Re: 911:: Manual E911 Database Querying

[Guest guest]

We use the Positron computer phone system, and can do a " DBR " on phone numbers.

This function allows us to query the phone company for the 9-1-1 database for

any Pacific Bell serviced phone in our region. It is supposed to be used only

in emergency situations, where immediate information is required for the safety

of officers or the public. For instance, if we receive a call from someone

reporting a suicidal subject, and all they have is the phone number, we can use

the system. A detective conducting an investigation cannot use it to get the

address to a phone number involved in a crime. He has other means he can

utilize to ascertain to whom the number belongs.

Our department's policy is for a sargent or higher rank to authorize the

database access. In extremely 'hot' calls, the supervisor in dispatch will

authorize a query if patrol supervisors are occupied and cannot be interrupted.

The incident supervisor will be advised as soon as possible that a " DBR " was

done to access the address information. So far, no query authorized by a

communications supervisor has been deemed inappropriate. A notation is made in

each CAD incident if a " DBR " is made, and who authorized it.

Although we always had rapid response from Pacific Bell security before the

Positron phones were installed, the ability to access the information directly

has been helpful in several incidents.

Jim Reeves, Jr. KC6YRU ICQ # 884017

Tulare County CA Sheriff's Office 9-1-1/Dispatcher

Web pages at: http://kc6yru.cnetech.com

E-mail to: jimmiejoe@...

Get paid to surf the web!

http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=jgj353

911:: Manual E911 Database Querying

Hi all-

I would like to know how many, if any, of you have the ability to perform

a manual E911 database interrogation. That is, are you able to manually enter a

10-digit telephone number and view the ALI record associated with it? I am

referring only to viewing the record, not making any changes to it. I ask

because our new phones have the technical ability to provide this functionality,

but our 911 service provider does not seem to want us to use it.

Currently, when we have a call for service at an unknown location where

the phone number IS known (by way of either admin line caller ID or a third

party) we call the operator and make the request, and then they call us back (in

5 - 15 minutes) with a location. Obviously, this is a significant delay,

especially when we now have the technical ability to have the info in - what? -

10 seconds to do a manual request?

Thanks for you input -

-

C. A. Voigt

pvoigt@...

EMD / Telecommunicator

BCSAR Comm Unit Leader

Burke County Emergency Services

[Guest guest]

Walter's message hit the nail on the head about querying the ANI/ALI

database--the phone company tariffs are written to protect the

records of its customers. They've told their customers that when they

dial 911, their address and telephone number will be transmitted to

the comm center. But otherwise, the information isn't released except

under emergency circumstances.

Pacific Bell in California has a standard policy of divulging

customer information from a phone number only when there is an

urgent, immediate need. They take your word for it--you don't have to

give them the gory details. For unlisted numbers, they also require

you to send them the request in writing after-the-fact.

You can imagine the privacy problems created by allowing free access

(even for a police department) to the phone company's customer

information. It may not have the legal protections of criminal

histories, but comm centers should protect access to this information

just as much.

[Guest guest]

We have this and it is WONDERFUL!!!! Much better and faster than the old

way. BellSouth was a little miffed when we first got it, but they got over

it! We use Tiburon CAD, and we also have the ability, w/ just a few

keystrokes, to query our CAD history for a name, address, or phone number of

prior callers. This is a huge help, for example, if someone is calling from

a business on a cellphone and doesn't know the exact address.

911:: Manual E911 Database Querying

>Hi all-

>

> I would like to know how many, if any, of you have the ability to

perform a manual E911 database interrogation. That is, are you able to

manually enter a 10-digit telephone number and view the ALI record

associated with it? I am referring only to viewing the record, not making

any changes to it. I ask because our new phones have the technical ability

to provide this functionality, but our 911 service provider does not seem to

want us to use it.

> Currently, when we have a call for service at an unknown location where

the phone number IS known (by way of either admin line caller ID or a third

party) we call the operator and make the request, and then they call us back

(in 5 - 15 minutes) with a location. Obviously, this is a significant

delay, especially when we now have the technical ability to have the info

n - what? - 10 seconds to do a manual request?

>

>Thanks for you input -

>

>-

>

>

>C. A. Voigt

>pvoigt@...

>EMD / Telecommunicator

>BCSAR Comm Unit Leader

>

[Guest guest]

> To: <911consoleegroups>

> Organization: Voigt Industrial Electronics, LLC

>

> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 19:25:16 -0400

> Reply-to: 911consoleegroups

> Subject: 911:: Manual E911 Database Querying

> Hi all-

>

> I would like to know how many, if any, of you

> have the ability to perform a manual E911 database interrogation.

