A Fairhope man was charged last week with interfering with a 911 dispatch call, and new court documents show a similar thing happened at the same apartment building a month earlier.

The residents of the apartment were the first to know and called the police.

On June 6, Trenton Lisak, 31, allegedly interfered with 911 dispatch calls from the Mobile Police Department, Fire Rescue, the sheriff and even the Metropolitan Jail in the downtown entertainment district. Police say Lissak carried out the well-planned attack from an apartment in downtown Mobile.

"People with these kinds of resources obviously cause a lot of concern," said Michael Kraus, a resident of the apartment building.

In a moment of life and death, this can be catastrophic

Officials at the Mobile County 911 Center told FOX10 News that detectives traced the disturbance to the 9th floor, where they found Lisak as well as the black market mobile jammer.

Now, new court documents show that a month ago, multiple tenants in the building complained that Wi-Fi and phones were not working.

Investigators said at the time that AT&T had gone to the apartment where Lissak was staying and told a tenant to stop interfering. After the disruption stopped, it began again on June 6. At that time detectives found the strongest signal jamming at the same door.

Kraus, who lives on a nearby floor, said the poor Wi-Fi signal affected his remote work for weeks

"Things are moving slowly, and I can see that there are issues like connectivity issues and interference," Krause said. "To me personally, it was very different, but after he left, or in this case, I guess arrested him, everything seemed to go back to normal." Since you told me it was on the 9th, that must explain a lot."

Court records show that Lissak is no stranger to the law. He was jailed for unrelated crimes, including a burglary in Baldwin County.

911 service director Charlie McNicol said Lissack's motive was unclear.

"He could have a variety of reasons, like he just likes to watch chaos, or he has mental issues, or unfortunately, he could be planning a major event and want to ensure public safety by interfering with communications," McNicol said.

Other residents told FOX10 News reporter Lacey Beasley that they saw SWAT officers enter the building the day Lisak was arrested.

But employees at the apartment said he did not live there.

The FBI is investigating.

A Chicago resident, aged 63, was formally charged on Tuesday for employing an illicit device to find solace during his commute on the CTA.

The man has been accused of interfering with cell phone signals before, as reported by Audrina Bigos of CBS 2, and the high number of complaints about dropped calls has raised concerns.

After being charged with a felony for using a signal jamming device, Dennis Nicholl, a certified public accountant, left the jail dressed in a ball cap and business casual attire.

The device caught Keegan Goudie's attention, leading him and his brother to write a post on thesixthirty.com after encountering it on the CTA Red Line.

Chas remarked that his behavior suggested he was engaging in suspicious activities, and that the device seemed inappropriate for him to possess.

Online retailers offer cell phone blocker for sale at prices that vary between $30 and $300. Federal regulations strictly forbid the sale, purchase, or operation of these devices. These jammers have the ability to block cell phone signals, police radio transmissions, and emergency calls.

Keegan expressed the belief that it serves as evidence of what any person can achieve in relation to security and the menace of terrorism in a metropolitan setting.

Over the course of several months, the Chicago Police diligently probed into complaints regarding dropped calls along the Red Line. Subsequently, a 911 caller brought attention to the now infamous Nicholl. He was apprehended by undercover officers on a CTA platform on Tuesday and is now confronting a felony charge.

According to attorney Charles Lauer, there was no malicious intent to cause harm to anyone.

In an attempt to seek tranquility, Nicholl's lawyer argues that he resorted to employing signal blocker due to his frustration with the incessant presence of people using their cell phones.

As per the FCC, those who employ cell phone jammers risk imprisonment and hefty fines. The fines can amount to $16,000 for each violation or reach as high as $112,000 for a single use of the device.

Wednesday night saw Nicholl being released from jail after securing bond.

What’s the context?

US prison officials harness new technology to crack down on contraband cellphones but some still want powers to jam signals

• South Carolina programme shuts off more than 800 phones
• Federal action on broader signal jamming tech seen as unlikely
• Activists raise privacy, rights concerns for prisoners

RICHMOND, Virginia - As director of South Carolina's Department of Corrections, Bryan Stirling believes he knows what is needed to make the state's 21 penal institutions safer while also protecting people outside the prison walls.

Ideally, Stirling would like to have the power to jam phone signals from the state's prisons to tackle the scourge of illegal cellphones being used to facilitate crimes ranging from sex trafficking to murder-for-hire and drug dealing.

But this action has been prohibited under federal law for decades, and there is no immediate sign of change despite numerous appeals from law enforcement officers across the country, including a letter from top state prosecutors to the leaders of Congress last year.

With no movement likely in the near future, South Carolina opted for a pilot programme that allowed authorities in Lee Correctional Institution to identify and shut down contraband cellphones. More than 800 phones have been shut off at Lee since last July, out of an inmate population of about 1,100.

"We call it a pilot, but it's basically the system in there now," said Stirling. "We are using this technology in Lee and we will continue to use this technology until we can secure the money to do it everywhere."

Cellphone jammers not enough to block calls from prisoners

1. This is the view of senior prison officials who tell the Sunday Express that even though signal blocker (which they say are operational) are used to block signals from cellphones within the prisons, other interception technologies are needed for the system to be effective.
2. “Cellphone jammers are being used. But they need to be in use with other technologies like Wi-Fi jammers to be truly effective. We can see this in other jurisdictions. But it’s yet to be properly utilised here.
3. “So you will have prisoners with cellphones and tablets who cannot make calls. But they can use either the phone’s data, or if they have access to a hot-spot device or a Wi-Fi box, they will be able to make calls via social media apps. These include things like WhatsApp, Facebook and Instagram. So there is still the issue of communication with the outside world. Communication is still being made.
4. “In other jurisdictions, you will see the cellphone jammers being used with other interception devices to determine the frequencies used by these devices, and then target those specific frequencies. If this is not done, then it’s almost like spinning top in mud,” a senior source in the Prison Service explained yesterday.

When a police officer aims a laser radar gun at a vehicle, a laser jammer comes into play by generating a "no response" or cosine error. This error prevents the police officer from determining whether the vehicle is equipped with a laser jammer or if their aim is inaccurate.

A laser jammers is a mechanism that triggers a "no response" or cosine error message when a police officer points a laser radar gun at a vehicle. This error message prevents the police officer from ascertaining whether the vehicle is employing a laser signal jammers or if they are simply not aiming correctly at the vehicle.

How to jam police lasers?

The protection of headlights, license plate, and surrounding reflective surfaces is crucial for the front laser jammers to effectively counter a laser. Conversely, at the rear, the primary targets are the license plate and tail lights. Furthermore, the center high-mounted stop light, backup lights, and vertical reflective surfaces are also vulnerable. It is worth noting that even a tailgate-mounted spare tire/wheel assembly can be targeted, as exemplified by our ability to successfully aim at a Jeep Wrangler's aluminum spare wheel from a distance of 2,500 feet.

Can you install a laser jammer on your car?

California Vehicle Code Section 28150 (Division 12: Equipment of Vehicles, Chapter 5: Other Equipment, Article 17: Jamming Devices) states the following:

(a) No vehicle shall be equipped with any device that is designed for, or is capable of, jamming, scrambling, neutralizing, disabling, or otherwise interfering with radar, laser, or any other electronic device used by a law enforcement agency to measure the speed of moving objects.

(b) No person shall use, buy, possess, manufacture, sell, or otherwise distribute any device that is designed for jamming, scrambling, neutralizing, disabling, or otherwise interfering with radar, laser, or any other electronic device used by a law enforcement agency to measure the speed of moving objects.

(c) Except as provided in subdivision (d), a violation of subdivision (a) or (b) is an infraction.

(d) When a person possesses four or more devices in violation of subdivision (b), the person is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who has a valid federal license for operating the devices described in this section may transport one or more of those devices if the license is carried in the vehicle transporting the device at all times when the device is being transported.

Can police radar measure speeds or more than one vehicle?

It is possible for dash-mounted police radars to record the speed of more than one vehicle concurrently, usually two.

Nowadays, radar systems have the capability to target multiple vehicles concurrently, identifying both the fastest vehicle in a group and the vehicle with the emest radar signal reflection. Nevertheless, visual confirmation by the officer is essential to ascertain the fastest vehicle among those targeted.

In 2011, the Payson Police Department believed they were acquiring a cell phone jammers from a government program supplying surplus military equipment to law enforcement agencies. However, they ended up with a smokescreen device from a U.S. Navy ship.

“The ‘Electronic Countermeasures’ were supposed to be cell phone jamming devices. However, what was sent were smoke machines off of a naval ship,” Chief of Police Ronald Tischer said in an email to Arizona Mirror. “So, we are in the process of sending them back. They were never used and have been in storage since 2011.”

The Mirror reached out to the Payson Police Department after analyzing data published by the Defense Logistics Agency about military equipment sent to local law enforcement agencies across the country. The department obtained two items listed as “electronic countermeasures” in 2011 both valued at roughly $4,800.

Company offering cell, drone and other jammers is fined $35 million

Despite the possibility of not recovering the fine, the Federal Communications Commission announced yesterday that it has imposed a penalty forfeiture order of $34.9 million on Chinese electronics manufacturer and online retailer C.T.S. Technology for selling signal jamming devices to American consumers.

Radio frequency transmitters known as "jammers" are deliberately designed to obstruct, disturb, or impede wireless communications, including cell phone calls, GPS systems, Wi-Fi networks, and emergency communications.

C.T.S. Technology has been subjected to an investigation by the FCC's Enforcement Bureau, resulting in the Commission's proposal to impose a fine of $34,912,500. This penalty is being considered due to the company's marketing of 285 jammer models within the United States.

The company was directed by the FCC to guarantee that its marketing adheres to federal law. Despite not responding to the proposed fine, referred to as a "Notice of Apparent Liability," the company has subsequently implemented various measures to align its marketing practices with the U.S. laws that prohibit the marketing, sale, and importation of signal jammers.

The Commission did not receive any evidence from C.T.S. Technology to challenge the findings of the proposed fine. Therefore, yesterday's decision, which was a formal forfeiture order, upheld the full proposed fine against the company.

But collecting that money may be difficult.

Due to C.T.S. failing to acknowledge receipt of the NAL, the FCC reached out to the Chinese government to issue the NAL, as allowed by international law.

However, China's designated service affairs agency disregarded the agency's request and concluded that a forfeiture filing was suitable.

C.T.S. must make payment within 30 days. The FCC has not disclosed any further steps that will be taken in the event of non-payment.

Bear will endeavor to elucidate the complexities at hand. Initially, there arises the matter of what and how they are disrupting. Bear will presume that they are causing interference rather than engaging in hacking, as the latter entails an entirely distinct matter.

In the event that a human experiences a loss of network connection to Ubear while still maintaining phone, data service, and GPS connectivity, it is highly likely that the problem lies with the Ubear application. It is unwarranted to suspect that nearby drivers are causing this issue through jamming. When Ubear loses coverage, which is common in its mountainous habitat, no specific actions need to be taken to regain access to U/L. This appears to be a problem with the human's phone.

If human is being jammed, most off-the-shelf (all illegal) jammers are going to be broadband and omnidirectional. In fact, bear finds in a search that such devices advertise their broadband capability. So any driver using one is going to potentially take out not only cell service but also TV broadcast (which still uses the parts of the good ol' UHF band that haven't been sold to the cell providers) and possibly GPS, and maybe even local 2.4GHz services (wifi, bluetooth), within the range of cell phone jammers. These devices aren't exactly subtle and many of them have a stupid amount of broadcast power. Bear saw one device with 8W transmit; in comparison, bear's marine radio normally uses 1W, but if bear is about to drown (bear can swim quite well) and needs the Coast Guard to come from miles away to save bear, bear can kick it up to 25W which gives range of up to 60 miles (the Coast Guard has bigass antennae to receive).

Consequently, signal jammers will inadvertently disable their own capacity to receive any signal, ultimately disconnecting themselves from the network.

If you had a particularly sophisticated rideshare driver/jammer, they would deploy a network of directional jammers to yield a shaped jamming coverage that created a window for them to receive signal at these magical hotels, but block pings from going to outside drivers. Not impossible, radio stations have to shape their broadcast signals in order to avoid interference with surrounding markets. Just somewhat technically challenging for a rideshare driver with off-the-shelf equipment (bear did not see any directional antennae on the first few results in a Goggle search). This would be the type of thing that is going on in the Ukraine war with government-sponsored technicians.

