Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Crime

How Technology Caught the Austin Serial Bomber (foxnews.com) 148

Wednesday police in Austin, Texas finally located the "serial bomber" believed to be responsible for six package bombs which killed two people over the last three weeks. "The operation was aided by different uses of technology, including surveillance cameras and cell phone triangulation." An anonymous reader shares this article: The suspect, who has been identified as 24-year-old Mark Anthony Conditt, was killed near the motel he was traced to thanks to surveillance footage from a Federal Express drop-off store, The Austin American-Stateman reported. The authorities were able to gather information after police noticed the subject shipped an explosive device from a Sunset Valley FedEx store, a suburb approximately 25 minutes away from Austin. The evidence included the security footage from the store, as well as store receipts obtained showing suspicious transactions. The authorities were also able to look at the individual's Google search history, the Statesman noted, which gave them further insight into his dealings...

The authorities were also able to use cell phone triangulation technology, which provides a cell phone's location data via information collected from nearby cell towers... The phone's GPS capabilities can track the phone within 5 to 10 feet and can also provide "historical" or "prospective" location information. It can also "ping" the phone, forcing it to reveal its exact location... As cell phone companies store this type of data, law enforcement authorities must request it via the appropriate court processes.

"Authorities in Austin were able to use this technology to trace the suspect to a hotel in Williamson County."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How Technology Caught the Austin Serial Bomber

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    People caught him using technology, moron editors!

  • He was a terrorist (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Daemonik ( 171801 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @02:52PM (#56319951) Homepage
    Nice to see the main stream still won't call a white guy a terrorist.
    • Was he? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @03:09PM (#56320021)
      Based on this targets (prominent members of the black community) you're right. I can't imagine he wasn't. It's just odd that there's no manifesto? The police have a 25 minute video of him though that they won't release until the investigation's done. So far I don't know of any hard evidence on his choice of targets. Though to be fair I think if we were Muslim the media would call this terrorism without that evidence. You're correct to point out that this sort of caution only exists for whites

      It does disturb me he was home schooled. School isn't just about learning, it's about socializing.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        The police have a 25 minute video of him though that they won't release until the investigation's done.

        They are trying to identify some organization he mentions having worked on behalf of. And find the identities of other members that might have been involved in a conspiracy. The detective work could take months or even years.

        Has anyone heard of a group calling itself the Lulz?

      • Actually TMZ reported several odd things about him. All from while he attended community college from blogs.
        He was homophobic.
        He was very pro choice.
        He had an odd perspective on the sex offender registry. He was against it feeling like those who served their time in prison should not be further penalized.
        Additionally, he was home schooled as you mentioned and a pretty religious family.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Home schooling has nothing to do with this. This might be the first documented case in relation with homeschooling in fact. A statistical anomaly.

        Personally, I wish more children were homeschooled provided their parents have both the time and drive to provide it. Itâ(TM)s a well documented fact that home school children on average do better academically. Actually, truth be told, any child will do better with parental involvement regardless of where they go to school.

        This teen was a loner. Nothing was g

        • Involved parenting is the essential, oft-missing component, of virtually every childhood education fail... parents able and willing to contribute positively to their child's rearing are clearly more likely to home school, and even place their offspring in private schools, to the detriment of public schools which suffer from a dearth of folks who rely on the school district for 7-8 hours of babysitting.
    • Nice to see the main stream still won't call a white guy a terrorist.

      He wasn't just any old terrorist, he was an Alt-right terrorist.

      There was a 25 minute video they won't release which I suspect is to avoid further violence/retribution.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pots ( 5047349 )
      I realize that "terrorist" is the new trendy label, but while hate crimes are often related to terrorism they are not the same thing. This despite the fact that hate crimes are often intended to generate terror.
      • by Known Nutter ( 988758 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @04:00PM (#56320193)

        I realize that "terrorist" is the new trendy label, but while hate crimes are often related to terrorism they are not the same thing. This despite the fact that hate crimes are often intended to generate terror.

        In it's simplest form, "terrorist" can be defined as "a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

        While we may not have seen the video associated with this case and we do not fully understand this individual's motivations, it is not unreasonable to theorize that those motivations were political on some level, and therefore not unreasonable to refer to this jackass as a domestic terrorist (or simply terrorist) until such time as evidence of his true motives is presented.

        • by mjwx ( 966435 )

          I realize that "terrorist" is the new trendy label, but while hate crimes are often related to terrorism they are not the same thing. This despite the fact that hate crimes are often intended to generate terror.

          In it's simplest form, "terrorist" can be defined as "a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

          While we may not have seen the video associated with this case and we do not fully understand this individual's motivations, it is not unreasonable to theorize that those motivations were political on some level, and therefore not unreasonable to refer to this jackass as a domestic terrorist (or simply terrorist) until such time as evidence of his true motives is presented.

          Then why does the media not apply the same definition to anyone who is brown or black and does something illegal?

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Terrorism has some sort of political goal - you are trying to get other people to change their behavior. Hence the name, you're trying to elicit terror in your target group, as a motivator to get them to change behavior.

      Based on early reports, this guy seems to be a straight out psychopath [usatoday.com]. His motive seems to be nothing more than doing it for thrills. Timothy Mcveigh [wikipedia.org] was a white terrorist. I'm not convinced that this guy is. Anarchist is probably a better match.
    • by amiga3D ( 567632 )

      If a guy kills people by planting bombs for no reason other than he's just out for kicks, is he a terrorist? Usually when we say terrorist we mean someone who is trying to strike fear into society with an agenda in mind, usually political. I don't know what this guy's politics is but it seems he may just have been crazy. Or maybe he did have something driving him but if so I haven't heard of anything official. Still, a killer is a killer. I don't care why he's killing, he needed to be stopped. Call him anyt

    • by dwpro ( 520418 )
      Sure, if the you want to skip the whole legal definition of terrorism, we can call him that. However, since we truly throw the book at terrorists, it's important to try and maintain a definition that doesn't cause an overly broad use of those specific state powers. Call that racism if you want.
    • Terrorism requires ideological or political motivation. So far, there doesn't seem to be evidence for that.
  • At least this time, the suspect wasn't killed while resisting arrest. We may never know his motives or if the victims were targeted or random and if the bombings stop, we may never really know for sure if he was guilty, but nobody will be able to claim that the cops killed an innocent man.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      At least this time, the suspect wasn't killed while resisting arrest. We may never know his motives or if the victims were targeted or random and if the bombings stop, we may never really know for sure if he was guilty, but nobody will be able to claim that the cops killed an innocent man.

      What? From TFA:

      The suspected serial bomber who killed two people and terrorized Austin, Texas for three harrowing weeks was killed in a dramatic confrontation with police overnight Wednesday, authorities said.

      The suspect wasn't killed while resisting arrest? Nobody will be able to claim the cops killed an innocent man? Where are you getting this?

      • The suspect wasn't killed while resisting arrest?

        The suspect was killed when a bomb he was carrying exploded. TFA doesn't say that the police were responsible for the explosion. It may have been triggered by the suspect and it may have gone off unintentionally, but I see nothing in TFA that implies that the police were responsible. Generally speaking, the expression, "killed while resisting arrest" implies that the suspect was killed, either directly or indirectly by the police. Unless you have evide
  • by pipingguy ( 566974 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @02:59PM (#56319977)

    I thought they were able to identify a "rare" battery that he used in the device that malfunctioned and then were able to find out where in Austin batteries of that type were shipped.

  • by Dallas May ( 4891515 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @03:00PM (#56319991)
    The guy mailed his package FedEx. The package blew up and FedEx was able to provide miles of paper trails of evidence for the police.
  • lame (Score:5, Interesting)

    by supernova87a ( 532540 ) <kepler1@NoSpaM.hotmail.com> on Saturday March 24, 2018 @03:14PM (#56320043)
    The "technology" that caught the bomber has been around for >30 years. Stores have been recording video and cops have been using it since your grandparents by this point.

    The Google search history on the guys computer was used after he was caught. By triangulation of his cell phone, I think the author kind of means, "the fact that most people now carry cell phones", which can be triangulated.

    Nothing about this is implausible to have happened 30 years ago with some moron using the pay phone system periodically instead. Makes me believe that the stupidity of criminals, and old fashioned police work based on our *current* laws are the solution to calls for increasingly invasive privacy monitoring and backdoors specially (ahem) for law enforcement.
    • Re:lame (Score:5, Informative)

      by BlazeMiskulin ( 1043328 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @03:52PM (#56320167)

      The "technology" that caught the bomber has been around for >30 years. Stores have been recording video and cops have been using it since your grandparents by this point.

