Spencer Daily Reporter: Local News: Cybercrime unit searches Spencer, Storm Lake homes (05/28/09)

(Photo by Russ Mitchell) Agents from the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation and the FBI executed search warrants at two Spencer homes and one Storm Lake residence on suspicion of child exploitation. Investigators will conduct data forensics on seized computers to determine whether charges should be filed related to inappropriate computer images. No arrests were made Tuesday. [Order this photo]

State and federal agents went to three areas homes - two in Spencer and one in Storm Lake - Tuesday after suspicious Internet traffic was detected by authorities.

Investigators used Internet Protocol (IP) addresses to trace suspicion of child exploitation to specific computers. Agents then executed the first of three search warrants at about 8 a.m. Tuesday at 1342 S. Grand Plaza Dr., in Spencer. A second search, at 906 Second Ave. SE, was completed just before noon.

The third search, at 1405 Seneca St., Apt. 16, took place late Tuesday afternoon in Storm Lake. Agents planned to retrieve computers from each address as part of the child exploitation investigations.

"It's highly likely this will rise to a child pornography investigation," said Gerard Meyers, Special Agent in Charge of the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation's Cyber Crime Unit. "That's basically the underlying nexus."

No one was charged, or identified, stemming from Tuesday's search warrants. It could take months for experts to retrieve the digital information needed to warrant or dismiss potential charges.

Jon and Gina Muessigman, residents at the 906 Second Ave. SE address issued a statement Tuesday morning explaining the circumstances related to the visit by law enforcement agencies to their home.

"On Tuesday May 26, a search was executed at our home. Today's technology, with laptops and routers that make the Internet convenient for you, can also very easily be used in the wrong way.

"About a month ago our son and another boy were watching a movie at our house. The other kid wanted to look up the Dragon Ball Z song on Livewire. When they entered the search, various options came up. Curiosity got the best of them and they clicked on a couple options and admittedly looked at explicit material. Before our son knew what was happening, the other kid had downloaded a couple videos off Livewire, at least one of which contained an underage child.

"Even though he deleted the file and did not agree with what was going on it was too late. Since it was on our son's laptop he was tagged and under investigation."

The Muessigmann's also cautioned other parents and children: "Please learn from his mistake and do not let other people use you laptop or Smartphone to access the Internet. Also any download you do not pay for (i.e. songs from Livewire) are illegal. Don't think that it cannot happen to you as it can happen to anyone."

Meyers was not able to be specific regarding the circumstances of any of the three investigations. "Until we are able to gather more facts -- through interviews and also through the forensic analysis of any associated, seized digital evidence -- we're unable, at this point, to discern whether or not they are potentially possessing, distributing or manufacturing what would be considered contraband," Meyers said.

He does not see a connection or collaboration among the three locations, saying: "They are all independent, separate, ongoing investigations at this point."

"We have taken every effort, through the ongoing investigation, to assure communities there's no additional risk," Meyers said. "At this point, it's really an isolated investigation relative to those locations."

Spencer Police Chief Mark Lawson said local officers were on the scene for support and deferred comment to the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation. FBI agents from Omaha, Neb., and state authorities were assisted by the Storm Lake Police Department and the Iowa Intelligence Fusion Center, which specializes in monitoring Web activity.

"It's ongoing, so there's not a lot, especially this close to the execution (of the warrants) that we can provide, but we can tell you there's no threat to the community at this point," Meyers said. "At least upon our initial assessment, there's no external risk to the community within the Spencer area. It's pretty much an isolated situation where we have an issue today (Tuesday). It appears to be a file-sharing, child exploitation investigation."