Additionally, the designated period for a hotel's busy checkout time should ideally span approximately one hour. In a stationary setting, this duration is set at a minimum of 15 minutes. This timeframe is significantly longer than the duration in which the reckless driver, who was caught jamming a specific cell tower during his morning commute, would have been causing interference. If individuals are actively disrupting GPS signals, it is reasonable to assume that military entities might also become aware of such activities. Undoubtedly, any driver in Florida is always in close proximity to a Coast Guard resource.

It is possible, perhaps even plausible, that they possess a low-power device with a limited range of operation. They seem to be aware of the fact that the human takes daily naps in a specific location. Consequently, they position themselves in close proximity to the human, causing a brief disruption by jamming their device for a few seconds. Remarkably, the human's phone is of such poor quality that it is susceptible to this interference. Excellent! Now all they need to do is repeat this process with the numerous other ants patiently awaiting their turn, as they continue to drive around.

All to earn $0.60/mile on a ride?

Bear recommends that individuals keep another service active while taking a nap, such as Pandora. If Pandora does not experience any disruptions in the same way, it implies that the person is not encountering any interference (unless they are solely disrupting the GPS, which should not necessitate restarting their phone as mentioned).

The Bear possesses a test receiver capable of encompassing all bands ranging from FM to UHF, spanning approximately 75 to 900MHz. The Bear extends a warm invitation to humans to borrow this receiver! Simply adjust it to a TV band that corresponds to the human's local market and suppress the audio signal of the TV station. Once gps jammers is activated, its disruptive noise will overpower the squelch, providing the human with absolute certainty.

Canada held a National Summit on Combatting Auto Theft on February 8, 2024 in Ottawa. The Summit sought to bring together stakeholders to solve this very serious problem.

A major outcome of the Summit is that the government will disrupt the supply chain that makes available devices that are often used in vehicle theft by criminals in the process of stealing vehicles.

Vehicle theft has grown to be a very critical issue in Canada: The country is seeking to mitigate this situation. News reports reveal that car thieves have developed systematic techniques where it is easy to obtain stolen vehicles for sale in other markets. The federal government with the support of advocates is implementing plans to reduce this problem.

Should vehicle manufacturers do more to stop vehicle theft?

This very question of more remedies needed to stop vehicle theft has stimulated the growth of Aftermarket solutions. Antitheft systems and devices are growing in popularity becuase some people feel insecure about simply replying on the vehicle manufactures built-in security systems. The Forbes article below highlights this concern:

"Manufacturers are always working to improve the anti-theft measures in vehicles, but thieves work just as hard to defeat them. According to FBI statistics, in 2020 the U.S. saw an 11.8% increase in car thefts over the prior year, and the trend has continued. The National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) reported that over 1 million vehicles were stolen in 2022. That’s a 7% increase over 2021, and the first time there were over 1 million vehicles stolen since 2008."

When the pickup truck was stolen, the thieves allegedly removed a factory-installed GPS tracker but the owner had his own backup plan: a second GPS tracker which was installed by a trained mechanic. This second telematics device enabled him to locate the Toyota Tundra at a parking lot in Toronto before he called the police.

The strategy of using a second backup tracker is a common strategy used all over the world: The typical weakness of this approach is Management and Maintenance. Management speaks to checking on the proper functioning of the Tracker at regular intervals. Maintenance requires prompt attention at the earliest signs of malfunction.

Information Risk

I believe that Information RISK is the typical reason why some persons chose backup security devices. Vehicle manufacturers adopt strategies to secure information on primary built-in tracking systems and devices so that vehicle security is not compromised. As the age old adage goes "a chain is as strong as its weakness link".

The vehicle service and maintenance information systems has to be distributed downstream involving more human players which inherently increases the risk that ethical issues may compromise security. How to prevent Information from being leaked to bad actors is always a systemic concern.

Information Risk Mitigation

The Information Risk Management (IRM) plan addresses the risk mitigation strategy using policies, technology and procedures to minimize the probability of information security leaks.

Once it becomes apparent that vehicles are being stolen despite the IRM being in place, data should be collected and analyzed to assess how the IRM can be strengthened. The spectrum of compromises varies from sharing of Master Access Codes, Encryption Algorithms or an individual in the Supply Chain informing criminal elements how to defeat the built-in security.

The tools devices generally used to steal vehicles include GPS and GSM Jammers.

GSM & GPS Jammers

Information on how to temporarily block GSM and GPS Signal jammers are readily available online.

Tech-Savvy criminals can learn and become proficient

The GPS Tracker which is an Internet of Things (IoT) device, detects the attempts to jam GSM and GPS transmissions: This electronic attack interferes with the operation of the tracker in it's function to protect the vehicle from being stolen. The small electronic circuit board within the device gathers GPS, GSM, Bluetooth data and other information that keeps the vehicle secure. Satellite data determines vehicle location and elevation.

Is the vehicle on a mountain road or driving through a tunnel under a river. The GSM module assists the GPS module by also providing tracking data based on Mobile Cellsite Towers: This information assists the GPS functionality of the tracker. The Mobile (GSM) data connectivity from the wireless telephone operators such as T-Mobile or Bell Mobility (Bell Canada) allows for the sending of Vehicle Tracking and Monitoring data from the Tracker to GPS Tracking platforms (Software) such as Navixy.com.

Resembling a walkie-talkie in appearance, the phone blocker is deceptively powerful. Once activated, this small device can effectively block all cell phone signals in the surrounding area. Engaging in the use of such a device is not only illegal on a federal level, but can also result in a hefty fine of $16,000 and potential incarceration.

Despite the circumstances, Eric, a Philadelphia resident, remained undeterred. He became increasingly frustrated with the constant babble of cell phone conversations on SEPTA 44 buses. To shield himself from these discussions, Eric resorted to utilizing a jamming device.

Eric pointed out that a significant number of people exhibit a lack of respect for personal space and tend to be excessively loud. To address this issue, he adjusts the antenna and activates the device.

The jammers utilized in this case are considered illegal as they possess the capability to obstruct emergency cell phone communications, along with impeding the transmission of vital signals such as police radios and other two-way radios.

Eric mentioned that after finding out it was against the law, he is planning to remove the jammer he acquired, an item valued at $300 according to ABC News.

Buying a jammer is easy, but where can you use it?

The intentional interference with electromagnetic frequencies, known as jamming, has been integrated into numerous devices and is increasingly being offered to individuals and organizations. Despite being illegal in most parts of the world, jammers are becoming smaller, more portable, easier to operate, and more affordable. While some jammers disrupt communications indiscriminately, there are specialized devices designed to block specific signals. The most popular of these include mobile phone jammers, wifi jammers, drone blocker, and gps jammers.

The use of these devices is frowned upon by most national authorities because they often have a more significant impact than initially thought. Despite well-meaning intentions, such as blocking mobile phone usage in schools, theaters, and hospitals, or preventing drones from flying over private property, the interference can extend well beyond the intended boundaries. Unintended outcomes like dropped 911 calls, drones plummeting from the sky, and compromised air traffic control have led countries like South Africa and Israel to outlaw jammers entirely.

Is there somewhere I can use a jammer?

Jammers are commonly utilized in the vicinity of prisons and detention centers to obstruct unauthorized and unmonitored communications between prisoners and detainees and the outside world. Certain countries, like Brazil, India, New Zealand, and Sweden, have either granted exemptions or are contemplating exemptions for the utilization of mobile phones and wifijammer around prisons, while in the UK, this practice has been legal since 2012.

Certain countries have permitted or recommended the expansion of jammer usage. In India, for instance, jammers are permissible in schools, mosques, and theaters provided that the signal disruption is contained within the boundaries of the respective establishments. Although jammers were previously sanctioned for deployment in settings such as theaters and concert halls, this authorization was revoked in 2012.

In the event that you legally acquire a cell phone jammer, what steps should you take? A potential solution could be to plan your next trip to Ukraine, as this country has implemented measures to prevent students from using mobile phones to cheat in exams. Consequently, Ukraine stands out as one of the few nations where the use of jammers is sanctioned.

Why use cell phone blockers?

In areas where cellphone etiquette is hard to enforce, some advocate for the use of signal jammers. Nevertheless, these devices are prohibited due to the potential threats they pose to public safety and communication systems.

