crashed a vehicle into someone else’s property and taken out a fire hydrant, on the busiest news day, a local field reporter, shivering in her network provided strappy heels, would be busy earning a day’s salary hunting down an articulate neighbor to interview on camera.  On a really slow, uneventful day, she might even be on the scene with police still present, pointedly ignoring her questions.  The camera guy would have, at least once, panned over the offender’s mailbox or front door; wherever the (alleged) defendant’s address is posted. 

So why the difference in treatment?  I don’t think we, and certainly not the Florida State Police, will be satisfied until a complete investigation has resolved the matter.

Perhaps Mr. NeJame is preparing Mrs. Woods with the Bullwinkle defense.  That would certainly explain the club-wielding glass party.  Judge me guilty now, but I would have done the same under similar circumstances.

In the meanwhile, we’re sure the local crime reporters will continue to listen in to police radios, especially in celebrity enclaves. Well, we, along with celebrity news reporter, TMZ,  might as well all understand what is being transmitted.  Below are commonly used (generally) nationwide police 10 codes:

* 10-1 poor reception
* 10-2 good reception
* 10-3 stop transmitting
* 10-4 message received, affirmative, ok
* 10-5 relay this information to ___.
* 10-6 busy
* 10-7 out of service
* 10-8 in service
* 10-9 please repeat your message
* 10-10 negative
* 10-12 standby
* 10-13 civilians present and listening
* 10-15 en route to station with suspect
* 10-18 urgent
* 10-19 return to station
* 10-20 specify location/my location is ___.
* 10-21 place a phone call to ___.
* 10-22 disregard
* 10-23 stand by on this frequency (also “On scene” in some areas)
* 10-27 vehicle registration request
* 10-28 arrests/warrants on driver’s license
* 10-29 arrests/ warrants on the vehicle
* 10-32 gun
* 10-33 emergency traffic follows, hold routine messages
* 10-34 frequency open (cancels 10-33)
* 10-36 what is the correct time of day?
* 10-39 false alarm, premises was occupied
* 10-40 false alarm, no activity, premises appears secure
* 10-41 begin watch
* 10-42 end watch
* 10-45 fueling vehicle
* 10-49 en route to assignment
* 10-50 accident
* 10-51 tow truck needed
* 10-52 ambulance needed
* 10-53 road blocked at ___.
* 10-54 animals on highway
* 10-55 security check
* 10-57 hit-and-run accident
* 10-58 direct traffic
* 10-59 escort
* 10-60 squad in vicinity, lock-out
* 10-61 personnel in area
* 10-62 reply to message
* 10-63 clear to copy info?
* 10-64 message for delivery
* 10-65 net message assignment
* 10-66 net message cancellation
* 10-67 person calling for help
* 10-68 dispatch message
* 10-69 message received
* 10-70 prowler, fire alarm
* 10-71 gun involved, advise nature of fire
* 10-72 shooting, fire progress report
* 10-73 smoke report
* 10-74 negative
* 10-75 in contact with ___.
* 10-76 en route
* 10-77 ETA ___.
* 10-78 need assistance
* 10-79 bomb threat, coroner’s case
* 10-80 bomb has exploded
* 10-81 breathalyzer report
* 10-82 reserve lodging
* 10-83 work school crossing at ___.
* 10-84 if meeting ___, advise ETA
* 10-85 delay due to ___.
* 10-86 officer on-duty
* 10-87 pickup
* 10-88 present phone number of ___.
* 10-89 bomb threat
* 10-90 bank alarm at ___.
* 10-91 pick up prisoner
* 10-92 improperly parked vehicle
* 10-93 blockage
* 10-94 drag racing
* 10-95 prisoner/subject in custody
* 10-96 psych patient
* 10-97 check signal (“On Scene” in CA and other areas)
* 10-98 prison/jail break
* 10-99 wanted/stolen record
* 10-100 dead body
* 10-200 alarm

Bulletin’s site of the week: gizmodo.com. Best tech site online.

BNI Investigators: Street smart; Web savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 186 other followers

%d bloggers like this: