Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Internet Science

Google Used to ID Hit-And-Run Victim 134

Posted by timothy from the power-of-the-net dept.
jafiwam writes "Google has been used (according to CNN) to help identify a hit-and-run victim from 1993. Detective Pat Ditter used Google to identify victim David Glen Lewis, 39 who died after being hit by a car while out of town. An image involving a fairly unique pair of glasses was found on the Texas Department of Public Safety web site, and a similar image on the Doe Network (involved in unsolved cases). This was after Det. Ditter began working on unsolved cases utilizing Google as a tool in that process. Makes you wonder how it took law enforcement that long to think of this. Process servers, employers and significant others already use Google for theses purposes... why not cops?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Used to ID Hit-And-Run Victim More

Google Used to ID Hit-And-Run Victim

Comments Filter:

  • i'm glad (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ginotech ( 816751 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @02:56PM (#10480827)
    that law enforcement and government agencies are finally starting to use the internet to its full potential.

    • Re:i'm glad (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Apreche ( 239272 )
      I agree. I am also glad. It may seem big brother-ish at first, but in fact its the opposite. The key difference is that the information is free and available to everybody. That's the way all information wants to, and should, be.

    • I'm not (Score:3, Insightful)

      by The_Mystic_For_Real ( 766020 )
      I see 2 problems with the government and law enforcement using the internet. I don't want the government using the internet for their job. They tend to over regulate and sometimes take full control of things they use, no one wants that.

      The second is that Google is a private corporation and there is no guarantee that google does not the display search results that it wants displayed instead of the real ones. Just too much power in Google's hands in my mind.

      • Google's power comes not from its search algorithms or from its ability to skew the results. It comes because people use it. People use it because it is the best of the web search engines.

        As soon as people stop using Google, Google has no power. Sort of like your avatar in Black & White. If Google is proven to skew results, people will stop using it.
        • My concerns are not based on the idea of consistantly skewing results. It's the one time when one of the heads of Google's misstresses comes under investigation and the search results are changed for that one search to get her off.

      • Re:I'm not (Score:3, Insightful)

        by idiotnot ( 302133 )
        So, what's the solution, then? Leaving unsolved cases unsolved, because you, personally, don't believe it's the right way to go about investigating things?

        In this case, if you'd bothered to read the article, the detective turned to google after the standard means came up empty. Note the dates -- this guy had been missing for eleven years. I've worked in law enforcement....sometimes you don't always find the information you need in police databases. They're old systems, often difficult to use (even for

    • After all, they paid for it (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 09, 2004 @04:49PM (#10481511)
      Now if only the USPTO would google for prior art.

  • They do use Google... (Score:5, Funny)

    by sgant ( 178166 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @02:57PM (#10480828) Homepage Journal
    But it's not a simple matter of typing in someones name and it comes up "he was killed in a hit-and-run , hit F5 to solve the case".

    The cops USE Google, but they still have to be the ones that put 2 and 2 together to get a conclusion.

    • Re:They do use Google... (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, of course not, because "F5" is different depending on which web browser they use. And if they're using a Mac, it's a whole different process altogether ("drag the victim into the case-solved file").


    • > The cops USE Google, but they still have to be the ones that put 2 and 2 together to get a conclusion.

      That's what the psychic consultants are for.

    • Re:They do use Google... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by StateOfTheUnion ( 762194 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:32PM (#10481045) Homepage
      I think you hit the nail on the head . . . A lot of cases don't get solved not because the police don't have tools but because they don't have the manpower.

      Many cases get shelved not because they are unsolvable but because there is too much other low hanging fruit that can more easily be addressed first. To get the most bang for the taxpayer dollar, easy cases get solved first and if there is time, the tough ones that take more time are addressed. Too often because of resource limitations, the more difficult cases are never addressed.

      • Re:They do use Google... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sgant ( 178166 )
        Then why don't they have a tier system of police work?

        You have a guy in the office, not a gun-carrying/badge-waving cop...but a researcher. Someone that digs through the evidence, searches on the web to come up with possible solutions to cases then turn them over to the gun-carrying/badge-waving guys to go out and make an arrest or search warrent or other "cop-doings".

        Just a thought...and not, not the CSI guys.
        • They do . . . at many police stations these higher tier individuals are called detectives. Uniformed officers typically pass cases off to detectives when the case involves significant research.

          Unfortunately, detectives are often given a certain number of hours to work a case. If they can't get a significant lead or significant potential progress on the case within that time, the case gets shelved and the detective is handed another case. Though I don't disagree that a better priorization system may result

          • I thought *all* police cases were solved within an hour?

            Or have I just seen too much American TV?
          • I read an interesting article a while back (linked off /.) about a mac user who tracked down an ebay scammer who ripped him off over an {i,Power}Book. The shipping address was in a city, and the city cop who he contacted was too busy to work on the case (simple mail fraud was not important enough). However, the next time the guy pulled the scam, the shipping address was out in the 'burbs and the local cop was bored (having no work) so jumped at the chance to nail a crim, put a lot of hours in, and got the g

      • Very True (Score:3, Informative)

        by sideshow ( 99249 )
        A 50+ year old copkiller cold case was sovled by the LAPD last year. All the homicide detectives had to do was just check the fingerprint found at the scene against the FBI's computers and they found their man.

