4 ms·

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't most reasonably smart criminals leave their smartphones switched on at home before they go on a job? 'Switched on' at home

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't most reasonably smart criminals leave their smartphones switched on at home before they go on a job? 'Switched on' at home would be an alibi if later questioned. Alternatively, at least switching to airplane mode or switching the phone off (but that could indicate intent). It seems to me then that only the stupid would get caught this way. That raises the question of how much longer will this method be effective when even the stupid get wind of the fact that their phones will betray them. From the unsolved crimes mentioned it seems the smart have caught on already. I wonder if there are any stats on whether crooks are actively aware of the dangers of carrying a phone. If so, then is there any trend downward in solving crimes as the knowledge of the fact spreads?

watwut 3y ago
Most often when people engage in small crime, they are not engaging in smart behavior overall. Having phone with them is just one of multiple stupid decisions that were done that week. They are used to have smartphones with them all the time, so they do not think about them at all. Another pretty common way of catching you is that you brag to friends or family about the crime and one of them tells the cops.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  Accepted, that's the stupid class. And no doubt such detection would be very useful in solving serious but unintended crime such as a hit-and-run accident.
stevezsa8 3y ago
I've seen a few stories of murders where the "smart" criminal turned their phone off during the exact window the crime took place. That and being seen at the scene of the crime was used as evidence. So the intent part is definitely a thing if they simply turn off their phone.
fx1994 3y ago
Well, you can check in current Ukraine vs. Russia war how both sides lost soldiers for using mobile phones. People tend to forget they carry device that might hurt them in the end.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  I'm surprised soldiers are actually allowed to carry mobiles whilst on active duty. It's a long time since I did any military stuff and it was before smartphones but I distinctly remember the incessant lectures about carrying unnecessary items that would identify one or one's mission. By those standards carrying a smartphone would definitely be outlawed and if caught one would be up on a charge. Edit: it seems to me that back then that had smartphones been around they'd have been classified as radio equipment and there were very strict rules and procedures about 'radio silence'.
  - paganel 3y ago
    Wasn't ever part of any military but as far as I understand having something to kill time on while there's almost nothing happening for hours and days on end is one of the main uses of having mobile phones in the trench-lines of Southern Ukraine. Also, to almost always keep in touch with the loved ones from back front, I can imagine that that has to be good for morale when you don't know if you're going to be still standing the next day. And as far as front-line battles go, the amount of cheap drones being employed by both sides makes "identification by mobile-phone signal" pretty moot, if you're close to the front-line the other side knows exactly where you're located long before checking with your mobile-phone tower or whatever. I agree though, use of mobile phones is still a pretty good location giveaway when there's troop concentrations just at the back of the front, where it's more difficult to employ drones. Also, this is the first protracted war fought between near-peer adversaries since the advent of the "IT revolution" (or whatever we want to call the last 30 or so years), there's lots of things that militaries are now learning when it comes to adapting said IT/tech to the battle-fronts and to the soldiers themselves.
    - isilofi 3y ago
sureglymop 3y ago
"Only the stupid".. what about " the desperate" instead? I believe many may engage in illegal activities because their situation (be it financial or otherwise) is so dire that they themselves see no other option (even if there are options). Most petty crime is not orchestrated by some super intelligent super criminal like depicted in a heist movie.
- sudhirj 3y ago
  Stealing bread to feed your starving family is one thing, planning a heist doesn’t feel like the same thing. Isn’t shoplifting not really the kind of case for which Google data would be requested?
- hilbert42 3y ago
  "Most petty crime is not orchestrated by some super intelligent super criminal like depicted in a heist movie." Right, that's the problem, it's why strict safeguards have to apply. Given half a chance law enforcement would welcome a real-time connection to Google's location data. If it ever reaches that stage then we'd be in Orwell's world.
- arghwhat 3y ago
  Note that desperation does not preclude a degree of planning, nor does intelligence rule out desperation. Considering how long phone tracking has been part of movies about crime, I imagine "turn off your phone" would be in the same category as "don't leave blood stains", "don't fire a traceable fire-arm", etc. ... But maybe we should try to avoid accidentally making this thread read like a how-to for committing crime.
  - hilbert42 3y ago
    Agreed, but it's curious it's still so effective. Perhaps much of the population thinks differently to many posting here and law enforcement relies on this.
  - sureglymop 3y ago
    I agree, funnily enough though a period where the phone is turned off may be used to prosecute if there is otherwise a consistent location history. Planning aside, it's actually a hard challenge so I still personally think most criminals probably don't intelligently overcome it.
fooker 3y ago
Most reasonably smart people can have careers without resorting to petty crime.
sambazi 3y ago
> I wonder if there are any stats on whether crooks are actively aware of the dangers of carrying a phone. burner phones are a thing prominently featured in all kinds of popular media ('breaking bad' and 'better call saul' come to mind)
avidiax 3y ago
> before they go on a job? Not every burglar is a "cat burglar". Many of them respond to crimes of opportunity, where they could not have foreseen the need to leave their phone on but at home. Of course, this investigation method is going to decrease in quality. Only going to take a few popular songs mentioning leaving Netflix on at home before this method only catches the innocent and amateur criminals.
iepathos 3y ago
Answered this in another comment here, but can repeat. Phone location is not a valid alibi in court. As you pointed out with your example here, it only proves your phone was at a location not that you were so it isn't accepted as an alibi. Police use phone location to generate leads not as evidence in court to prove someone they charged was at a location. They need better evidence than that in court to prove someone committed a crime.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- brokenmachine 3y ago
  "We have proof you were there. Will you risk 10 years in jail, or take this plea bargain? Are you feelin' lucky, punk?"
mleo 3y ago
I was a on a jury back in 2002 where the prosecutor was presenting cell tower data to show the suspect was in the area. We are at 20 years from then and people are still committing crimes with their phones on, and the phone is more part of daily lives now.
hnburnsy 3y ago
Google also tracks your app interactions so leaving your phone at home, switched on but not showing any interactions is possibly telling the authorties something.

watwut 3y ago

Most often when people engage in small crime, they are not engaging in smart behavior overall. Having phone with them is just one of multiple stupid decisions that were done that week. They are used to have smartphones with them all the time, so they do not think about them at all. Another pretty common way of catching you is that you brag to friends or family about the crime and one of them tells the cops.

hilbert42 3y ago
Accepted, that's the stupid class. And no doubt such detection would be very useful in solving serious but unintended crime such as a hit-and-run accident.

stevezsa8 3y ago

I've seen a few stories of murders where the "smart" criminal turned their phone off during the exact window the crime took place. That and being seen at the scene of the crime was used as evidence. So the intent part is definitely a thing if they simply turn off their phone.

fx1994 3y ago

Well, you can check in current Ukraine vs. Russia war how both sides lost soldiers for using mobile phones. People tend to forget they carry device that might hurt them in the end.

hilbert42 3y ago
I'm surprised soldiers are actually allowed to carry mobiles whilst on active duty. It's a long time since I did any military stuff and it was before smartphones but I distinctly remember the incessant lectures about carrying unnecessary items that would identify one or one's mission. By those standards carrying a smartphone would definitely be outlawed and if caught one would be up on a charge. Edit: it seems to me that back then that had smartphones been around they'd have been classified as radio equipment and there were very strict rules and procedures about 'radio silence'.
- paganel 3y ago
  Wasn't ever part of any military but as far as I understand having something to kill time on while there's almost nothing happening for hours and days on end is one of the main uses of having mobile phones in the trench-lines of Southern Ukraine. Also, to almost always keep in touch with the loved ones from back front, I can imagine that that has to be good for morale when you don't know if you're going to be still standing the next day. And as far as front-line battles go, the amount of cheap drones being employed by both sides makes "identification by mobile-phone signal" pretty moot, if you're close to the front-line the other side knows exactly where you're located long before checking with your mobile-phone tower or whatever. I agree though, use of mobile phones is still a pretty good location giveaway when there's troop concentrations just at the back of the front, where it's more difficult to employ drones. Also, this is the first protracted war fought between near-peer adversaries since the advent of the "IT revolution" (or whatever we want to call the last 30 or so years), there's lots of things that militaries are now learning when it comes to adapting said IT/tech to the battle-fronts and to the soldiers themselves.
  - isilofi 3y ago

sureglymop 3y ago

"Only the stupid".. what about " the desperate" instead? I believe many may engage in illegal activities because their situation (be it financial or otherwise) is so dire that they themselves see no other option (even if there are options). Most petty crime is not orchestrated by some super intelligent super criminal like depicted in a heist movie.

sudhirj 3y ago
Stealing bread to feed your starving family is one thing, planning a heist doesn’t feel like the same thing. Isn’t shoplifting not really the kind of case for which Google data would be requested?
hilbert42 3y ago
"Most petty crime is not orchestrated by some super intelligent super criminal like depicted in a heist movie." Right, that's the problem, it's why strict safeguards have to apply. Given half a chance law enforcement would welcome a real-time connection to Google's location data. If it ever reaches that stage then we'd be in Orwell's world.
arghwhat 3y ago
Note that desperation does not preclude a degree of planning, nor does intelligence rule out desperation. Considering how long phone tracking has been part of movies about crime, I imagine "turn off your phone" would be in the same category as "don't leave blood stains", "don't fire a traceable fire-arm", etc. ... But maybe we should try to avoid accidentally making this thread read like a how-to for committing crime.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  Agreed, but it's curious it's still so effective. Perhaps much of the population thinks differently to many posting here and law enforcement relies on this.
- sureglymop 3y ago
  I agree, funnily enough though a period where the phone is turned off may be used to prosecute if there is otherwise a consistent location history. Planning aside, it's actually a hard challenge so I still personally think most criminals probably don't intelligently overcome it.

fooker 3y ago

Most reasonably smart people can have careers without resorting to petty crime.

sambazi 3y ago

> I wonder if there are any stats on whether crooks are actively aware of the dangers of carrying a phone. burner phones are a thing prominently featured in all kinds of popular media ('breaking bad' and 'better call saul' come to mind)

avidiax 3y ago

> before they go on a job? Not every burglar is a "cat burglar". Many of them respond to crimes of opportunity, where they could not have foreseen the need to leave their phone on but at home. Of course, this investigation method is going to decrease in quality. Only going to take a few popular songs mentioning leaving Netflix on at home before this method only catches the innocent and amateur criminals.

iepathos 3y ago

Answered this in another comment here, but can repeat. Phone location is not a valid alibi in court. As you pointed out with your example here, it only proves your phone was at a location not that you were so it isn't accepted as an alibi. Police use phone location to generate leads not as evidence in court to prove someone they charged was at a location. They need better evidence than that in court to prove someone committed a crime.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
brokenmachine 3y ago
"We have proof you were there. Will you risk 10 years in jail, or take this plea bargain? Are you feelin' lucky, punk?"

mleo 3y ago

I was a on a jury back in 2002 where the prosecutor was presenting cell tower data to show the suspect was in the area. We are at 20 years from then and people are still committing crimes with their phones on, and the phone is more part of daily lives now.

hnburnsy 3y ago

Google also tracks your app interactions so leaving your phone at home, switched on but not showing any interactions is possibly telling the authorties something.