4 ms·

This is something I was wondering about as well. Would evidence gathered in this way be admissible in court? I worry that once the general public gets ahold of

by evan_ 14y ago

This is something I was wondering about as well. Would evidence gathered in this way be admissible in court? I worry that once the general public gets ahold of it, it would simply become a "middle-eastern-looking person finder".

jbaudanza 14y ago
Yes that would be unfortunate. I would like this to be a "crowdsource" tool, not a "mobsource" tool. I'm open to ideas on how to prevent that. Maybe moderation?
- evan_ 14y ago
  Maybe rather than focusing on finding the culprit, the crowd could simply try to identify and account for the movements of everyone present during some time window.
  - shocks 14y ago
    This, or give people objectives rather than just stabbing in the dark. The AP[1] is reporting the bombs were in black duffel bags containing 6ltr pressure cookers. Make people look for them instead of "anything suspicious". [1]: http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/16/some-areas-downtown-boston-reopen-today-boston-marathon-bombing-investigation-continues/qTROe6L0b98qRl9W7dnWiJ/story.html http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/16/some-areas-downtown-...
spikels 14y ago
I'm no lawyer but I don't we why it wouldn't be admissible unless it somehow violated the perpetrators rights. Even then since we are not the police the situation might be different. Anyone know for sure? There must be rules of evidence that cover this situation.
- berberous 14y ago
  I think there may be issues with authentication. Usually, you would have a witness authenticate a photo ("yes, i took this with my camera at this day and time, etc."). If it's a random photo on a website, it may be more difficult to prove its accuracy.
  - spikels 14y ago
    Seems like there would be two stages: (1) solve the crime and (2) gather the evidence. Seems like as long as the evidence is not tampered with it would still be usable in court. For example uploading a picture shouldn't destroy its value as evidence.
- jbaudanza 14y ago
  Even if it's not admissible, it may provide helpful leads.

by evan_ 14y ago

jbaudanza 14y ago

Yes that would be unfortunate. I would like this to be a "crowdsource" tool, not a "mobsource" tool. I'm open to ideas on how to prevent that. Maybe moderation?

evan_ 14y ago
Maybe rather than focusing on finding the culprit, the crowd could simply try to identify and account for the movements of everyone present during some time window.
- shocks 14y ago
  This, or give people objectives rather than just stabbing in the dark. The AP[1] is reporting the bombs were in black duffel bags containing 6ltr pressure cookers. Make people look for them instead of "anything suspicious". [1]: http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/16/some-areas-downtown-boston-reopen-today-boston-marathon-bombing-investigation-continues/qTROe6L0b98qRl9W7dnWiJ/story.html http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/16/some-areas-downtown-...

spikels 14y ago

I'm no lawyer but I don't we why it wouldn't be admissible unless it somehow violated the perpetrators rights. Even then since we are not the police the situation might be different. Anyone know for sure? There must be rules of evidence that cover this situation.

berberous 14y ago
I think there may be issues with authentication. Usually, you would have a witness authenticate a photo ("yes, i took this with my camera at this day and time, etc."). If it's a random photo on a website, it may be more difficult to prove its accuracy.
- spikels 14y ago
  Seems like there would be two stages: (1) solve the crime and (2) gather the evidence. Seems like as long as the evidence is not tampered with it would still be usable in court. For example uploading a picture shouldn't destroy its value as evidence.
jbaudanza 14y ago
Even if it's not admissible, it may provide helpful leads.