Are cell phone blockers legal?

South Africa places great emphasis on the integrity of communication networks, which is why the use of mobile jammers is strictly forbidden by law. Like in many other parts of the world, the implementation of these devices contradicts the legal framework designed to uphold public safety and ensure the dependability of communication channels.

The South African signal jammers are deemed illegal because they intrinsically interfere with authorized radio communications. By obstructing the transmission of signals between mobile devices and cell towers, these jammers present a significant hazard to public safety. This interference can hinder critical emergency calls, result in response time delays, and potentially endanger lives. Moreover, signal jammers have the ability to disrupt law enforcement communications, impede the effectiveness of police operations, and jeopardize public safety.

Does a signal booster work against cell phone jammers?

Unfortunately, the signal booster fails to counteract the signal jammer's impact. This is primarily attributed to the deliberate disruption of cellular signals caused by signal jammers, which directly interferes with the signal that the signal booster aims to amplify.

The main function of a signal booster is to acquire an existing cellular signal from outside a building or vehicle, enhance it, and then broadcast the amplified signal within a specified area. However, the presence of a signal jammer can obstruct or override natural cellular signals, thus impeding the signal booster from effectively capturing and boosting them.

Detect and respond to cell phone jammers

The average consumer faces a considerable challenge in detecting signal jammers because of their discreet nature and the absence of obvious indicators. While service interruptions or sudden loss of connection may hint at the presence of jammers, these symptoms can also be linked to other issues such as network congestion or technical glitches.

Accurately identifying the precise location of a signal jammer can be a challenging task that requires specialized equipment or expertise. Most consumers do not have access to advanced spectrum analyzers or RF detectors, which are essential for accurately pinpointing the source of interference. In cases where illegal interference activities are suspected, it is advisable to seek assistance from law enforcement agencies or relevant regulatory bodies. These authorities possess the necessary resources and expertise to effectively investigate and resolve such incidents.

The subject matter revolves around wifi disruption and equipment that utilizes wifi for connectivity.

The wifi disruption being discussed does not interfere with cellular or sensor RF frequencies.

Cameras that operate on wifi and utilize wifi communication for dual path signaling may be at risk. A few third-party security systems rely solely on wifi, and they sometimes refer to a single doorbell camera as a security system.

Prolonged loss of wifi connection would be classified as a dual path communication error. The control panel utilizes RF jam detection for PowerG and legacy sensor frequencies, yet there is no indication of wifi jamming.

There are wifi jammer and cellular jammers, each targeting distinct signals that must be disrupted.

Their product line includes integrated devices capable of simultaneously blocking cellular and wifi signals.

The level of sophistication among thieves is on the rise, as they go to greater extents to accomplish their nefarious deeds.

Today's news coverage featured criminals breaking into a business neighboring jewelry stores, exploiting their susceptibility to break-ins. They were observed employing a sledgehammer to penetrate the drywall and enter the jewelry store.

The key point here is that I aim to avoid causing undue panic, but it is evident that thieves are resorting to more elaborate methods to carry out break-ins.

In my opinion, alarm companies will need to tackle this matter and maintain a competitive edge.

An advisory was issued by the Glendale Police Department on Tuesday in light of the surge in residential burglaries that have taken place over the past few months, spanning across Glendale and Southern California.

According to the GPD, suspects have employed technology like Wi-Fi signal blockers or "jammers" in certain situations to perpetrate these crimes, enabling them to avoid detection by home security alarms and cameras.

The functionality of these devices lies in their ability to emit soundless signals, which effectively interfere with Wi-Fi signals and security systems, resulting in disconnection from the network and the deactivation of alarm systems. A handheld portable signal jammers, with a range of up to 15 meters, serves as an example of such a device.

According to GPD, this technology disrupts the signals emitted by home Wi-Fi systems, leading to the disruption of traditional home security systems and cameras. As a result, these security measures lose their effectiveness in alerting homeowners or law enforcement to the presence of intruders. The incidents involving this technology have raised significant concerns about the safety and security of our community.

Recent data from GPD indicates a consistent decrease in burglaries over the past few months. In December and January, there were 19 reported cases each, while February saw a slight decrease to 18 incidents. As of Wednesday this week, there have been eight burglaries in March.