> The specific incident in question was a grand larceny case where two men tried (and failed) to steal a robot owned and operated by Serve Robotics I think the

> The specific incident in question was a grand larceny case where two men tried (and failed) to steal a robot owned and operated by Serve Robotics I think there should be legal limitations in place to strictly limit police use of camera footage, but even in my ideal world, this would be fine. A possible crime was identified, the crime was targeted at the device that was recording the video, and the footage was provided voluntarily by the intended victim of the crime. The headline is completely misleading, unless they decided to hide their best evidence deep in the article somewhere. This seems exactly like a driver providing dashcam footage of somebody running into them. I expect the police are very happy for this case to be held up as an example, since it would tend to calm concerns rather than raise them.