No, for a number of reasons. The police can't verify when they met. The police can't verify when the laptop was purchased. The police can't verify that the data from before hasn't been transfered to that laptop. The offence could be on going and the police haven't disclosed that they know.
Indeed! It seems a few people have issue with the fact the partner is being embroiled into the situation and the timing of events... Fact is, the OP has just given a snippet of info, but more to the point, people LIE... CONCEAL and EVADE when criminal activity is involved...
You can't just not investigate because someone tells you 'we weren't together then' or 'he never used my laptop' etc... You cannot take people's word in such matters, proof and excluding individuals is part of the investigation and evidentiary processing.
Oh dear. The fact they have taken things to do with computers/ipads/mobile phones/ digital media etc might mean the alleged offence could be something possibly involving a sexually motivated offence, hence the need to examine all digital things in the household.
I would get in touch with a solicitor asap.
What?!?!? There could be any number of reasons for taking computers/phones that have nothing whatsoever to do with sexual offences.
what a crass assumption to make.
No, for a number of reasons. The police can't verify when they met. The police can't verify when the laptop was purchased. The police can't verify that the data from before hasn't been transferred to that laptop. The offence could be on going and the police haven't disclosed that they know.
You're right, and even if they were able to verify when the laptop was purchased it still wouldn't make any difference. There could well be evidence of emails, chat logs, Skype records etc. in which the case has been discussed. All of these would be potentially recoverable by a computer forensic examiner.
Search warrant in partner's name but police took my things! Is this allowed?
My recommendation would to contact one of the legal practices in the LawWorks Clinic network because they can give free legal advice which can then be acted upon.
Indeed! It seems a few people have issue with the fact the partner is being embroiled into the situation and the timing of events... Fact is, the OP has just given a snippet of info, but more to the point, people LIE... CONCEAL and EVADE when criminal activity is involved...
The issue is that if the OP is telling the truth, the police are preventing them from using their own property for a period which is well beyond what most people would consider reasonable, apparently because it will take over a year to establish whether the property can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
If the OP isn't telling the truth then it should not take over a year to find that out either.
The issue is that if the OP is telling the truth, the police are preventing them from using their own property for a period which is well beyond what most people would consider reasonable, apparently because it will take over a year to establish whether the property can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
If the OP isn't telling the truth then it should not take over a year to find that out either.
I assume the OP is telling the truth. I assume the OP is a she, and the partner may have been a naughty boy, in which case the wheels of justice may grind exceeding slow.
Perhaps a brief can help release the laptop, but it wont be cheap I expect
The issue is that if the OP is telling the truth, the police are preventing them from using their own property for a period which is well beyond what most people would consider reasonable, apparently because it will take over a year to establish whether the property can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
If the OP isn't telling the truth then it should not take over a year to find that out either.
Fact is, it will take as long as it takes, although I must say I'd wager that they were told up to a year, dependent on backlog etc... I've seen estimates given to exceed the reality more often than not.
If it was me, I'd be having some stern words with my OH, finding out what really happened and why such items are being seized...If he's been questioned, he'll have a fair idea what it's about and why it's happening. It can be a wake up call to some people, and there's every chance his involvement is merely innocent, but then again, it might not. Truth is, he will know, and I'd be finding out from him!
The issue is that if the OP is telling the truth, the police are preventing them from using their own property for a period which is well beyond what most people would consider reasonable, apparently because it will take over a year to establish whether the property can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
If the OP isn't telling the truth then it should not take over a year to find that out either.
The thing is, how can the OP be sure that their laptop hasn't been used? Do they really close the lid or lock it everytime they walk away?
At best they can say they have not given the password nor witnessed the partner using it.
I agree is a big problem for the OP, but the laptop needs to be available to both the prosecution and the defence.
No, for a number of reasons. The police can't verify when they met. The police can't verify when the laptop was purchased. The police can't verify that the data from before hasn't been transfered to that laptop. The offence could be on going and the police haven't disclosed that they know.
Thank you. It's interesting (if that's the right word) to learn about procedures.
Fact is, it will take as long as it takes, although I must say I'd wager that they were told up to a year, dependent on backlog etc... I've seen estimates given to exceed the reality more often than not.
Could well be even longer than that - there was a recent Scottish appeal case (about an allegedly excessive period to bring charges after a search warrant was executed), and the computer media they took sat on a shelf for a year before it was even looked at, never mind when they completed gathering evidence and made a decision about whether to charge.
The thing is, how can the OP be sure that their laptop hasn't been used? Do they really close the lid or lock it everytime they walk away?
At best they can say they have not given the password nor witnessed the partner using it.
I agree is a big problem for the OP, but the laptop needs to be available to both the prosecution and the defence.
Maybe it does, but only if it (or the data on it) is going to be produced in evidence.
If it isn't it should be returned to the OP ASAP.
And I don't want to get into a debate about what the police can and can't do, but computers have serial numbers which can be verified with the manufacturers, and files have dates embedded in them. That might not be enough to prove whether someone is guilty or not but they would surely prove whether the laptop was, as the OP claims, bought after the alleged crime was committed.