-----------<snip>------------

Well, since that would be an admission of an act of envasion of

privacy, I for one refuse to answer.

When we test our system though, and querry a number, we can enter a

one-digit code of 1, 2 or 3 before the 7-digit number, with each

single digit being a different area code.

Nick Wagner

Cortland Co. (NY) Sheriff's Dept

E9-1-1 Center/Sr. Supervisor

mailto:nwagner@...

[Guest guest]

>The equipment in our center is also capable of doing it, but currently , " I

may be wrong " , the tariff is written so that is prohibited. This is in the

state of Alabama<

As I believe it is in most states.

In Indiana most of the 9-1-1 centers will not do this type of reverse

lookup... even for police officers.

It's considered to be infringement of privacy, and if I'm not mistaken,

illegal.

Emergency (9-1-1) personnel are allowed to use it in the course

of their duties, and even then there are some strict requirements.

Weintraut

[Guest guest]

>It may not have the legal protections of criminal

histories, but comm centers should protect access to this information

just as much.<

Amen.

I've had officers ask me to call the local 9-1-1 center, trying to

obtain information in this manner.... I refuse to do so....

Not only is this possibly illegal... It's simply wrong.

Weintraut

[Guest guest]

USWest (or Quest as it is now called) will give you the name/address for a

phone number if the ALI display fails. Their reasoning is that if the person

dialed 9-1-1, that person wanted you to have the information and they will

give it to you, provided you give them your PIN number assigned by the

telephone company.

If it's an emergency situation where we must know where a phone number

belongs, but did not receive the call on 9-1-1, and the number is unlisted by

customer reqeust, the telephone company requests a " demand letter " which they

keep on file should the customer question why the police dept was given their

information.

Info we need to put on the demand letter is the date and time of our request,

the phone number and the reason we made the reqest.

Kathy

<< >The equipment in our center is also capable of doing it, but currently , "

I

may be wrong " , the tariff is written so that is prohibited. This is in the

state of Alabama<

As I believe it is in most states.

In Indiana most of the 9-1-1 centers will not do this type of reverse

lookup... even for police officers.

It's considered to be infringement of privacy, and if I'm not mistaken,

illegal.

Emergency (9-1-1) personnel are allowed to use it in the course

of their duties, and even then there are some strict requirements.

Weintraut

>>

[Guest guest]

I work for a sheriff's department in Missouri. We are able to query

any number within our 911 system. This is supposed to only be done

for emergencies. Unfortunetley our officers have learned the magic

question. Any time they request us to query a # we have to ask if it

is a life or death situation. Of course they will say yes every time.

The only comfort we have is that all of our phone lines and radio

transmissions are recorded. So we as dispatchers can't be held

responsible for miss use. Our state does have privacy acts to protect

the general public. Our officers just feel they are above this law.

Does anyone else have this same problem?

Op Brinkley

County So

[Guest guest]

>>Any time they request us to query a # we have to ask if it

is a life or death situation. Of course they will say yes every time<<

I personally don't give them the option. They ask to check the phone #, I

ask why and usually get some long story. Then 99.9% of the time I say

sorry.

Bob in Tacoma

[Guest guest]

>The only comfort we have is that all of our phone lines and radio

transmissions are recorded. So we as dispatchers can't be held

responsible for miss use. Our state does have privacy acts to protect

the general public. Our officers just feel they are above this law.

I wouldn't be so sure of this... If your officers are abusing the

system.. and you and the people in charge know this....you still

hold some of the responsibility for the abuse...

Police Officers are not above the laws concerning privacy. They have

taken a sworn oath to uphold them.

Weintraut

[Guest guest]

>Then 99.9% of the time I say

sorry.

This may not make you popular... but it makes you right...

Like any dispatcher, I've " bent " the rules when I felt it was the

thing that needed to be done.

But I've found over the years that many of the things that officers

ask dispatchers to do.... put the dispatcher in the line of fire for big

trouble...

And usually it's something the officer can take care of themselves... with

just a little effort....

Sorta like drugs... sometimes you must " Just Say No. "

Weintraut

[Guest guest]

>The dispatcher's argument was that she didn't know

if people were inside, trapped, etc. Director's argument was that given a

few more minutes, she would have received other calls concerning the

structure fire (as evidenced by the yellow glow) and the manual search

wasn't required.

Now this doesn't make sense to me...It seems to me that this

instance is one which would certainly be the reason for having

the ability to query.

And your director's argument that you would have gotten

more calls in a " few more minutes " ... is probably correct..

But a " few minutes " might make a big difference.

This certainly doesn't seem an abuse of the system...

Weintraut

[Guest guest]

We can also manually search a phone number in our 9-1-1 system.

