4 ms·

So if I was unlucky enough to be near a couple of the robbery locations, I might be swept up in the dragnet based on my phone location. Even if 6 of 8 robbery l

So if I was unlucky enough to be near a couple of the robbery locations, I might be swept up in the dragnet based on my phone location. Even if 6 of 8 robbery locations my phone was clearly elsewhere the police may still try to make a case that I only participated in two of the robberies. That's some scary excrement right there. There needs to be a much larger burden or proof than location info. Even if a suspected phone is at 8/8 locations (like the robbers have a way of steeling an someone's phone and putting it back before/after a robbery just to help incriminate someone else). (See the movie Rampage)

marci 9y ago
> See the movie Rampage Which one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage
- BLKNSLVR 9y ago
  The 2009 one, directed by Uwe Boll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage_(2009_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage_(2009_film)
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
And you know there's a LE conversation happening that goes, "well, if they didn't commit this crime, we have plenty of unsolved ones to compare the data against."
- specialist 9y ago
  Pretty much. The sales guy from Seisent (bought by Lexis/Nexus) gave examples of their data mining of demographic data helped solve cold cases. Back in 2005. Both awesome AND scary.
pm90 9y ago
> So if I was unlucky enough to be near a couple of the robbery locations, I might be swept up in the dragnet based on my phone location. Even if 6 of 8 robbery locations my phone was clearly elsewhere the police may still try to make a case that I only participated in two of the robberies. I don't think you are reading this right. This wasn't some random person who happened to be in the same place as the robberies. I believe one of the robbers testified that he was their ringleader. I feel like the cellphone data needlessly jeopardized the whole operation. A judge would probably have given an actual warrant to search online data for 12 people on the contact list of the robber. But this is the thing: the police in this case were used to getting by without a warrant and so probably didn't think twice about getting all that data (which they should). The question being considered is whether that warrant less search is illegal. If SCOTUS does overturn this decision, the guy's conviction would be thrown out causing much outrage. I hope they do: the privacy laws are clearly not strong enough.
- coding123 9y ago
  That could be true, I was mainly going off the article's notion that it was the 127 days of phone records - and if it was all phones nearby or his phone records wasn't clear in the article.
- drakenot 9y ago
  A former lawyer on Planet Money discussed this case and said that it may not throw out the conviction. That the "Good Faith" exception may allow the conviction to stand.
- linkregister 9y ago
  Are you sure that the conviction would be thrown out? SCOTUS rules all the time to reverse precedents set by a lower court while moving finding of fact to the original venue.
Shivetya 9y ago
Get scared. you can be arrested, tried, and convicted, all for dealing non existent drugs where the driving force behind it all was the law enforcement scam that put it all in place and dropped hints. I know some distrust Cato, but please read the following and tell me, how do we protect ourselves from such as this without dragging it out in the open? https://www.cato.org/blog/stash-house-stings-when-government-can-invent-crimes-criminals https://www.cato.org/blog/stash-house-stings-when-government... So we best hope the Supreme Court decides there was over reach in gathering cell data because its apparent some district courts are more than willing let law enforcement create a crime and manufacturer criminals as needed

marci 9y ago

> See the movie Rampage Which one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage

BLKNSLVR 9y ago
The 2009 one, directed by Uwe Boll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage_(2009_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rampage_(2009_film)

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

And you know there's a LE conversation happening that goes, "well, if they didn't commit this crime, we have plenty of unsolved ones to compare the data against."

specialist 9y ago
Pretty much. The sales guy from Seisent (bought by Lexis/Nexus) gave examples of their data mining of demographic data helped solve cold cases. Back in 2005. Both awesome AND scary.

pm90 9y ago

> So if I was unlucky enough to be near a couple of the robbery locations, I might be swept up in the dragnet based on my phone location. Even if 6 of 8 robbery locations my phone was clearly elsewhere the police may still try to make a case that I only participated in two of the robberies. I don't think you are reading this right. This wasn't some random person who happened to be in the same place as the robberies. I believe one of the robbers testified that he was their ringleader. I feel like the cellphone data needlessly jeopardized the whole operation. A judge would probably have given an actual warrant to search online data for 12 people on the contact list of the robber. But this is the thing: the police in this case were used to getting by without a warrant and so probably didn't think twice about getting all that data (which they should). The question being considered is whether that warrant less search is illegal. If SCOTUS does overturn this decision, the guy's conviction would be thrown out causing much outrage. I hope they do: the privacy laws are clearly not strong enough.

coding123 9y ago
That could be true, I was mainly going off the article's notion that it was the 127 days of phone records - and if it was all phones nearby or his phone records wasn't clear in the article.
drakenot 9y ago
A former lawyer on Planet Money discussed this case and said that it may not throw out the conviction. That the "Good Faith" exception may allow the conviction to stand.
linkregister 9y ago
Are you sure that the conviction would be thrown out? SCOTUS rules all the time to reverse precedents set by a lower court while moving finding of fact to the original venue.

Shivetya 9y ago

Get scared. you can be arrested, tried, and convicted, all for dealing non existent drugs where the driving force behind it all was the law enforcement scam that put it all in place and dropped hints. I know some distrust Cato, but please read the following and tell me, how do we protect ourselves from such as this without dragging it out in the open? https://www.cato.org/blog/stash-house-stings-when-government-can-invent-crimes-criminals https://www.cato.org/blog/stash-house-stings-when-government... So we best hope the Supreme Court decides there was over reach in gathering cell data because its apparent some district courts are more than willing let law enforcement create a crime and manufacturer criminals as needed