Maybe it does, but only if it (or the data on it) is going to be produced in evidence.
If it isn't it should be returned to the OP ASAP.
Yes, it should be returned asap, but in order to determine whether there is any evidence is going to take a long time (clearly there is an issue here of resources, as it looks like it will be taking a ridiculously long time to do anything).
And I don't want to get into a debate about what the police can and can't do, but computers have serial numbers which can be verified with the manufacturers, and files have dates embedded in them. That might not be enough to prove whether someone is guilty or not but they would surely prove whether the laptop was, as the OP claims, bought after the alleged crime was committed.
But as has been pointed out in a few posts, the age of the laptop is irrelevant, the partner could have used it for conversations, or copies of files etc.
Until they check, then it can't be determined what the situation is. An examination may even reveal more crimes.
Fortunately, the OP has been given a few links to lawyers that hopefully will help them expedite the situation.
Yes, it should be returned asap, but in order to determine whether there is any evidence is going to take a long time (clearly there is an issue here of resources, as it looks like it will be taking a ridiculously long time to do anything).
But as has been pointed out in a few posts, the age of the laptop is irrelevant, the partner could have used it for conversations, or copies of files etc.
Until they check, then it can't be determined what the situation is. An examination may even reveal more crimes.
Fortunately, the OP has been given a few links to lawyers that hopefully will help them expedite the situation.
If the OP had encrypted their laptop would the police have any grounds to get a requirement under RIPA to ask for the encryption keys, given that the partner isn't actually a suspect?
If the OP had encrypted their laptop would the police have any grounds to get a requirement under RIPA to ask for the encryption keys, given that the partner isn't actually a suspect?
We dont know that the partner isn't a suspect we only have the OP's knowledge of what her partner has told her. There might be lots that he hasnt said to her.
Just browsed the thread and am intrigued about the mobile phone/sim.
How can they justify a person having to keep a sim 'alive' for possibly over a year. What if it's PAYG?
What if it's on contract but the contract runs out?
What if you can't pay and cancel the direct debit?
Just browsed the thread and am intrigued about the mobile phone/sim.
How can they justify a person having to keep a sim 'alive' for possibly over a year. What if it's PAYG?
What if it's on contract but the contract runs out?
What if you can't pay and cancel the direct debit?
This is the part that must be either made up or mistaken because as you say why would you keep doing so
Just browsed the thread and am intrigued about the mobile phone/sim.
How can they justify a person having to keep a sim 'alive' for possibly over a year. What if it's PAYG?
What if it's on contract but the contract runs out?
What if you can't pay and cancel the direct debit?
This is the part that must be either made up or mistaken because as you say why would you keep doing so
There is certainly no policy for doing this so I agree that the OP is probably mistaken on this matter. Forensic phone examinations are carried out in sterile environments using faraday boxes or similar, and the last thing they would want is for the phone to establish a connection of any sort as this could contaminate evidence.
Just browsed the thread and am intrigued about the mobile phone/sim.
How can they justify a person having to keep a sim 'alive' for possibly over a year. What if it's PAYG?
I do think it's possible that they would have been instructed not to kill the phone i.e. not to trigger a remote erase of it, which may have been confused with keeping the contract live.
I do think it's possible that they would have been instructed not to kill the phone i.e. not to trigger a remote erase of it, which may have been confused with keeping the contract live.
Very likely it is something along the lines of 'find my iphone' which has the option to 'erase iphone'
I am sure if this was done they could still 'find' the evidence, But obviously they have asked for this not to be done to make things easier for all involved
I do think it's possible that they would have been instructed not to kill the phone i.e. not to trigger a remote erase of it, which may have been confused with keeping the contract live.
Very likely it is something along the lines of 'find my iphone' which has the option to 'erase iphone'
I am sure if this was done they could still 'find' the evidence, But obviously they have asked for this not to be done to make things easier for all involved
The Police have no power to request that a person keeps a phone contract live.
ACPO guidelines advise that Phones and other mobile devices are switched off as soon as they are seized, and then only powered up for examination purposes (imaging) in a sterile environment with no chance of signals being received from any source.
I do think it's possible that they would have been instructed not to kill the phone i.e. not to trigger a remote erase of it, which may have been confused with keeping the contract live.
tbh that's the first thing I'd be doing if I ever lost control of my phone regardless of who had taken it although although I understand that seized phones are put immediately into faraday bags for this very reason which would prevent it receiving the command to begin wiping. Wish there was an app to get around that by working in reverse e.g automatically wipe if it DOESNT receive a command not to for a preset length of time but as far as I know there are none.
tbh that's the first thing I'd be doing if I ever lost control of my phone regardless of who had taken it although although I understand that seized phones are put immediately into faraday bags for this very reason which would prevent it receiving the command to begin wiping. Wish there was an app to get around that by working in reverse e.g automatically wipe if it DOESNT receive a command not to for a preset length of time but as far as I know there are none.