HOWEVER....to do so.....it must be deemed life threatening. And when you do

it, you (the dispatcher....not an officer) must write up a report/form on

why you did what you did. Case in point.....had a gentleman call on an

administrative line (no caller ID, etc.) that his house was on fire. He

gave us his name and hung up. We had no idea where in the county this guy

was. We searched his name in our CAD database and it was in there....no

address......only a phone number. The dispatcher did a manual query on the

number and got the correct address. The dispatcher was reprimanded for

doing a manual search. The dispatcher's argument was that she didn't know

if people were inside, trapped, etc. Director's argument was that given a

few more minutes, she would have received other calls concerning the

structure fire (as evidenced by the yellow glow) and the manual search

wasn't required. Right or wrong is not the point.......we can do it.....but

you better have proof it was necessary!

--------------------------------------------------------------

Cain

9-1-1 Dispatcher/Training Officer

Randolph County Communications

155 E. South Street

Winchester, Indiana 47394

mcain@...

[Guest guest]

>>. Director's argument was that given a

few more minutes, she would have received other calls concerning the

structure fire (as evidenced by the yellow glow) and the manual search

wasn't required.<<

OH MY GOD!

Bob in Tacoma

[Guest guest]

>>But a " few minutes " might make a big difference<<

What's that everpopular bumper sticker?? " Seconds save lives, Dispatchers

save seconds " Might find one and put it on the directors bumper....or maybe

on his car.

Bob in Tacoma

[Guest guest]

Oh yes... same situation here.. especially when you get a new officer with a

new dispatcher! I also enjoy it when an officer wants to request a photo

from motor vehicle and I ask " What is your felony charge? " (that's motor

vehicles policy, will only issue photo for felony investigations).

Kathy

<< Unfortunetley our officers have learned the magic

question. Any time they request us to query a # we have to ask if it

is a life or death situation. Of course they will say yes every time.

The only comfort we have is that all of our phone lines and radio

transmissions are recorded. So we as dispatchers can't be held

responsible for miss use. Our state does have privacy acts to protect

the general public. Our officers just feel they are above this law.

Does anyone else have this same problem? >>

[Guest guest]

You got that right . I found myself named in a BIG-BIG Dollar

law suite. Had a Shift Commander who on occasion requested I run Drivers

checks and records checks on subjects. Seems as though this fellow, who

was a lawyer, was doing " Skip-Chases " in attempts to locate wayward

X-husbands behind in their child support for his clients. Lost a lot of

sleep over that one. He did turn out to be a good guy, for me anyway,

told folks he had ordered me to run the checks, and that I had no idea

what he was doing with the Info. Which by the way was the truth.(we all

were young and naive once} I can assure one and all I NEVER got caught

up in a mess like that again.

JUST SAY NO IS THE WAY TO GO!

Vern

Retired

Served Proudly

wrote:

>

> >Then 99.9% of the time I say

> sorry.

>

> This may not make you popular... but it makes you right...

>

> Like any dispatcher, I've " bent " the rules when I felt it was the

> thing that needed to be done.

>

> But I've found over the years that many of the things that officers

> ask dispatchers to do.... put the dispatcher in the line of fire for

> big

> trouble...

>

> And usually it's something the officer can take care of themselves...

> with

> just a little effort....

>

> Sorta like drugs... sometimes you must " Just Say No. "

>

> Weintraut

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

GTE allows us to do it. When we got our new 9-1-1 system, our GTE trainer

told us that GTE was the only telephone company in Texas that allowed PSAP's

to do this. However, they stressed that this was only for 9-1-1

EMERGENCIES. Not for finding people who had warrants for their arrest.

annette hallmark

ahallmark@...

[Guest guest]

With our new phone system, we have the ability to look up addresses

by entering phone numbers. Prior to that we had a " Criss-Cross " book, where

we could look up phone #'s by address or look up address/names of people by

phone #.

Outside of the fact that the e911 database is updated more frequently that

the Criss-Cross book, the functions are just about the same. Unlisted

numbers in the e911 database just come back with an address, no subscriber

info listed.

This book was/is available to officers/detectives/dispatchers, etc. and I

far as I know using it was never considered an invasion of privacy - so why

would the e911 data base be different?

Lori

>>It's considered to be infringement of privacy, and if I'm

not mistaken,

illegal.

Weintraut<<

[Guest guest]

And, you see, that's too bad. I mean, think about it.....

We have access to ALL SORTS of information as dispatchers. DL, MVD,

Criminal History, CAD. On campus we have access to the student information

database which will give us updated addressed, next of kin, and schedules

(no grades - we don't need them). We also get a printout of student

listings every semester AND criss cross information.

