Your Google Searches May Be Used Against You In A Court Of Law
from the so-you-know... dept
While there appears a ton of other evidence (digital and otherwise), one of the pieces of evidence in the murder trial of a man accused of killing his wife was that he searched for "neck snap break" on Google soon before he allegedly killed her. It sounds like prosecutors figured this out just from looking at his computer, rather than by getting the info from Google. Either way, for the potential criminals among our readers, perhaps you shouldn't Google up stuff related to your crime before committing it.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
You computer keeps copies of everything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You computer keeps copies of everything.
I tried every combination and looked through tons of pages. I can't find shit about breaking someone's neck.
I then proceeded to find articles about how to break a neck using my own personal searching techniques. I couldn't find shit.
http://www.totse.com/en/bad_ideas/irresponsible_activities/22kill.html
That url is to an article containing "22 ways to kill a man with your bare hands."
None of the 22 ways to kill someone from that article would seem like an accident.
I'm not buying anything the prosecution has on this guy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You computer keeps copies of everything.
For me, the first place to search is the history of the web browsers...
Sounds like a set up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You computer keeps copies of everything.
It’s scary to think such a piece of evidence is used without knowledge of its authenticity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tracking perps online
Could this murder have been prevented by scanning popular search engines and evil how-to sites?
OTOH how many of us want our web adventures monitored, databanked, and reviewed for possible 'criminal potential'?
And how long would it take before 'criminal potential' morphs into 'politically undesireable' and then 'liquidation'?
How do we get past having to choose between saving lives and saving freedom?
Is there a way to accomplish both?
The pragmatist in me says prevent or minimize death and destruction.
The idealist in me says preserve individual freedom and privacy.
Heh, our present administration seems unable to do either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
Your freedom is worth much more than this government wants you to beleve. They give you the preseption that it is better for "us" to let the goverment control what they determan what is right for us...
Only "the people" should have the right to choose what we consider is an important freedom.
I would much rather have the right to own a gun, with the thought that some one else will have a gun and possably harm me with it, than the government just say that know one can have a gun except for us the "government" because of the millitary or some other bullshit excuse. If this were to happen we the "people will not have anyway to stop the "government from wanlong into owr homes and doing what ever the fuck they want because they are the ones wi the guns... This also goes along with damn near any other "Freedom/righs/safty" issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
Jerimy: ahhh terorist BANG
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tracking perps online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Googling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Googling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Googling
Also, web investigations and tracking have exposed a city official in Spokane, WA. trolling for homosexual partners and offering them city employment.
A separate incident resulted in the arrest of an individual researching and purchasing ingredients to make ricin -- a very lethal poison.
The downside comes when people (usually in authority) misuse technology to attack others who are on their enemies list.
The problem is how to protect the public while also assuring their freedom and privacy.
Prehistoric man faced a similar problem with fire, which could protect him or kill him.
Many millenia later fires continue to warm us and harm us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Googling
but what of the situation, where more than one person are living in a house... and multiple people use the same computer, how do you then prove who actually looked at what? I live with 3 other people, with 5 computers in the house, we all use all the different computers at different times...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Digital Evidence
Windows has had numerous zero-day exploits for the entire history of the OS.
Police shouldn't look for a shortcut around good traditional forensic work in "digital" evidence.
(And I agree that these criminals need to get caught, just realize any defense attorney with a teensy bit of understanding of computers is going to have this thrown out very quickly.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Digital Evidence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Digital Evidence
In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.” --Pastor Martin Niemöller, 1945
Food for thought.
Eventually the little things add up to bigger things. By then it's generally too late to do anything but scream.
I'd rather fight to keep the freedom's I have.
There are no shades of grey when it comes to evidence that may or may not lead to a conviction in what, in some states, could be a capital offence (Meaning they kill you). Evidence HAS to be 100% or what is the point?
You can't go up under oath in a court of law and state, "We're not 100% sure the search was done by the defendant, but that it was on his computer and found sometime later, it has to be his".
That right there introduces "Resonable Doubt". No prosecutor in his right mind would try to bring in evidence that wasn't clearly an asset to the case.
So, to you patrick, shame on you, just because it doesnt affect you now, it might. Then what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Digital Evidence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Digital Evidence
> That right there introduces "Resonable Doubt". No prosecutor in his right mind would try to bring in evidence that wasn't clearly an asset to the case.
In some countries/courts/cases you also have the concept of `balance of probability'. Treat it for what it is: a single data-point of evidence with error-margins around it. Let the prosecution raise it, but also let the defendants counter if they can.
Personally I'm sort-of glad they actually found it on his computer - one hears a lot of them being taken and not so much of the outcomes. Plus it's better than the RIAA/MPAA approach where they need to prove a link between "something to do with this IP#" and a given person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Search Profiles
But using this info in the Court as evidence sounds baffling as there is no way to establish whether the search qery was actually performed by the particular person. For instance I keep my self logged into Google with "remember me" option. In my absence it could be misused.
Andy
Da Tek ee
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
He got life in Jail....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nice Headline Grabbing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
in that case
Surely then there would be no way to prove who was searching for what.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: in that case
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll frame you if I want...
Think it can't really happen?? Do a quick search on the case of Julian Green in 2002. One of countless examples....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wtf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: wtf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pretty Misleading
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why
Jurors, judges, and attorneys no very little about technology. They use expert witnesses, but that only goes so far. It isn't the same as the attorney knowing the technology.
There is little doubt in my mind that there are a substantial number of people who sit in prison today because they were framed using computers. During trial, the right questions weren't asked; the right case wasn't made. And something that was just a sequence of bits on a hard drive was distorted as if it were the same as a pool of blood.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I may finally
I see my computer as an extension of my mind and I believe I have the right to know anything I deem interesting and as long as I do not inflict harm on another person and do not solicit others to do so my privacy should be respected. I am glad that several US supreme court justices believe that the bill of rights guarantees a right to privacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Almost right
You should Goolge stuff up, just be sure it's on the PC of a plasuable suspect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google
What a Moron!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google-ing
NoMorePoints.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
Trading freedom for an illusion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think we've missed an important point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wat the heck
-SPARKO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: wat the heck
the searches were found ON THE SUSPECT's computer. Google doesn't store that. Take the fact that they are one of the largest search engines and then multiply the amount of storage it would take to catalog everyone's search terms, ip addresses, etc.
Forensics on computers are very involved and very detailed. You can try to plant evidence all you want, we'll figure it out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: wat the heck
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Heh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ha!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
google searches
[ link to this | view in chronology ]