FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics. |
Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |||
|
||||
The voice of reason
|
anything we can do to make police work easier is a very good thing
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | ||
|
|||
-
|
At the very most, advocating the police having full, free access to someone's phone is ridiculous, because of the number of personal things that could be on there totally unrelated to the case. Naked selfies? Who doesn't have a few of those on their phone? And that's just a start.
If there IS good reason for a phone to be searched, surely the obvious answer is that the relevant data (data from the time of the alleged attack and since the attack - NOTHING prior is relevant IMO) should be accessed and documented in the presence of the phone's owner and a lawyer? I think a major part of the problem here is that it takes a hell of a lot of trust (and from someone who has potentially just lost all of their trust in the human race) to believe that some random police officer will only access the relevant data, and won't go looking through messages and pictures going back months / years just because they feel like being nosy. Or digging through personal messages that have absolutely nothing to do with the case. Contents of a phone might contain important evidence but "full unrestricted access" is overkill and asking far too much. Like I said, I would be VERY hesitant to give anyone unrestricted access to my phone or computer willingly, and it's not because it's got anything incriminating on it, it's just ****ing private. It also just increases the risk all round to be honest because in some communities, if people don't feel like the police are an option for whatever reason, it just ends up with family members deciding to take action for themselves and that's when even more people end up getting hurt ![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |||
|
||||
Flag shagger.
|
How many times have to seen a TV show where cops walk in and pick up all the tech, computers, laptops... it's not a new thing.
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Surely that's only when the crime relates to the tech specifically though, like financial crime or illegal pornography or dealing drugs / guns / whatever else online...
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |||
|
||||
Flag shagger.
|
Not exclusively... I think the CPS and the police have a hard time with rape cases mostly because of their previous inertia, but I have said before... this law is rather like a hammer to crack a walnut.
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | ||
|
|||
thesheriff443
|
Phones are not that safe or private, in most cases if you lose a phone or it’s nicked it can be taken to a corner shop and be unlocked for a tenner giving who ever has your phone access to its contents.
Deleted files contacts, messages, pictures and videos can be retrieved, saved phone contents can be hacked, celeb nudes is an example. Criminals use pay as you go phones as they harder to trace to an individual. In the case of Shannon Mathews, the home computer was siezed and her mums partner was later convicted of viewing sexual images involving children. |
||
![]() |
Register to reply Log in to reply |
|
|