A 2015 Arkansas murder case that had raised privacy questions surrounding "always-on" electronic home devices took a step forward last week after Amazon agreed to release recordings from the murder defendant's Amazon Echo as possible evidence.
The Seattle-based e-commerce company had refused to comply with police warrants requesting the data in December and sought to quash a search warrant in February, court records showed. Although the company would not comment on this specific case, an Amazon spokeswoman told The Washington Post in December that it objected to "overbroad or otherwise inappropriate demands as a matter of course."
That changed after the defendant, James Andrew Bates, agreed Friday to allow Amazon to release data from his Echo device to prosecutors. The company turned over the recordings later that day, according to court records.
"Because Mr. Bates is innocent of all charges in this matter, he has agreed to the release of any recordings on his Amazon Echo device to the prosecution," attorneys Kathleen Zellner and Douglas Johnson said in a statement to The Washington Post.
-- submitted from IRC
Previously: Police Seek Amazon Echo Data in Murder Case and Amazon Continues to Resist Requests for "Alexa" Audio Evidence in Arkansas Murder Case
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mhajicek on Saturday March 11 2017, @10:59PM (1 child)
Indeed. From what I've read, if you ask an echo who it works for, it will truthfully say it works for Amazon. It does not work for you, even though you paid for it and "own" it.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 14 2017, @10:24AM
Indeed. From what I've read, if you ask an echo who it works for, it will truthfully say it works for Amazon. It does not work for you, even though you paid for it and "own" it.
Don't get saucy with me, Bernaise! [youtube.com]
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr