5 ms·

I'm wondering, what if the suspect agreed with the request of the police to check the Echo recordings? Suppose the suspect is innocent and thinks that allowing

I'm wondering, what if the suspect agreed with the request of the police to check the Echo recordings? Suppose the suspect is innocent and thinks that allowing access to the Echo recordings can only make his case stronger. Would Amazon then still refuse access?

Godel_unicode 10y ago
Does Amazon not provide access to your recordings similar to how Google does with OK Google recordings? That seems easier.
- icebraining 10y ago
  The cops can't be certain if the suspect hasn't deleted incriminating recordings.
  - Godel_unicode 10y ago
    How is that different from you giving them access to your text messages? Edit: IANAL, but pretty sure deleting incriminating evidence is obstruction of justice
    - icebraining 10y ago
      I don't think it is. I expect cops to ask the provider for a copy of the messages as well. pretty sure deleting incriminating evidence is obstruction of justice Probably, but so what?
      - Godel_unicode 10y ago
        This thread started with the idea that someone might want their Alexa records as evidence of their innocence. I doubt that an innocent person would commit a crime to remove potentially incriminating evidence from their voluntarily offered evidence. The prosecution very well might subpoena those records if they thought there was value in so doing. Edit: grammars
        icebraining 10y ago
        And my point is that the records are useless as evidence, since the cops can't trust them, therefore an innocent person would want Amazon to provide the recordings themselves anyway.
        Godel_unicode 10y ago
        In the US it's the jury that needs to trust them.
mikestew 10y ago
From my POV, cops tend to ignore anything that doesn't point to "guilty". There would be no benefit to the accused in this case. IANAL, yada, yada.
- Godel_unicode 10y ago
  That's absurd. Investigative police work is the process of ruling out possible suspects to arrive at the truth.
  - mikestew 10y ago
    That might be the definition of "investigative police work", yes. That's not what I've observed in practice. And those that know better than I advise against giving up evidence with the idea that it will "help your case"; re: the "don't talk to the police" video that is so often referenced here.
    - Godel_unicode 10y ago
      So you think that, for instance, if the police are investigating you in connection with a bank robbery while you were in another country speaking at a conference, you should not tell them that? What about if you are wanted for questioning about a murder which involved dragging the body a significant distance while you were in the hospital recovering from chemotherapy? Still don't talk to the cops?
      - mikestew 10y ago
        Still don't talk to the cops? Nope. While you're busy playing "what if...", I'm dialing a lawyer. Should that trained professional advise talking to the adversarial trained professionals, then I would do so, and not before. I don't how it is where you're at, but in the U. S. cops have demonstrated time and again (and I've seen with my own eyes) that they are not concerned about truth and justice, but arrest and conviction rates. I'm not walking into that scenario running my mouth without professional advice.
  - 10y ago
ansgri 10y ago
There is a strong argument for them to still refuse: suppose the suspect somehow gamed the system (e.g. by translating the voice via radio), and the suspect is acquitted based on this data, and proceeds to do his evil things — think about the bad PR your company would get! No thanks, I'd rather stick to the safe and rather popular policy of preserving privacy.

Godel_unicode 10y ago

Does Amazon not provide access to your recordings similar to how Google does with OK Google recordings? That seems easier.

icebraining 10y ago
The cops can't be certain if the suspect hasn't deleted incriminating recordings.
- Godel_unicode 10y ago
  How is that different from you giving them access to your text messages? Edit: IANAL, but pretty sure deleting incriminating evidence is obstruction of justice
  - icebraining 10y ago
    I don't think it is. I expect cops to ask the provider for a copy of the messages as well. pretty sure deleting incriminating evidence is obstruction of justice Probably, but so what?
    - Godel_unicode 10y ago
      This thread started with the idea that someone might want their Alexa records as evidence of their innocence. I doubt that an innocent person would commit a crime to remove potentially incriminating evidence from their voluntarily offered evidence. The prosecution very well might subpoena those records if they thought there was value in so doing. Edit: grammars
      - icebraining 10y ago
        And my point is that the records are useless as evidence, since the cops can't trust them, therefore an innocent person would want Amazon to provide the recordings themselves anyway.
        Godel_unicode 10y ago
        In the US it's the jury that needs to trust them.

mikestew 10y ago

From my POV, cops tend to ignore anything that doesn't point to "guilty". There would be no benefit to the accused in this case. IANAL, yada, yada.

Godel_unicode 10y ago
That's absurd. Investigative police work is the process of ruling out possible suspects to arrive at the truth.
- mikestew 10y ago
  That might be the definition of "investigative police work", yes. That's not what I've observed in practice. And those that know better than I advise against giving up evidence with the idea that it will "help your case"; re: the "don't talk to the police" video that is so often referenced here.
  - Godel_unicode 10y ago
    So you think that, for instance, if the police are investigating you in connection with a bank robbery while you were in another country speaking at a conference, you should not tell them that? What about if you are wanted for questioning about a murder which involved dragging the body a significant distance while you were in the hospital recovering from chemotherapy? Still don't talk to the cops?
    - mikestew 10y ago
      Still don't talk to the cops? Nope. While you're busy playing "what if...", I'm dialing a lawyer. Should that trained professional advise talking to the adversarial trained professionals, then I would do so, and not before. I don't how it is where you're at, but in the U. S. cops have demonstrated time and again (and I've seen with my own eyes) that they are not concerned about truth and justice, but arrest and conviction rates. I'm not walking into that scenario running my mouth without professional advice.
- 10y ago

ansgri 10y ago

There is a strong argument for them to still refuse: suppose the suspect somehow gamed the system (e.g. by translating the voice via radio), and the suspect is acquitted based on this data, and proceeds to do his evil things — think about the bad PR your company would get! No thanks, I'd rather stick to the safe and rather popular policy of preserving privacy.