Police: Man Uses Neighbor’s Unsecured Wi-Fi Connection To Download, Distribute Child Pornography

CAMDEN, N.J. (CBS) — An unsecured Wi-Fi connection led to a scary case of mistaken identity in Camden County, NJ.

Investigators with the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office said a Clementon man used his neighbor’s open network to download and distribute thousands of images of child pornography.

On September 1, at 5:30 a.m., officers jolted a couple out of bed in their Windmill Drive home, seeking the person responsible for downloading and sharing tens of thousands of images of child pornography.

Orioles’ Jones To Paper: ‘Baseball Is A White Man’s Sport’

A sweep of the couple’s computer found nothing, but investigators soon discovered their Wi-Fi network was not password protected.

“Unfortunately, the older generation is certainly a target for hackers like this, because they may not be understanding what kind of technology they’re putting in place,” said Leeza Garber, a cybersecurity attorney. “It sets you up to be extremely vulnerable.”

Investigators said Louis LaSalle, 55, used a wireless router to connect to his neighbors’ unsecured Wi-Fi to download and distribute the more than 700 pornographic videos and 33,000 images found on his laptop.

Garber said there are several easy ways to secure your network and yourself.

Police Seek Man For Allegedly Sending Flowers To A Woman With Threatening Message

“Make sure the password is something that’s not easily guessable or hackable,” she said. “There are different softwares including free applications that will monitor the traffic on your network so you can see whose accessing it, whose putting in passwords that don’t work. There are ways to monitor this if you’re especially concerned about it.”

LaSalle is currently in the Camden County Jail on $150,000 cash bail.

More from Trang Do
Comments

One Comment

  1. Citizen poops says:

    I laughed pretty hard when the police called the perp a “hacker” because he was able to get onto an unprotected wireless network.

  2. Cody says:

    Obviously, English is not Trang Do’s first language – Not trying to be critical, just helpful …..

    ” “There are different softwares including free applications that will monitor the traffic on your network so you can see whose accessing it, whose putting in passwords that don’t work. ”

    Next time don’t use Spellcheck, find something that will show you when you use the wrong spelling of a word, if there is such a thing. Even us old fogies in the ‘older generation’ who never went to college know that you should have used who’s instead of whose! Jus’ sayin’ ……

  3. JJ says:

    There’s another, even more sinister reason to secure your WiFi with a firewall and good security protection: Hillary operatives are targeting Conservative households and sabotaging them with p0rn. It’s effectively the same thing as “SWATTING” a home where someone calls 911 and reports some madman with a gun being locked up in there. These are desperate times for Democrats folks. And like wild animals, they will lash out when cornered. Keep your guard up.

  4. George Smith says:

    Why is it that reporters feel the need to show their iphone to the camera? We don’t CARE that you are an apple sheep or about your little status symbol with the apple logo on it. We aren’t impressed by your dumb iphone. It adds nothing to the story. We don’t need to see your wifi screen to understand the concept of unsecured wifi. And BTW, most intelligent people who compare iphones to androids quickly realize that you have more control over the device THEY paid for when the buy an Android, along with many more capabilities. Iphones are for sheep, so I get tired of seeing sheep brag about being sheep.

    1. JJ says:

      Well said! I’ve long stated that Apple users are dimwitted who need one-finger access to everything. I like the challenge of more complex things like Android and PC which you also can have more control over for security, among other things. Apple “smart phones” and tablets are dumbing down an entire generation and they don’t even know it.

  5. Bill Williams says:

    Tim Kaine looks like the kind of guy who’d do this.
    Rapey Billy Clinton already has his stash all set up.

  6. Teddy Novak says:

    * “who’s” not “whose”.

  7. Rodger says:

    Cowardly union cops need to be held accountable for the way they violently serve warrants. There is no excuse for breaking into a home like this. Innocent people are within their rights to shoot any home intruders dead for breaking into their homes, and if I am on such a jury that person would certainly walk away free. A simple knock on the door is more appropriate and lawful. The law is setup to protect the innocent, I could not care less if one lowly porn trader gets away so long as most innocent people don’t get their doors busted in and their house raided by stormtroopers.

    1. John Henrick says:

      The article said nothing about cops busting in. It said they “jolted” the couple. If cops came knocking at your door at 5.30 a.m. wanting to check your computer, you might feel jolted, too. Don’t assume so much and go blaming cops for something you know little about.

  8. CKinTX says:

    “On September 1, at 5:30 a.m., officers jolted a couple out of bed in their Windmill Drive home, seeking the person responsible for downloading and sharing tens of thousands of images of child pornography.

    A sweep of the couple’s computer found nothing, but investigators soon discovered their Wi-Fi network was not password protected.”

    Because of this blatant negligence on the part of the police, they should be forced to pay punitive damages to the couple. Maybe, next time, they’ll do a better job and not go blundering into an innocent’s home.

