Page 2 of 2
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:53 pm
by sp1989
RPD was involved because some of the search was on the eastern fringe of their AOR. RPD SWAT did the extraction of the kid who broke his hip running away from the suspect up above UCR in the hills. Unlike the old days when scanners were used by RSO & RPD to hear each others' traffic, PSEC eliminates that possibility, so I'm guessing the patch was done so they could coordinate their responses to the incident.
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:39 pm
by CQPSK
"so everything that was going on was patched to riverside pd ch1???"
~Yes, it was.
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 5:55 pm
by inlandpatch
CQPSK wrote:"so everything that was going on was patched to riverside pd ch1???"
~Yes, it was.
DARN!!! i missed it, i was so focused on monitoring PSEC to see if they were using a clear channel!!
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:01 pm
by cvrules90
inlandpatch wrote:CQPSK wrote:"so everything that was going on was patched to riverside pd ch1???"
~Yes, it was.
DARN!!! i missed it, i was so focused on monitoring PSEC to see if they were using a clear channel!!
Seriously has anybody found a clear RED TGID?
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:33 pm
by sp1989
RSO is not going to put any LE traffic in the clear. One of the main reasons they went with the EDACS system 20+ years ago was they were told no one could listen in on their traffic. Unless someone sues them (they are deathly afraid of being sued) for some misbehavior that was covered by total encryption (I guarantee that is/will sonn happen) they are not going to change.
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:13 am
by cvrules90
sp1989 wrote:RSO is not going to put any LE traffic in the clear. One of the main reasons they went with the EDACS system 20+ years ago was they were told no one could listen in on their traffic. Unless someone sues them (they are deathly afraid of being sued) for some misbehavior that was covered by total encryption (I guarantee that is/will sonn happen) they are not going to change.
Well I guess we should all write a letter and sign it saying we want at least one clear talkgroup for high-scale emergencies. The media must be really upset...
Re: Officer Shot in Moreno Valley
Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:37 am
by CQPSK
" Unless someone sues them (they are deathly afraid of being sued) for some misbehavior that was covered by total encryption (I guarantee that is/will sonn happen) they are not going to change."
I doubt that encryption would play any sort of major factor in some sort of "cover up". All transmissions are recorded, and the absence of the recordings would throw up a major red flag. On top of that you have radio techs, admin, etc. all who can hear the transmissions. Additionally, if you are going to use that argument, why not just say that you should be able to listen to their cellphone calls as well? It seems more likely that if they were running a big conspiracy that they would just use cellphones, especially personally owned ones that would be much harder to secure discovery motions or search warrants on. On the cellphone there is less a chance a supervisor will hear,less chance of getting a court order to divulge call registries, less a chance you would be found out, and you have better coverage, it's a win, win win, win yet nobody is arguing they should be able to listen in on their cellphone calls.