      I know this may be a surprise to you, but we're not all Millennials. My grandparents died in 1967, 1982, 1986, and 1998. The last of those was in a nursing home for 10 years with severe Alzheimer's. 30 years ago, I was in university. The Berlin Wall was still standing, the Cold War was in full swing, the "World Wide Web" was several years from being born, "Car phones" were something only the rich could afford, and "cell phones" were a brick connected to a briefcase--something only affordable by the wealthy.

      "Google search history", "cell tower data", and "cell phone GPS data" (listed in TFS) most certainly did NOT exist 30 years ago.

      If you think 30 years ago is "your grandparent's time", you're obviously young. It might surprise you to know that "the government can track you everywhere you go" is something that your grandparents almost certainly considered "unAmerican"--if not outright "evil". That's what the Nazis and the Commies did, not America.

      • Re:lame (Score:5, Informative)

        by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @05:21PM (#56320455)

        It might surprise you to know that "the government can track you everywhere you go" is something that your grandparents almost certainly considered "unAmerican"--if not outright "evil". That's what the Nazis and the Commies did, not America.

        Yup. I was in college when Reagan was elected the first time. I remember one of the most popular memes* among my Reaganite friends was a joke about Soviet internal passports (which were really a thing).

        Fast-forward to the past decade - we have on more than one occasion had American bureaucrats propose the same thing for us, for the same reason the Soviets had been doing it way back in the day.

    • I can understand how they could triangulate on a known device to determine it's location. Google can do that. But can it go the other way? Like, use the Fedex surveillance videos to determine when the suspect arrived and left that location, then query for any phone that followed that pattern. Doing this a couple times and you've got his IMEI or other identifying signature. But what about the "ping" mentioned and what is the "it" that "pings" the phone and how does that reveal the "exact location"? Doe
  • The bomber was white, Christian, home-schooled, anti-LGBT and conservative. This fits the profile of almost all domestic terrorists in the US. Why wasn't he on the FBI's radar?

    Where was he radicalized? Why hasn't the rest of the white, home-schooled, anti-LGBT, conservative community denounced him?

    I saw on TV that white folks in South Carolina were celebrating with each bombing. There's video. Why isn't the mainstream media talking about that?

    Don't stop fighting for the truth. The reckoning is coming

    #

    • by ColdWetDog ( 752185 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @03:35PM (#56320119) Homepage

      The bomber was white, Christian, home-schooled, anti-LGBT and conservative. This fits the profile of almost all domestic terrorists in the US. Why wasn't he on the FBI's radar?

      ....

      Any how do you know he's wasn't. The FBI follows lots of right wing nuts. But contrary to popular belief, the FBI can't surveil *everybody* (that, apparently, was the CIA's job). There have been dozens of cases that have come to light where people *known* to the FBI and other authorities have slipped under the radar (or cell phone tower) and committed crimes.

      The successful MO is coming clear - be white, be socially inept, have some technology background and have an axe to grind.

      Oh. Wait....

    • by guruevi ( 827432 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @04:36PM (#56320285)

      He wasn't a radicalized terrorist, he was a serial killer. There is a difference. He had no ideological causes, no politicla target, whether or not he was white, home schooled, Christian or anti-LGBT, it had nothing to do with it.

      What he did was because he was intelligent, psychopathic and his skills were most likely undervalued by his family and/or community. He probably had recently gone through some psychological trauma (girlfriend breaking up, fight with his dad, fired from his job) culminating into the thoughts that he was going to "show the world" with the hubris that he could get away with the cat-and-mouse game with agents he perceives to be less intelligent. He started low-end with someone disposable like a transient or a prostitute and worked his way up, probably to the perceived "target" but primarily to show that he can get away with it.

      Especially towards the end, they virtually all end up in a killing spree where they either commit suicide or get caught (and then commit suicide). Some choose guns, some choose hands, some knives, there are a number of currently active serial killers, they are not terrorists, they aren't profiled as terrorists, they typically work alone instead of in a cell although rarely a team of 2 will happen.

      • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @05:20PM (#56320447) Journal

        He wasn't a radicalized terrorist, he was a serial killer.

        They are not mutually exclusive, as the Austin bomber shows. Anyway, serial killers seldom commit suicide, as Mark Anthony Conditt did. However, radicalized terrorists very often commit suicide.

        • by guruevi ( 827432 )

          Yes, they aren't mutually exclusive, there are probably some Al Qaeda psychopaths doing their serial murdering, however there appears to be no political motive for the Austin bomber, hence he is not a terrorist.

          Terrorist: a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
          Serial killer: a person who commits a series of murders, often with no apparent motive and typically following a characteristic, predictable behavior pattern.

          To conflate the

          • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
            Re "pursuit of political aims."
            Thats why police and the FBI have to be very aware of who they are looking for.
            A person of faith can be fully supported by the texts of their faith and could have the full support of a large faith community in the USA.
            A community that would fund, support and hide a person.
            That could offer a person a no go area for people of the faith to hide in.
            Where any attempts at CCTV is removed by criminals of the same faith.
            To provide a new real identity for any person of faith on t
      • Incorrect. The more thoughtfully crafted bombs he sent all specifically targeted the homes of sociopolitically prominent people of color, and the rest that came later were of much lesser construction. I call diversion.

        Moreover, the attitudes of the misogynistic and racist church and community is well known to us in Austin.

        Now whatever you decide, please consider doing something for this kid who watched her father die right in front of her. https://www.gofundme.com/tx-bo... [gofundme.com]

    • by cyn1c77 ( 928549 )

      The bomber was white, Christian, home-schooled, anti-LGBT and conservative. This fits the profile of almost all domestic terrorists in the US. Why wasn't he on the FBI's radar?

      Because that profile is quote close to those currently leading our nation?

      Wait, was that a rhetorical question?

    • The bomber was white, Christian, home-schooled, anti-LGBT and conservative. This fits the profile of almost all domestic terrorists in the US.

      That profile also fits millions of non-terrorists. With a sufficiently loose definition of anti-LGBT, it fits a large minority of people where I live. If you remove "home-schooled" as well (and with the aforementioned loose definition) it fits almost everyone.

      Your statement is akin to saying that the FBI should be watching all Arab Muslims who go to Mosque daily.

      Profiling is questionable in any case, but it's just stupid when the 99.999% of the people who fit the profile aren't a problem.

      • That profile also fits millions of non-terrorists.

        Gosh, so if I understand you correctly, you're saying that it sucks to be classified as some sort of danger to society just because of your race and/or religion?

        Your statement is akin to saying that the FBI should be watching all Arab Muslims who go to Mosque daily.

        No shit, Sherlock. That was the point. We have a lot of jackoffs in this country who say exactly that. A bunch of them work in the White House and one is golfing in Florida today on the taxpay

        • It feels different when it's topsy-turvey, with you turvey instead of topsy, doesn't it?

          It feels exactly the same level of ludicrous both ways to me. Actually, it doesn't "feel" any way; I try to think with my brain.

          If the purpose of your post was simply to illustrate that profiling is stupid, then we agree. But that's not how it came across. It came across as a serious proposal and you are a sufficiently assholish and irrational leftist that I found that completely believable.

  • its true! (Score:3, Funny)

    by bobmajdakjr ( 2484288 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @04:16PM (#56320231)
    what is the first thing they always do in movies about heists and other crazy illegal doings? the newbie always pulls a phone out then jason statham grabs it and and chucks it out the window.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    They called him "Mark Anthony" and not just "Mark." We've known at least since the time of Lee Harvey Oswald that dangerous people have three names.

  • by mallyn ( 136041 ) on Saturday March 24, 2018 @06:34PM (#56320659) Homepage
    My thanks to those who used technology for a very good purpose! To bring such a person to justice is a good use of technology!!!
  • It is lucky for us it was the local police that caught him. The FBI is convinced that they are going dark because of encryption so would have just put out a press release calling for backdoors in cell phones and web etc.

    It is reasonably obvious that despite encryption which is shutting some traditional doors that the cops were used to looking through, that there is a plethora of new data that can be used instead.

  • Triangulation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Uldis Segliņš ( 4468089 ) on Sunday March 25, 2018 @12:23AM (#56321643)
    Cell towers are not triangulating. They can do it, but to a very limited approximation only where directional antennas have narrow coverage. And narrow is 30 degrees, that can not give a practically usable location, unless you plan to napalm him. What they use instead is trilateration, by comparing the signal strength at nearby towers. That can give meters of location precision.
  • This man assisted me in hacking my CHEATING HUSBAND Facebook account and he is a very good hacker for services like :what's app, call logs, test messages etc. He delivers in 2hrs or less you can email him on E N R I Q U E H A C K D E M O N 11 ( a t ) G M A I L d o t C O M or WhatsApp: + 1 ( 6 2 8 ) 2 0 3 - 7 0 0 5 .

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Working...