Bogus storm reports probed

[Mark Sefried]

Found an interesting article yesterday online. Apparently someone has been sending false storm reports into local NWS offices.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=617464&format=print

 

[Tarmo Tanilsoo]

My opinion on that "someone" is: Lock up and throw away the key.

It is indeed like calling 112 when there is no emergency (Note: 112 is in Estonia the same as 911 in USA)

 

[John Diel]

This is an issue that crops up from time to time with any pubic service department. NOAA is not immune. They must pretty well have the evidence they need to prosecute the case as they've gone public with it.

This would be very close to a Volunteer Firefighter starting fires, calling them in just so he can respond. This does happen as well.

There was the thread that ran here not all that long ago about Chasers sending in reports as they were out chasing. I was surprised (and not surprised) by some of the reactions. It's amazing to me how much is based on personality and how much was actually based in whether or not the report was 1. taken seriously, 2. listed in an LSR, and 3. Whether is howed up in the SPC Storm reports.

Given that, the person making the false reports listed in the story is getting his "gratification" by seeing a warning pop up from the servig NWS Office and probably really got a thrill when the local TV station went "Wall to wall" in their coverage probably based on his report(s).

I wouldn't be surprised to see the person come up as a Weather Spotter, Storm Chaser, or some other Volunteer that reports weather. I would almost bet on late teens to early 20's middle class male, and is a member of 1 or more weather related bulletin boards. Could even possibly be a member of ST! We, of course, hope that isn't the case though.

I've seen (and investigated) similar cases in the past. I helped investigate a Voluteer Firefighter once who was out setting fires, then calling in 911 to report it. I also had an EMT who wasn't though he was very credible in talking to him. The problem was his credentials were all false. He was arrested and prosecuted, same with the FF.

 

[fplowman]

I would say an impish chaser. The reports were being made in multiple jurisdictions in different states even.

 

[Marcus Opitz]

I find this to be a bizzar story to say the least. I guess we will have to be aware of the psychopath chasers out there!!!!!

 

[Billy Griffin]

Seems a little awkward to me that they'd be issuing warnings on public reports without verification. Here in Seattle, we have a reporting method where we MUST give our spotter ID number. In OK, I do all my reporting via the amateur radio net. The article mentions it's an online type thing, but still, looks like they could easily trace that.

 

[rdale]

Seems a little awkward to me that they'd be issuing warnings on public reports without verification.

They didn't.

"The tornado warning that was issued for the county through the Emergency Management Agency was given based on spotter reports, not on the false report, said Phil Anello, the emergency agency's coordinator for Macon County. "

 

[Terry Tyler]

My opinion on that "someone" is: Lock up and throw away the key.

It is indeed like calling 112 when there is no emergency (Note: 112 is in Estonia the same as 911 in USA)

you dont "lock someone up and throw away the key" for someone sending false NWS reports...that is way over the edge...

thats why you leave a number so they can call and check in...if you put a website up on the world wide web...there are going to be people who will use it in a way unsuitable, but you cant lock them up and charge them with felony charges...

you should have to register and have your own log-in to even access those sites...they should not be for the general public...then maybe they wouldent have to worry about those problems...

anyone who advocates prison time for sending a false severe weather report apparently doesnt know too much about jail time...let alone prison time...

i agree with the fines...trace the IP address...go have a talk with him or her...and then if he or she keeps it up...then go from there...

 

[Billy Griffin]

A bit off-topic, but related at the same time... I worked for a corporation in the cement business, in which we fell under MSHA regulations (just like OSHA for general industry & construction). Someone (an angry neighbor) kept logging on to MSHA's web site and making false allegations on our safety compliance, claiming we were dumping toxic waste in Puget Sound, releasing toxic air contaminants, etc. MSHA, obviously, had to come out and investigate. After finding these allegations false, they still kept getting the same things about once every week. Finally, the Federal office of MSHA had some of their folks do an IP address to find out where it was coming from. It took a while, but about two months after this all went down, this individual was ARRESTED for falsifying information on a Federal web site.

Looks like NWS offices would fall into this category as well, and they should be able to track this person down and prosecute if warranted. The goofy thing is, they are advertising it! Why not let it keep going on, then catch the guy red-handed? Then again, they may be hoping that if this individual is called out, some self-policing may occur and it will stop.

 

[Dick McGowan]

They should also arrest people who steal photos online. I don't see how some people can be so stupid about it! There also should be a law that is against compulsive liars.

 

[Eric Friedebach]

you should have to register and have your own log-in to even access those sites...they should not be for the general public...then maybe they wouldent have to worry about those problems...

That's what eSpotter is all about.

I wonder how much useful information really comes in from a site that requires no training.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

If the FBI is involved, whoever was filing the reports is looking at a little PMITA prison time, unless it turns out to be a kid or something. They probably don't have it traced down to who did it yet (otherwise they'd be arresting the guy or gal, not talking about it), but letting everyone know that they're looking should at least stop the false reports, unless the person is a complete idiot.

Screwing around with federal computer resources in a way that get the EAS activated = not a terribly smart idea.

*edit* Actually, re-reading the article, it sounds like whoever is doing this understands storms a bit, as the weather offices say that their reports fit the storm profile. So whoever it is at least understands that these storms are supercells, either by looking at the radar or following online board discussions like here on Stormtrack. Given that the NOW threads can only be seen by registered members, I would not be surprised at all if it turned out to be one of the ST members.

Unless the person doing this was very well read-up on multi-hop encrypted anonymous networks and was running through one, they should be seriously soiling themselves right now. (And hopefully whoever runs the severe report server(s) over at the NWS automatically filters out reports made from the exit nodes of those networks, which are fairly well known.)

 

[Van DeWald]

Terry, perhaps you're not familiar with United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 47 which states...

Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully--

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

So yes, if someone is willfully making fraudulent storm reports to the NWS, an executive government agency, then it indeed is a federal crime punishable by up to 5 years in prison if that person is caught.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

I seemed to remember reading something about this on WX-CHASE a little while back. Thank you, Gmail search!

from Chris Novy [email protected]
reply-to Chris Novy [email protected] to [email protected] date May 17, 2007 6:18 PM

subject Re: [WX-CHASE] [WX-TALK] Oh, this is really cute...
mailed-by listserv.uiuc.edu

*SNIP*

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> NOUS73 KCRH 162229
> ADMCRH
>
> TO: ALL CR WFO/S AND RFC/S
> FROM: CRH (FROM TOM SCHWEIN...ISSUED BY WFO EAX)
> SUBJECT: FALSE SEVERE WX REPORTS
> TIME/DATE: 525 PM CDT WED MAY 16 2007
>
> **** PLEASE SHARE WITH THE ENTIRE STAFF ****
>
> PLEASE BE AWARE THAT INTENTIONALLY FALSE REPORTS OF SEVERE WEATHER
> ARE ONCE AGAIN BEING RECEIVED THIS AFTERNOON (WED 5/16) AT THE LA
> CROSSE WFO. THE IP ADDRESS OF THIS SENDER IS 70.131.218.15.
>

A bit of digging resolves that IP out to adsl-70-131-218-15.dsl.emhril.sbcglobal.net. It's an SBC Midwest Illinois Bell (AT&T DSL) customer feeding through their Elmhurst, IL datacenter, so they're probably living somewhere in Illinois. (AT&T has other data centers throughout the Great Lakes, so if they lived elsewhere, the last visible hop wouldn't be exiting via Elmhurst.)

DSL IPs are usually static. Ping isn't getting any response, so they've either unplugged/shut down their computer or have been shut off.

*edit* The Redback 13 router at the Elmhurst DSL data center apparently only serves Chicago and immediate vicinity, so my money is on a Chicagoan or someone from one of the Chicago burbs being the culprit.

 

[Terry Tyler]

That's what eSpotter is all about.

I wonder how much useful information really comes in from a site that requires no training.

really, NWS/FO columbus doesnt ask anything...you just enter in and you go...it asks for your spotter number and a phone number to confirm the report...

i wondered myself how many bogus reports they got every day because anyone can access the site...

Terry, perhaps you're not familiar with United States Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 47 which states...

Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully--

yes, i am well aware of that but that is not the issue...taking away 5 years of someones life is a bit harsh for someone entering a bogus report on a website...i am not an advocate of this persons behavior, and i am not justifying his case by any means...im just saying that 5 years, felony charges and $250,000 fines are abit excessive for someone who is putting in false reports...

hence the idea why there should be a log-in...

there are child molesters who have been known to get off with less...think about the "three-strikes" law...where some guy stole video cassettes from wal-mart three different times and got life in prison...im not saying it isnt wrong...but punishing someone to that extent is pretty severe...

a $10,000 fine would stop me from sending any form anywhere that wasnt true...