Unwise — Search History of Murder Methods

nonprofiteer writes "Mark Jensen's home computer revealed Internet searches for botulism, poisoning, pipe bombs and mercury fulminate. A website was visited that explained how to reverse the polarity of a swimming pool — the Jensens had a pool — by switching the wires around, likening the result to the 4th of July. The State pointed out the absence of Internet searches on topics like separation, divorce, child custody or marital property. Julie Jensen died as a result of ethylene glycol in her system, an ingredient found in antifreeze. On the morning of her death, someone attempted to 'double-delete' (apparently unsuccessfully) the computer's browsing history, which included a search for 'ethylene glycol poisoning.'" What if searches for devious, undetectable methods of murder were in everyone's history?

Comments

timothy...

[angus77]

timothy, you're an asshole.

Re:timothy...

[icebike]

May not matter if you click it or not, depending on how much pre-fetching your browser does.

Re:timothy...

[hairyfeet]

Which is why I think URL shortening should be banned. I mean what if some troll decides a rick roll or Goatse isn't nasty enough, and decides to trollbomb with CP instead? Nowadays your browser cache and history can and will be used against you in a court of law, which I'm sure gives many trolls a pitter patter of glee in their twisted little hearts.

So as long as we have shortening of URLs and allow the cops to use browser cache as "evidence" then trolls are gonna be a hell of a lot worse threat than ever before. I mean how many average folks can even tell you how to delete much less secure delete, the browser cache and search history? Hell I'm constantly trying out new browsers and don't have a clue on how to do a secure delete on Chromium based like Dragon or the more funky rare browsers like Kmeleon CCF Me, do you?

Re:timothy...

[w0mprat]

Similar problem, I write Slashdot comments and this results in many searches to sound like I know what I am talking about.

Re:timothy...

[Eivind]

Exactly. Nobody will get a murder-conviction from search-history.

But combine a dead wife with a motive, no alibi, access to the poision used to kill her, search-history indicating interest in the same poision from which she died and other clues, and the sum total, may add up to a conviction.

Or, if there was enough evidence for a conviction already, search-history such as this, could help prove that the murder was pre-planned and not a spur-of-the-moment kind of thing.

Re:timothy...

[Bob9113]

Which is why I think URL shortening should be banned. ... So as long as we have shortening of URLs and allow the cops to use browser cache as "evidence" then trolls are gonna be a hell of a lot worse threat than ever before.

I think you may be shooting the wrong messenger, or something like that. The problem is not URL shorteners, it is that courts are allowed to use what you have been reading as evidence against you. This causes a chilling effect on research. While I think "what he read" in this case is outstanding evidence of his guilt, we must consider the greater societal cost of creating an inhibition to studying unsavory topics.

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are sullied when the right to hear and read such free expressions is harmed. To take a more prosaic case; suppose a person were fired from his job, asserted that it was without cause, and in the eventual court proceedings to follow the corporation used the person's cached searches for "WikiLeaks" to support an assertion that they believed the person posed a threat to the corporation's information security. Or simply got a subpoena for the person's browser history to go fishing for cause. Suddenly any unsavory search puts you at risk of being terminated without cause (which may not be a big deal for all people, but there are many jobs where with-cause versus without-cause is a substantive issue).

Chilling effects are not limited to speech and press. They can inhibit the practical value of free speech and free press by inhibiting the consumption of such free expression. Ultimately we must choose whether it is more important to make it easier to convict criminals, or to have the ability to study and discuss our society -- even the ugly bits -- without fear of reprisal. That may not be an easy question to answer, but it is the rational context in which the full weight of the dichotomy must be considered.

Huh?

[Kenshin]

What if searches for devious, undetectable methods of murder were in everyone's history?

If I'm not mistaken, you're condoning the murder of his wife?

There are all sorts of lines to cross ...

[ScentCone]

... and they get crossed on /. all the time. But this one has a certain special stink to it. Is Timothy working on some sort of special asshat merit badge or something?

Re:Police Doing Actual Police Work?

