4 ms·
If their sample rate and position accuracy was even remotely acceptable, then it should be obvious he was riding past and didn't spend more 1 minute with 100m o
by kurthr 3y ago
If their sample rate and position accuracy was even remotely acceptable, then it should be obvious he was riding past and didn't spend more 1 minute with 100m of the location. They should only have been asking whether he saw anything suspicious.
What if an airplane flew over during the burglary? Are they suspects?
OTOH if it showed that his position was static within 10m of the home for 20min before leaving again... then that might be evidence. Almost all of us leave huge digital footprints that can be followed with a warrant (not sure about UK). That can be used for pretexting, but can also be used as an alibi.
- autoexec 3y agoThe data google had was enough to show that he wasn't the thief, but the police didn't bother digging that deep. They just took their easy answer and ran with it. He would have been cleared in court, but there's zero reason we should let lazy cops force us to spend time in jail or spend thousands on lawyers to avoid that fate. This needs to get regulated.
- JohnFen 3y ago> He would have been cleared in court Plus, in many US states, you never get fully cleared. Just having a record that you've been arrested -- regardless of the ultimate outcome of that arrest or whether or not you were cleared in court -- can keep you from renting housing, getting jobs, etc.