  9. Mel Beavis says:

    This is typical incompetent police work where they just send in the SWAT team in the dark of night and break down the door in an unnecessary use of force. Police routinely use Stingrays to illegally tap all of the cell phones in an area, so it is certainly trivial to survey the neighborhood, discover the unsecured wifi network, and determine the MAC address and location of the computer involved prior to an invasive search. Besides, any sophisticated porn trafficker is going to use a bot net to store and distribute their wares, so their own computer is clean. Anyone, despite the best precautions, can end up with malware that makes them part of a bot net. How many innocent people have been convicted because of this? (“Bot net” should be one word, but autocorrect turns it into “bonnet.”)

  10. Rally2xs says:

    Or maybe the police could act like civilized people, knock on the door at 5:30 PM rather than busting it down at 5:30 AM, and have a polite conversation with people who are legally presumed innocent and take a look at their computers respectfully. Someone comes busting into my bedroom at 5:30 AM without knocking is going to get a load of 12 gauge, and they can yell “police” all they want, and I will assume it is home invaders attempting to take advantage to gain enough time to kill me, and shoot first, ask questions later. This nonsense of breaking down doors when you don’t have to is going to be the death of freedom in this country.

    1. Bil says:

      You’re not really this dumb, are you? You do realize that officers don’t typically give suspects the opportunity to dispose of evidence, right? Officers aren’t expecting to be wrong. They have evidence that has led to the courts granting a search warrant. They have to assume the suspect will not allow them to do their job. To protect themselves and the public, they can’t give the suspect the opportunity to react.

      It’s common sense. Try joining reality.

      1. Rally2xs says:

        Cops show up at 5:30 PM,knock on the door with a search warrant, how, from that point on, are you going to destroy evidence? You can’t flush a 5 Tb hard drive down the toilet. You can’t erase it all either, it takes time. Get real yourself, this tactic is a gross violation of the 4th amendment, engendered by the insane drug war that is dismantling our constitutional rights to allow the government to “save us from ourselves” if we choose to burn out our brains on crack and meth. And OBTW, it doesn’t work, they’re saving nobody, and we’d be a whole lot better off to repeal _ALL_ the anti-drug laws and therefore shut down the cartels and the vile, dangerous black markets, as well as removing the reasons for these rights violations. And, like I said, surprise me in the middle of the night and get a face-full of bird shot. Act like civilized people and everything will turn out just fine.

      2. Rally2xs says:

        Ever try to do a “secure” erase of a hard drive? I did that for a computer I sold recently. It took hours. Here’s how you do it:

        http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/255105/windows-7-the-top-10-hidden-features/8?backTo=255105

        That ran, and ran, and ran, and that was only the 1 Tb hard drive, drive C. The current computer has my photographs and lots of other stuff, with several 5 Tb external USB-3 hard drives, some of which are mirror images of each other to ensure not losing data. A couple of them, 1 for computer backup and another a “spare” mirror backup that are both offline to be out of reach of cryptolocker type malware, Then there’s a couple 1 Tb eSata drive from ancient times that I also keep turned off to prevent infections. It would probably take a week to secure-erase. The cops would have full access. There would be no way to destroy things before they could get to them. Treating regular citizens like drug dealers is, again, shredding the Constitution.

      3. dmiv says:

        I’m sorry… at what time during the day does a search warrant crosses over from OK, in your mind, into the land of…how did you put it…a “gross violation of the 4th amendment”? Is it 7:00 am…8:00. I’m just wondering where in the constitution do you find language detailing the time period when a search warrant is allowed to be executed. If the time, you have arbitrarily set, happens to be 8:00, would it only be a mild violation of the 4th amendment if they knocked on the door at 7:45? Or would it still be a gross violation?

      4. JMWinPR says:

        Did you read the article, can you read? They had all of the evidence, they new precisely what was downloaded and when. A search warrant should have been issued and enforced during later in the morning. If the perp had half a brain, he would have noticed the activity next door and he should have wiped his computer. This was not a life and death situation, hopefully this couple has a good attorney.

      5. CKinTX says:

        So, what, they might’ve flushed their PC down the toilet?

  11. William says:

    Well, this is different than the usual killings, shootings, robberies, knockouts, stabbings and home invasions.

  12. Well there you have it, the equivalence of switching drivers after a wreck, the sober passenger takes the rap and says the drunk was not driving. Now, pedophiles will just down load off of each others wifi and dodge the law.

  13. It is much easier to secure it. says:

    This is the main reason I always secure my WiFi. I don’t need this kind of headache.

    1. ComancheTerritory says:

      Besides, if you have a dog in your house, they will shoot it.

  14. Joe E in the IE says:

    And how often have we heard the lame excuse “It’s too much of a hassle for the kids and their friends”?

    Scariest part of all: These same people drive cars on the streets as the rest of us.

    1. Nbr1 says:

      Yeah, they also vote.

      The “hassle for the kids and their friends” thing is why most routers have the option for “guest” access to the internet, while still preventing access to the local network.

  15. Dana Tufts says:

    I purposely don’t have a wifi password, as a courtesy to my neighbors, just as McDonald’s and Starbucks don’t have a wifi password as a courtesy to their customers.

    The law should not treat people like me any differently than it treats McDonald’s and Starbucks. If this kind of law enforcement behavior becomes a trend, I guess we can say goodbye to free wifi access at airports, restaurants, etc.