[niado]

How awful is it that detectives were able to discover that her husband searched for information on the exact thing that killed her shortly before her death, along with other methods of killing someone. On top of that he attempted to delete traces of it. This is an invasion of piracy.

Normally in murder cases the significant other of the victim is the primary suspect. As such I would assume (Didn't RTFA so not sure if there is more detail) that it was pretty easy to get a warrant for his house, computer, bank statements, etc. etc.

Okay, I don't follow this...

[pushing-robot]

After Mark Jensen’s wife died mysteriously in 1998, he consented to police searching his home for causes.

In October 1998, the Jensens’ home computer revealed that searches for various means of death coincided with e-mails between Jensen and his then-paramour, Kelly, discussing how they planned to deal with their respective spouses and begin “cleaning up [their] lives” so they could be together and take a cruise the next year.

So it sounds like a dumb criminal got caught by police doing their job. Is Slashdot so far toward the anarchist fringe that this is being spun...

from the unless-everybody-joins-in dept.

What if searches for devious, undetectable methods of murder were in everyone's history?

as some sort of The People vs. Big Brother thing?

Say what?

[rueger]

Believe it or not, I'm not new here, but this has to be the most garbled incoherent summary in memory.

"reverse the polarity of a swimming pool"
"likening the result to the 4th of July"
"someone attempted to 'double-delete' the computer's browsing history"

I guess if I knew who the hell "Mark Jensen" was it might make more sense. Better run out and read some tabloids.

Re:Say what?

[sjames]

We all know that small miracles can be accomplished by reversing the polarity. Sometimes you can even propel your ship into an alternate dimension that way! However, IIRC it was a virus rather than reversing the polarity that won the day in Independence Day.

As for deletion, double deleting is for hacks, the pros prefer to triple dog delete.

Bravo, timothy

[gregmark]

Let the grumpy-pants anarchy-baiters grumble. The system can always use more disorder, whatever its present condition.

Search evidence fails standard of reasonable doubt

[mysidia]

If you looked back into my search history far enough, you could probably find places where I searched for all those different things in the past.

I wouldn't need to search for any website to tell me how to reverse polarity of a swimming pool motor, because it's basic electronics..

And yet, I have not murdered and will not murder anyone using those or any other methods.

Is it reasonable to suspect people of murder just because they have in the past searched for, found, or viewed material, that might relate to methods used by the murderer?

How is it even proven that the searches are born of some intent, and not merely idle curiosity, or FEAR for ones own safety?

• Searches for: botulism. This is something every person needs to know about, because it poses a danger to everyone who eats food. People can protect themselves if they have some understanding of what the danger is, where you could be exposed to the toxin, how it could reach your mouth, how to detect it, how to recognize the first signs, what to do, etc
• Searches for: poisoning. Same deal; it is a good idea to know what methods people might try to use to poison you, especially if you think someone is after you. A search for poisoning can relate to (as much) detecting/knowing if you're poisoned and/or what to do to protect/preserve life.
• Searches for: pipe bombs. There were several high-profile media events. It would probably be a good idea for members of the general public to understand what exactly a pipe bomb is, how to recognize it, and who to contact or what to do (LEAVE QUICKLY/RUN), if you think you see what might be an explosive device that could threaten your life.
• Searches for: mercury fulminate. Again, being able to recognize the signs of mercury poisoning is a good idea. People learn more about a subject by hearing about it, and then looking up materials on the subject.

Would police have made such a deal of simple searches, if they were done by looking up books on the subject at the library? Would a list of books checked out seriously be used to convict an alleged suspect?

Re:Police Doing Actual Police Work?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an amazing post. Except for "And destroying evidence is illegal, every sentence in that post is wrong (assuming you're referring to the USA, at least).

Re:For how long?

[wizardforce]

"I give you consent to search my apartment for the purpose of catching a thief" is not the same as "I give you the eternal right to search my premises for any and all reasons." Once their investigation concludes, the permission you gave them goes away. At least that's what would be sane; we could, of course, have a few idiot judges that failed history class give huge power to the state...