
Flaws in Cellphone Evidence Prompt Review of 10k Verdicts in Denmark - JetSpiegel
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/20/world/europe/denmark-cellphone-data-courts.html
======
tych0
At least the authorities looking at them. In the states we have to rely on
stuff like the Innocence Project, unfortunately.

~~~
numakerg
And they're not perfect either.

[https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reaso...](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-
doubt/480747/)

\- Innocence Project doesn't take on cases where DNA link was established

\- Man served four years for sexual assault after his DNA was found to be
“consistent” with samples from the victim

\- Turns out the DNA testing failed to establish a match between two of his
own samples

\- This evidence was not presented to the jury

\- Lab tech makes numerous errors but is cleared because their lawyer
demonstrated that here errors "were a product of systemic failures that
included inadequate supervision".

~~~
pmoriarty
Are there any independent organizations which regularly audit these and other
crime labs?

------
kawsper
It's worth noting that the European Court of Justice has deemed this form of
logging to be in violation of human rights, but the danish government
continues to do it and our old minister of justice have said they need time to
revise the law, there is a group that are fighting it and you can read more
about it on their website :
[https://ulovliglogning.dk/en/](https://ulovliglogning.dk/en/)

~~~
toxik
I thought this was really well articulated, goes for all mass surveillance:

> But why?

> You might not think that your secrets are worth keeping, but with enough
> data, everyone’s a suspect. Maybe you’ve sent a Merry Christmas text to the
> suspect of an ongoing investigation? Maybe you’ve googled “manure” the week
> before a homemade bomb is found?

> Maybe you’re the only person with a mobile phone that’s been near the scene
> of a crime, and maybe you’d just bought binliners. Mass surveillance flips
> the burden of proof. Your movements are recorded and can be used against
> you, but not in your defense. You might have left your phone at home on
> purpose.

~~~
kmlx
> but not in your defense

why not in my defence? i mean, my smartphone already knows everything about
me, so why not use it for my defence?

~~~
toxik
That’s not how mass surveillance works, you don’t have access to the same
information, and you don’t even know what information there is to even request
in the first place. It’s asymmetrical.

------
inetsee
A non-New York Times discussion of the issues:
[https://www.enmnews.com/2019/08/20/flaws-in-cellphone-
eviden...](https://www.enmnews.com/2019/08/20/flaws-in-cellphone-evidence-
prompt-review-of-10000-verdicts-in-denmark/)

~~~
p1necone
Is there some issue with the NYT specifically? I'm out of the loop. Edit: Oh,
pay/account wall, right.

------
lone_haxx0r
> “We cannot live with incorrect information sending people to prison.”

Don't trust data given by third parties then.

~~~
penagwin
> The authorities said that the problems stemmed partly from police I.T.
> systems and partly from the phone companies’ systems, although a telecom
> industry representative said he could not understand how phone companies
> could have caused the errors.

It appears data came from the telecom companies and straight to the police's
IT department. I'm not sure what parties you're referring to?

Unless you're suggesting not to use data from telecom companies? In which case
how would they get any records at all?

~~~
lone_haxx0r
The telecom company is the third party.

Yes, I'm suggesting to not use data from telecom companies, unless they have a
way to prove that said data is real.

~~~
dagw
The problem in this case wasn't the third party data, but an error in how that
data was analysed and presented. By all accounts the raw data from the telecom
companies was both complete and correct.

~~~
lone_haxx0r
I'm talking about the general case.

Maybe in this specific case the telecom data was correct, but can you assure
the same for every datum ever provided?

Trusting telecom data is essentially the same as trusting an eyewitness.

The eyewitness says the truth sometimes, but you can't trust them as an
infallible source of truth.

------
chiefalchemist
"The national police determined that the flaws applied to 10,700 court cases
dating to 2012, but it is unclear whether the faulty data was a decisive
factor in any verdicts."

What are their (privacy) laws like, and what types of illegalities would
generate that many cases so quickly?

~~~
zaarn
They're probably investigating all court cases that had phone evidence
submitted, even if it wasn't crucial to the case or even used or which side
used it. It might be that most of these are simply normal court cases where
someone texted someone else or made a phone call, either proving their
innocence or not.

------
mirimir
That's a _lot_ of cases involving cellphone tracking. In a country with only
~six million people.

Or am I just out of touch? Does every criminal case now involve cellphone
tracking data?

~~~
cstpdk
It is, sadly, a lot. And it's trending upwards. As mentioned above it's a
human rights violation but unfortunately we are relying on NGO's to try and
stop it (they are raising money for trials against the government). The
political will to stop this is sadly sorely missed

~~~
tremon
Doesn't it simply take one convicted to bring this matter before the ECHR? Or
is this what the collected funds will be used for?

------
dominicr
We've been conditioned to believe that some evidence is infallible, such as
technology based tracking and even DNA evidence. Whilst people might
embellish, lie or simply have bad recall, we think technology is near perfect.
The reality is that this can often be flawed or indicative, and not always a
certain proof of guilt. A lot of this technology, or advances in it, is new
and I imagine not everyone is keeping up with the full implications.

~~~
jmnicolas
Exactly, here is the equivalent article for DNA :
[https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reaso...](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-
doubt/480747/)

------
sysbin
Hmm, would have the people prosecuted by evidence of inaccurate gps
coordinates, been effected if they had used an iOS jailbreak and or android
device to constantly fake a GPS location? Or is the gps coordinates being
logged from an external point of location and that's predicting the phone's
whereabouts. Basically, not being received from the phone.

~~~
Aloha
It's using tower based records, which determine what sector/site the customer
is in

------
duxup
How many cases are there where "well the cell phone data said he was there" is
what decided it?

