Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Shares Data With Arkansas Prosecutor In Murder Case (ap.org)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Associated Press: Amazon dropped its fight against a subpoena issued in an Arkansas murder case after the defendant said he wouldn't mind if the technology giant shared information that may have been gathered by an Amazon Echo smart speaker. James Andrew Bates has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of Victor Collins, who was found dead in a hot tub at Bates' home. In paperwork filed Monday, Bates said Amazon could share the information and Amazon said it handed over material on Friday. The Echo "listens" for key words and may have recorded what went on before Collins was found dead in November 2015. Amazon had fought a subpoena, citing its customers' privacy rights. A hearing had been set for Wednesday on whether any information gathered was even pertinent.
If Amazon Echo records voice in the home
It only records the sentence following the keyword, which by default is "Alexa".
there is a law in California that you are not allowed to record voice without consent , are all Amazon Echo customers in California breaking the law?
No. It is illegal to intentionally record someone without their consent or notification. Incidental unintentional recordings are not illegal. So an inadvertent recording by a false trigger would not be illegal.
Probably their guests being murdered didn't know they were also being recorded.
If they did, they could just say "Alexa, I am being murdered. Please call 911!
Anyway, this murder took place in Arkansas, which is a "one party" notification state. So you can record without consent or notification as long as you are a participant in the conversation.
There is a test for that...
https://xkcd.com/1807/
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
"Don't talk to the cops" is good advice when you are being arrested, or pulled over for something because you're not a lawyer, and you don't know all the tricks the cops have.
This guy does have a lawyer though, and the lawyer knows all the tricks, and has determined that it is ok to let the recordings be released. I can't really comment wisely on that topic, but I can pretend to:
*) The lawyer may think that the recordings will help the case.
*) The lawyer may have decided that the recordings would probably be released anyway, so might as well cut to the chase.
*) The lawyer might think the openness will help the case.
*) The lawyer might think his client is guilty and hopes he goes to jail.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."