Comment

Comment by ThePowerOfFuet

>this only happens when the phone contents are deemed relevant to the investigation

Perhaps you stopped reading the article part way through?

> Olivia (not her real name) reported being drugged and attacked by strangers. Police asked for seven years of phone data, and her case was dropped after she refused. “My phone documents many of the most personal moments in my life and the thought of strangers combing through it, to try to use it against me, makes me feel like I’m being violated once again,” she said.

“This isn’t about trying to stop the police from putting together the facts of the case. This isn’t about objecting to the police downloading information from the time that it happened. This is about objecting to the police downloading seven years of information that pre-dates the event and therefore has zero relevance.

“I kept trying to ask them if the data that they took could be restricted just to the period of time of relevance to what actually happened, and they said no.

“They told me that if I didn’t consent, they may just drop the case and may not proceed with it. They have now dropped the case citing one of the reasons being that I have not handed over seven years of my personal life which is of complete and utter irrelevance to that one night.

“I am willing to hand over the information that is relevant to what happened – I’m not willing to hand over seven years’ worth of information that is totally and utterly irrelevant.”

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton