Police Used Cell Tower Logs To Text 7,500 Possible Crime Witnesses (www.cbc.ca)

"Investigators are calling it a 'digital canvass' -- the high-tech equivalent of knocking on thousands of doors for information," reports the CBC, describing how an Ontario police department sent text messages to 7,500 potential witnesses of a homicide using phone numbers from a nearby cell tower's logs. Police obtained the numbers through a court order, and sent two texts -- one in English, and another one in French -- asking recipients to "voluntarily answer a few simple questions..." Slashdot reader itamblyn writes: On one hand, this seems like the natural progression from the traditional approach of canvassing local residents by putting up flyers and knocking on doors. On the other hand, I think one can reasonably ask -- Are we OK with this approach...? Do we want this to happen whenever there is a major crime?
The article adds that the police force "will keep the numbers on file until the killing is solved, officers said at a news conference on Wednesday... Investigators will also consider calling the numbers of people who don't respond voluntarily, but they would be required to obtain another court order to do so."

Comments

Re:Slippery slope

[Anonymous Coward]

The OPP went to a judge to obtain permissions to do this, the judge was explained that firstly they wanted to get a court order to receive the Cell tower data from the providers and told the judge their intended use to send texts to users. This was done through the court system as required. It should be noted that it's not much different than Amber Alert texts sent out in bulk requesting information.

The more interesting component from a legal standpoint will be how this plays out and if people feel coerced and if that's a factor in any court case resultant from it.

Re: fucking hell that's horrendous

[Anonymous Coward]

I am perfectly happy for them to do what ever it takes to catch a murderer.

No you aren't. Locking everyone up would catch a murderer, but you're clearly not happy with that. Forcing everyone to wear cameras 24/7 taping what they do for later review would catch a murderer, but you're clearly not happy with that. Collecting everyone's DNA in advance would significantly help catch murderers - would you be happy with that?

something you might just have to accept, because democracy.

"because democracy" has justified some of the worst oppressions. There are times when the majority of voters would vote for horrible things but constitutions or the people's representatives (MPs/Congress/whatever) have put a brake on it. This is why most modern democracies are better described as democratic republics.

Now if this was in an authoritarian dictatorship or if they hadn't used court oversight prior to obtaining this information you might be on to something,

It's up to the legislature what a court can grant permission for - the separation of powers makes things better, but it does not make every given behaviour acceptable.

but instead you sound like a whining teenager who doesn't like the idea of their parents telling then what to do.

Oh, I see the problem - I see government as existing to serve the people, whereas you see them like parents. Well, no.

It all comes down to whether you think people should have the right to commit crime and get away with harming others.

I think the government exists fundamentally to protect freedoms. That means that the freedoms of millions of innocent bystanders are more important than the desire to capture one miscreant, even if they have created one victim. One murder sucks, but it sucks less than denying privacy to everyone in the country.

Obtained through court order

[lbalbalba]

Since the cell tower's logs and phone numbers were obtained legally and transparently through a court order, I don't particularly see the problem here. I would if they had been obtained without a court order, in secret, by using a hack or a stingray device or something similar, but that isn't the case here.

Re:Obtained through court order

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the reason people find this creepy is because, out of nowhere, they received a text from the police that says:
We know where you were that day.

You don't find it scary that the people authorized to use violence and kidnapping are stalking you?

Re:fucking hell that's horrendous

[BlackPignouf]

+1.
I was a witness once, never again. The police took a picture of me and send it to the victim, just to make sure I wasn't the culprit. She said "maybe", so I spent a night in a cell. You don't want to be falsely accused of something just because the local police station wants to improve the stats and you're the only person they could find who was near the crime scene.
ACAB.

Re: fucking hell that's horrendous

[smallfries]

Completely false reasoning. You assume that revealing the information to the police was the only way to get the desired effect: notifying everyone in the vicinity.

The police could have made a request to the carrier to send the message on their behalf to every subscriber in the logs WITHOUT revealing any of the phone numbers. The loss of privacy was completely unnecessary.