We are checked with background checks, criminal history checks, and

fingerprinted. So why in the heck won't the phone companies allow - at the

very LEAST - on-line criss cross information? All we need is to be able to

put in a phone number and find out the address, or put in an address and

find out a phone number. SO WHAT if it is used for warrant service? It's

getting bad guys off the streets......

Additionally, this information is available ON THE INTERNET, in a limited

form, since it is only for people who are not UNLISTED. We don't

necessarily need to know who the subscriber is, just where the durn phone is

located!!!

I submit that even if only LISTED numbers were provided, this would help out

emergency responders. Now, you know that the general public does NOT know

that the police does NOT have access to this information..... They

generally assume that we do. (The Rescue 9-1-1 syndrome)

annette

<<snip>>

To follow up pon Annette's remarks we found the " button " for about three

days when they were transitioning to some new TCI equipment. When it was

(quickly) taken off we were told Southwestern Bell did not allow that

capability with their database.

D. Neafcy

<<snip>>

[Guest guest]

" " With our new phone system, we have the ability to look up addresses

by entering phone numbers. Prior to that we had a " Criss-Cross "

book, where

we could look up phone #'s by address or look up address/names of

people by

phone #.

This book was/is available to officers/detectives/dispatchers, etc.

and I

far as I know using it was never considered an invasion of privacy -

so why

would the e911 data base be different?

Lori " " " "

I agree with you 100% on the " criss-cross " directory, I used to be a

Librarian and we had one available for the general public's use.

I tried talking my director into buying one for our officers so they

would quit requesting the 911 queries. Of course i got the usual

answer its not in the budget.

On another note, I stated that our officers simply had to answer the

magic question of life or death situation.

Has any one ever attempted to second guess the under sheriff's

motives. Telling an officer no sometimes isn't an option.

We've had people fired for less.

Op Brinkley

[Guest guest]

Hi Andries....

South Africa might be fraught with something called " common sense " ..

Basically, common sense (or logic) doesn't work here in America when it

comes to access to personal and private information - even if it could save

your life one day. So bylaws that would protect or even promote *gasp*

common sense, are not passed.

This is what keeps lawyers in business.....

*extremely dripping in sarcasm today because I am spending alot of time

researching a petty argument that is happening between two dispatchers.*

annette hallmark

ahallmark@...

<<snip>>

Hi

I am Andries from 107 in South Africa. 107 is the equivalent of your 911.

We have had this function since 1994, when we started. We have a special

part in what we call the " 107 act " which permits us to do this. You should

have simmilar protection in your bylaws, etc to protect you if I am not

mistaken.

<<snip>>

[Guest guest]

Lori wrote:

> With our new phone system, we have the ability to

> look up addresses

> by entering phone numbers. Prior to that we had a

> " Criss-Cross " book, where

> we could look up phone #'s by address or look up

> address/names of people by

> phone #.

lori-

not sure how your criss cross book works in your area,

but I know that in LA and CA, the info submitted is

voluntary- ie you ok'd it to be in the regular phone

book, or they come door to door to verify info, and

you give permission then. NO unlisted numbers are

printed in the book, unless permission is given by

resident in interview!!!

I know because i am listed by address, but not by

phone! Most of our officers are the same-no need for

joe q public to have our home phone numbers-but we

understand addresses may be needed in emergency

situations....

shauna in la

>

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

What kind of ____________(fill in the blank) are u working for????

Rich

Cain wrote

> The dispatcher was reprimanded for doing a manual search. The dispatcher's

> argument was that she didn't know if people were inside, trapped, etc.

> Director's argument was that given a few more minutes, she would have received

> other calls concerning the structure fire (as evidenced by the yellow glow)

> and the manual search

> wasn't required.

[Guest guest]

At 12:26 AM 07/17/2000 -0700, Lori wrote:

-----------------<major snip>-----------------

>This book ( " Criss-Cross " directory) was/is available to

officers/detectives/dispatchers, >etc. and I>far as I know using it was

never considered an invasion of privacy - so why

>would the e911 data base be different?

The cross-directory is a third-party product; it is NOT developed by or

maintained by any telephone company vendor from their subscriber data-base.

Trust me! One such directory that I know is used by a great many agencies

is produced by Haines Company; this is NOT a telco product! The E-9-1-1

database IS protected and is to be used for EMERGENCY purposes related to

the use or access by someone dialing 9-1-1. And that's it. Don't confuse

the two.

Happy to be here, proud to serve.

Olmstead

Communications Supervisor

~on the Central California coastline~

" Not presumed to be an official statement of my employing agency. "

Home E-mail: mailto:gryeyes@...

http://www.gryeyes.com/