No one was there to investigate or care when my daughter reported someone on line she didn't know trying to get her to talk to him. She kept blocking him and he kept making his way through the block. He kept trying to talk to her, and he creeped her out. This has gone on for quite a while, several months. When we reported it to the Spencer Police, they didn't care. I wonder if he finally got someone and and what he may have done to them. If we do actually have a cybercrime unit, why didn't they care about a real concern?? Aren't you supposed to report cyber stalkers?? But, reporting one did no good. They didn't really care. I'm just grateful my daughter had enough sense to know better than to talk to someone she didn't know. She could have potentially gotten caught up in a bad situation, as I know happens.

Do not depend on the Spencer police to help your children when it comes to cyber stalkers, they don't care.

-- Posted by army-mom on Thu, May 28, 2009, at 12:15 PM

Wow, army-mom, way to turn this into a rant against the Spencer Police. I'm sorry for your situation, but how is what happened in this story not a "real concern"?

-- Posted by notinia on Thu, May 28, 2009, at 3:45 PM

Hard to believe all this law enforcement attention is because of 1 or 2 downloaded videos

-- Posted by Ervserver on Thu, May 28, 2009, at 4:21 PM

There is quite a difference between cyberstalkers and cybercriminals. Also, the focus of the article is file downloads, not cyberstalkers/cybercriminals, so they are two entirely different things. Please also note that the article mentions "state and federal agents", not the local PD.

-- Posted by meltedsnowflake on Thu, May 28, 2009, at 7:31 PM

Erv, 1 or 2 downloaded videos is a LOT if it involves an underage person as the subject of those videos. Or would you not care if "only" 1 or 2 videos was released of a young family member of yours?

-- Posted by notinia on Fri, May 29, 2009, at 12:14 PM

notinia,

I never said what happened in this story was not a real concern.

The point of my comment was the fact that they were going after someone without real evidence of this person being a criminal. However, when we needed cyber help, when my daughter was scared of this freaky creepy unwanted guy who was trying very hard to get to her, which the police could have turned over to this cyber crimes unit, there was no help for us. Where are they when these creeps are stalking our young girls?? How many other girls have reported creepy guys and been ignored?

Have these guys gotten through to some innocent young girl who then boarded a bus, or found a ride, and gone across the state or country to meet him like happens so frequently?? Too many stories of young girls running away to meet these guys, and the police are ignoring reports of them. I think they are ignoring something that shouldn't be ignored.

Also, Downloaded videos of underage people--how many of our teenagers are purposely sending text pics (sexting) of themselves that aren't much different than some of these videos. They need to look at what these kids are sending back and forth on their phones. Some of that would be considered pornography. We would have to arrest half the high schools.

-- Posted by army-mom on Fri, May 29, 2009, at 10:32 PM

you never know what is legal and not legal on the internet so tehy should shut down limewire and sites likes this that are not legal so you dont get into trouble

-- Posted by Funckj on Sun, May 31, 2009, at 12:33 PM

army-mom, I agree with meltedsnowflake, and his/her point that this article mentions federal agents, not the Spencer PD. You are comparing the responses of two different entities, here. I'm not saying the Spencer PD was without fault in their response to your situation, just that they may not have been the correct authorities to contact. Also, the fact that teenagers are "sexting" does not excuse grown men for viewing underage pornography. That's like saying its OK to drive 90 under the influence because you don't always get pulled over for going 59. This is a big problem online, as I'm sure you know from your family's experience.

-- Posted by notinia on Mon, Jun 1, 2009, at 11:36 AM

Again, I had no idea about a cyber crimes unit, let alone how to contact them, therefore it was up to the police dept. to either turn our complaint over to them, or give me the info to contact them myself.

I am not saying anything against what the cyber crimes unit did, I am saying if they are getting the old guys for downloading off the internet, or in this case a very young guy, they also need to look into the underage children who are sending porn to each other. It's just another area they need to look into.

I was just trying to add our experience, and maybe bring light to another situation that may occur, and warn parents they may need to search for this cyber crimes unit if necessary, because the police dept. did not help us find it.

-- Posted by army-mom on Fri, Jun 5, 2009, at 7:02 PM