    1. Namey Name says:

      Dana, with Liberty comes Responsibility. Though it is your right, you are using your Liberty in an irresponsible way, imo. Your “courtesy” to your neighbors is creating the condition for a POS like this guy to do what he did. He would never have done this one his own WiFi. Your comparison to Starbucks and MacDonalds is irrelevant. They have an army of lawyers to protect their interests because their facilities are in fact, public places.

    2. dmiv says:

      I’m no expert on the free wifi at airports and restaurants but I would guess they shut out access to sites known to distribute child pornography.

      And I don’t know what you gleamed from the article but it doesn’t look like the couple is being treated differently than airports or restaurants. I’m sure the police would get a warrant to get access to those business’s computer records to clear their names. This couple isn’t going to jail. What different treatment are you seeing?

  16. HeywoodJablowme says:

    I bet the two old people were treated like common criminals until the truth became apparent.

  17. force41 says:

    Is that the best we can do in 2016? Raid homes based on best-guesses? No judge should have signed off on such a warrant on law-abiding citizens, and no investigator should have pointed any finger at the wrong home, house, or in this case, law-abiding citizens. Way too many mistakes occurring again and again with these house raids.

    1. dt60093 says:

      The child pornography was going to their router inside their home.

    2. dmiv says:

      How would you have proceeded with the investigation if you found out child pornography was being downloaded through their router? Just curious

      1. Rally2xs says:

        Knock on the door IN THE DAYTIME, tell the people, “We have a search warrant to inspect your computers for illegal activity.” The law abiding person will let you in, the actual criminal may try to stop you, but either way, you get access to the computers, look at the hard drives, and find kiddie porn or no kiddie porn. Find kiddie porn and arrest them, or find no kiddie porn and leave without having destroyed a locked door, and possibly getting shot in the dark of night by a terrified but armed homeowner.

      2. dmiv says:

        Uhhh… no door got destroyed you dimwit. Did you watch the video? The police didn’t come in, guns blazing with a battering ram. They knocked on the door. I know it is fun to make stuff up to make it looks like these folks were “violated” because they were woken up at 5:30 but it wasn’t some SS crew demanding papers.

    3. Nbr1 says:

      Not sure what you mean by “best we can do in 2016”, but I can tell you unequivocally that the quality of life we all are seeing in “2016” doesn’t hold a candle to how life was 50 years ago. Today, people are cruder, ruder, and rougher by a HUGE margin than back then, and law enforcement is dealing with it as best they can.

      The judge didn’t sign off on a warrant “on law abiding citizens”; he signed it so law enforcement could investigate known illegal activity emanating from the “law abiding citizens” house and computer. Your reference to “law abiding” is specious; everyone is “law abiding” until they’re caught doing something illegal.

      1. Nbr1 says:

        “Knock on the door in the DAYTIME” …. Nope, sorry, it doesn’t work like that in the real world, and for good reason. Cops know, and you should too, that it’s much easier to gain control of people if they’ve been asleep than if they’re wide awake. A criminal can escape, or fight back, whichever, a lot easier if he’s confronted when wide awake, than if he’s in bed with lights out. That’s pretty easy to understand.

      2. Rally2xs says:

        So you think that making it easier for the cops is a good enough excuse to violate people’s 4th Amendment rights. You sure you’re a real American? Maybe if we just abolish the Constitution, and go back to having a king, you’d be happier? The king could do anything he wanted to you, and you’d have no say. That seems to be what you want for your fellow citizens. Personally, I’m fighting that attitude.

  18. jklasdfjklsdf djsasdfjklsdf says:

    who uses an unsecured wifi network? how was that man able to navigate life to the point of owning a house, having a job, a car, etc?

    1. LeoBassy says:

      LOL, well done. Was about to pose the same question.

    2. Herring says:

      It was an older couple. They probably did those things before wifi was invented.

    3. Rally2xs says:

      First, 55 isn’t “old.” I’m waaaay older than that, and am just getting to the point that I feel “old.” 2nd, I have an unsecured wifi router, and just don’t give a if someone uses it or not. The neighbors are too far away to easily use the signal, and if someone is passing by on the road and needs a connection, I hope they make good use of it.

      I had a password once, and it was just hassle, hassle, hassle. I started by using the “wrong” security protocol and so, according to my friend, should start all over using the right one. I did, and then it kept thwarting my attempts to use it with each new computer. And that was before the wifi connection by my burglar alarm, the new connection I will shortly make with my new internet-enabled garage door opener, the wifi connection that works with the DVD player, etc. etc. Wrestling with all those passwords and so forth, only to have the thing give endless error messages telling you you’re doing it wrong is just to much stress in my life. So… my connection is open. If I lived in an apartment building, yeah, things would be different, as I probably would have so many neighbors on it that it wouldn’t beat dial-up speeds, but out here in the boonies, it’ll stay “open.”

Comments are closed.

More From CBS Philly

Guide To Oktoberfests And Other Fall Beer Events
Sign Up Now!
Taz Goes Big!

Listen Live