Yeah a dead man's switch. I've seen an android apk out there that claims to do this, but not within the play library so who knows what sort of malware it may contain
Comments
Indeed! It seems a few people have issue with the fact the partner is being embroiled into the situation and the timing of events... Fact is, the OP has just given a snippet of info, but more to the point, people LIE... CONCEAL and EVADE when criminal activity is involved...
You can't just not investigate because someone tells you 'we weren't together then' or 'he never used my laptop' etc... You cannot take people's word in such matters, proof and excluding individuals is part of the investigation and evidentiary processing.
What?!?!? There could be any number of reasons for taking computers/phones that have nothing whatsoever to do with sexual offences.
what a crass assumption to make.
You're right, and even if they were able to verify when the laptop was purchased it still wouldn't make any difference. There could well be evidence of emails, chat logs, Skype records etc. in which the case has been discussed. All of these would be potentially recoverable by a computer forensic examiner.
My recommendation would to contact one of the legal practices in the LawWorks Clinic network because they can give free legal advice which can then be acted upon.
Link: http://lawworks.org.uk/clinics
The issue is that if the OP is telling the truth, the police are preventing them from using their own property for a period which is well beyond what most people would consider reasonable, apparently because it will take over a year to establish whether the property can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
If the OP isn't telling the truth then it should not take over a year to find that out either.
I assume the OP is telling the truth. I assume the OP is a she, and the partner may have been a naughty boy, in which case the wheels of justice may grind exceeding slow.
Perhaps a brief can help release the laptop, but it wont be cheap I expect
Fact is, it will take as long as it takes, although I must say I'd wager that they were told up to a year, dependent on backlog etc... I've seen estimates given to exceed the reality more often than not.
If it was me, I'd be having some stern words with my OH, finding out what really happened and why such items are being seized...If he's been questioned, he'll have a fair idea what it's about and why it's happening. It can be a wake up call to some people, and there's every chance his involvement is merely innocent, but then again, it might not. Truth is, he will know, and I'd be finding out from him!
At best they can say they have not given the password nor witnessed the partner using it.
I agree is a big problem for the OP, but the laptop needs to be available to both the prosecution and the defence.
Thank you. It's interesting (if that's the right word) to learn about procedures.
Could well be even longer than that - there was a recent Scottish appeal case (about an allegedly excessive period to bring charges after a search warrant was executed), and the computer media they took sat on a shelf for a year before it was even looked at, never mind when they completed gathering evidence and made a decision about whether to charge.
Maybe it does, but only if it (or the data on it) is going to be produced in evidence.
If it isn't it should be returned to the OP ASAP.
And I don't want to get into a debate about what the police can and can't do, but computers have serial numbers which can be verified with the manufacturers, and files have dates embedded in them. That might not be enough to prove whether someone is guilty or not but they would surely prove whether the laptop was, as the OP claims, bought after the alleged crime was committed.
Until they check, then it can't be determined what the situation is. An examination may even reveal more crimes.
Fortunately, the OP has been given a few links to lawyers that hopefully will help them expedite the situation.
If the OP had encrypted their laptop would the police have any grounds to get a requirement under RIPA to ask for the encryption keys, given that the partner isn't actually a suspect?
We dont know that the partner isn't a suspect we only have the OP's knowledge of what her partner has told her. There might be lots that he hasnt said to her.
How can they justify a person having to keep a sim 'alive' for possibly over a year. What if it's PAYG?
What if it's on contract but the contract runs out?
What if you can't pay and cancel the direct debit?
This is the part that must be either made up or mistaken because as you say why would you keep doing so
There is certainly no policy for doing this so I agree that the OP is probably mistaken on this matter. Forensic phone examinations are carried out in sterile environments using faraday boxes or similar, and the last thing they would want is for the phone to establish a connection of any sort as this could contaminate evidence.
I do think it's possible that they would have been instructed not to kill the phone i.e. not to trigger a remote erase of it, which may have been confused with keeping the contract live.
Very likely it is something along the lines of 'find my iphone' which has the option to 'erase iphone'
I am sure if this was done they could still 'find' the evidence, But obviously they have asked for this not to be done to make things easier for all involved
The Police have no power to request that a person keeps a phone contract live.
ACPO guidelines advise that Phones and other mobile devices are switched off as soon as they are seized, and then only powered up for examination purposes (imaging) in a sterile environment with no chance of signals being received from any source.
tbh that's the first thing I'd be doing if I ever lost control of my phone regardless of who had taken it although although I understand that seized phones are put immediately into faraday bags for this very reason which would prevent it receiving the command to begin wiping. Wish there was an app to get around that by working in reverse e.g automatically wipe if it DOESNT receive a command not to for a preset length of time but as far as I know there are none.
Just like my house then
That does make sense, though then wouldn't explain why the OP got the ...
I'm wondering now if they meant not to try and transfer the phone's number / contract to another phone, hence needing a new contract?
Yeah a dead man's switch. I've seen an android apk out there that claims to do this, but not within the play library so who knows what sort of malware it may contain