Although this had some relevance in establishing motive and mood, it was too rough and may have unreasonably influenced the jury, the court said. Harris was no longer seen as a murderer and the state decided not to try him again.
But he was not released from prison because his phone had also revealed “lewd and sometimes illegal sexual messages and photographs with four minors,” which landed him in jail on separate charges. he finally went launched in 2025.
Or there is the case of the Florida woman accused of strangling and robbing his own friend for money to buy drugs. An hour before the murder, police say the woman searched for:
- “chemical products to make a person faint”
- “making people faint”
- “Ways to kill people while they sleep”
- “how to suffocate someone”
- “how to poison someone”
Supposedly this was in addition to visiting Yahoo! Answer page called “What’s in those rags that make people faint?” and a Wikipedia entry for “murder-suicide.”
Our phones, our confessors
From nude photographs to questions about dead children and “luxury prisons for the rich,” our devices have become such a part of our lives that there is almost nothing that people don’t trust them with.
This extreme confidence contrasts uncomfortably with extreme paranoia about our devices. For years, as just one example, many people have asked if Facebook listens to their microphone without the company’s permission. an official response.
But as examples like the above illustrate, there is little reason for companies to resort to direct spying like this, because users simply can’t wait to voluntarily divulge the most intimate details of their minds and bodies. Even if you’re a pro using privacy mode, your search history may be just a quick citation away.