        Matching fingerprints isn't as easy as searching Google but it's pretty damn easy compared to olden days (the 80's) where the two prints were put side by side and someone had to visually compare them.

        After that murder case was solved the LAPD decided to assign a group people to work on these cold c
        • All they need is the manpower to go through it.

          They need brainpower to automate doing it -- once and for all. Many organizations lack that, prefering to "work harder, not smarter [c2.com]" -- especially, government offices...

          • Automate? You've been watching to many movies. Forensic science takes a whole bunch of people that start their names with the word "Doctor".

            It's not like CSI, I'm sorry.

            • Yes, automate. The subthread was about a cop finally getting around to matching the fingerprints long available to LAPD against the FBI database.

              The FBI database contains thousands of entries and is, of course, on-line (not on the Internet, but a terminal was, evidently, available to LAPD). The LAPD's database is (or should be) online too. There can only be so many different software packages for fingerprint maintainance and it is certainly within the LAPD's and/or FBI's resources to order converting "plu

      • Sadly, they don't have enough manpower because they're too busy trying to make money off of people driving 5mph over the speed limit. How about they get traffic cops to start working on real crimes?

        • Sadly, they don't have enough manpower because they're too busy trying to make money off of people driving 5mph over the speed limit. How about they get traffic cops to start working on real crimes?

          Speeding is a real crime. If you're travelling at 35mph then an increase of 5mph (14.3%) will increase your braking distance by 30%. The distance travelled during your reaction time is also increased by 14% however the reaction and braking distances are in different scales so cannot be simply added together

          • "Speeding" wasn't the cause of 7167 deaths you listed. The cause was the inability of the driver to control his or her vehicle. Their high rate of speed may have compounded the fact that they were a poor driver to begin with (or exacerbated a situation beyond their control), but generally in my experience, most vehicles do not simply become more dangerous as their speed increases. Also, all vehicles are not created equal. A small, light, all-wheel-drive car will be much safer at high speed than a large, hea
          • "Speeding is a real crime."

            Well, it is a minor one for the most part. In fact, I suspect nearly everyone breaks it. When everyone breaks a law, you had better consider the reasons for it....

            "You only have to look at real world case studies to see that speed reduction on USA highways was the major factor in 9000 fewer road deaths in 1974."

            Well, I can't read the case studies so I will take your word for it. But it is currently 2004, so those statistics are out of date.

            "In 2002 the USA road toll exceeded 4
          • The Great Lie of motoring is that 5mph isn't a big deal. It's not a real crime.

            You're right, travelling 5mph over the speed limit is not necessarily a real crime. At least here in California, we have a law called the "Basic Speed Law". What this means is that most posted speed limits are only a recommended maximum speed, and not the maximum allowable. There are many cases where one can safely and legally exceed the speed limit, though not many people are aware that they legally can (but do anyway).

        • How about they get traffic cops to start working on real crimes?

          Problems with that:

          1. Income from traffic tickets helps to pay for police. Not directly, but still... Without it, most cities would probably only be able to have half as many police.

          2. Why do you think traffic laws shouldn't be enforced? Traffic fatalities are a MAJOR cause of death... Far above anything else police are involved in, let alone, anything they can help prevent.

          3. Do you really want traffic cops to become detectives? Th

          • "Income from traffic tickets helps to pay for police."

            Well, they could use taxes like everybody else. At least this would result in all voters having a say in how many police they want. Second, how much of that revenue goes back into paying for the cops writing the tickets? If there is no "net gain" your argument is worthless. Finally, what happens if everyone obeys the traffice laws? Are we going to fire all those police? I think not....

            "Why do you think traffic laws shouldn't be enforced?"

            Reasonable on

            • And what does speeding have to do with traffic fatalities? Not much.

              On the contrary, it is the cause for a lot of accidents, and surely many fatalities. I've seen plenty of accidents happen because someone was driving so fast they couldn't stop when another car changed lanes, stopped, turned out in front of them, etc.

              Finally, if speeding is a safety issue, why do cops hide? Shouldn't they be in plain view at all times?

              Only if they can have a constant presence all through their jurisdiction. People slo

    • "The cops USE Google, but they still have to be the ones that put 2 and 2 together to get a conclusion."

      Sure about that? [google.com]

  • Similar story (Score:5, Interesting)

    by erick99 ( 743982 ) <homerun@gmail.com> on Saturday October 09, 2004 @02:57PM (#10480831)
    Last year when I was doing web work for a car dealer a state policeman happened to come into the showroom asking for assistance. He had a piece of a tailight lens and that was it. Something had hit a parked car on some private property and that piece of lens was the only evidence. When the parts department said they couldn't help I poked my head up and volunteered. This drew some sneers from the "pros" behind the counter who felt that I couldn't possibly help with anything related to cars. Anyway, using Google I narrowed it down to a specific year and model of a Ford pickup. The police were able to track down the owner - it's not that big of a town. It was fun, though it took about two hours and I got quite a headache looking at so many images.
    • I'm sure they'll have a role for you on CSI: Washington D.C. Every years seems to bring a new CSI show.

      • CSI: Google Geek (Score:5, Funny)

        by Cryofan ( 194126 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:21PM (#10480986) Journal
        The story of how one Google-obsessed computer geek solves crime after crime, all the while consuming vast quantities of pizzz, snacks, soda and coffee...

        • Re:CSI: Google Geek (Score:3, Interesting)

          by 0x0d0a ( 568518 )
          Assisted by his Magic Blue Glowy Thing from ThinkGeek that exposes all evidence.
          • Assisted by his Magic Blue Glowy Thing from ThinkGeek that exposes all evidence.

            Wait, I saw that on the show, Las Vegas, last week.

            Now, if you've never seen the show, let's just say that they rely on a lot of "magic" technology. Such as surveilance cameras that can change frequency on the fly ("hey, let me see that in infrared, now ultraviolet") or surveilance tapes that let you zoom in and pan the camera around during playback.

            Last week, they showed off a new toy. A magic "blue glowy thing", but
        • consuming vast quantities of pizza, snacks, soda and coffee...

          I think given the nature of the work you'd have to throw some donuts in there as well.


    • > The police were able to track down the owner - it's not that big of a town.

      I was wondering how they caught me, you jerk.

      If you had a slower internet connection I might have made it across the border.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @02:59PM (#10480853)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion


    • > Google will soon be starring in TV's CSI :)

      LoL. "CSI:Google"

    • I know that a couple CSI episodes and a couple NCIS episodes used a generic looking search engine page. I don't know whether or not they'd use Google unless someone paid them to but the concept's there.

      Of course, the TV search engines can tell you a person's entire life history with only a first name and a hair color. They're pretty powerful, you know...
    • I often sneer at the fantastic search capabilities (and impeccable graphics) dramatized in the CSI shows. If only the state was so organized to have so many databases immediately on hand... and if only the software was so good. Perhaps Google is in fact one step in that direction.

      Also interesting, there is a phenomenon called the "CSI effect" referring to jurors expecting capabilities similar to the tv series in real-life forensic investigations...
    • No, Google isn't fake. To be in CSI, everything must be as far from reality as possible, and work perfectly despite being used by idiots spewing nonsense.

      I really hate that show.

  • New Meaning (Score:4, Funny)

    by whiteranger99x ( 235024 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:02PM (#10480867) Journal
    I guess that puts a new meaning to Google's "Don't be evil" slogan. =)
  • Google makes a standalone internal search engine server called the Google Appliance. We have one in use at my current job and I was just thinking it would be neat to see what just a little bit of effort from several law enforcement agencies and one of these appliances could do.
    • Slightly OT:
      We just replaced (Wholesale) our old search with something like 12 of these things. Searches have never been better! (75K employees in company).

      back OT:
      If the cops could get together across state and agency lines with Google providing the search and DB indexing I'm sure there would be a lot less unsolved crimes across state lines!

      Just wonder what the leagal impact would be?
      -nB
    • What if law enforcement could obtain logs of all the searches associated with your Google-set cookie for the past three years?

      It'd also be useful data for industrial espionage types...

  • Facial Recognition software? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by StateOfTheUnion ( 762194 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:06PM (#10480903) Homepage
    In my ignorance I may be opening a can of worms here but . . .

    What about facial recognition software used for this purpose? If drivers license pictures were standardized and pictures taken at the morgue were made to the same standard (assuming the face of the disceased in not injured/damaged) is facial recognition software good enough to be used to try to identify John Does?

  • Surely if the cops are googling, criminals have been googling for a while too. Will changing metatags for better "I'm-no-criminal" placement help them evade the long arm of the law?

    It's only a matter of time before Google will have the new GEvader Beta system....

  • So... what is the news here? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The masses are finally discovering google's advanced search capabilities?

    Now if google could only date (date when google archived the information) the result entries....

    • dating the archive (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ChipMonk ( 711367 )
      They already do. Take a look at the Google-cached copy of a page, and you'll see something like "This is Google's cache of ((BLAH)) as retrieved on Sep 21, 2004 05:14:22 GMT" at the top of the page.
  • But ever put your name in to a Google search?

    I did, and it brought up an obscure post (circa 1996) I made to some alt.linux.* newsgroup about re-formatting Linux text files so they would be readable in Windows.

    Spooky.

    • I put my name, and got many pages of 2 different people which aren't me. And it's not like my name is at all common where I live, let alone that the set of people in which this is at all a name is less than 10 million worldwide.
    • I share my name with some people who are far more famous than me. My username, however, was unique last time I Googled it.

    • Re:Sort of off topic... (Score:5, Funny)

      by jrumney ( 197329 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @04:44PM (#10481487)
      But ever put your name in to a Google search?

      Apparently some 14 year old girl on the other side of the world has the hots for me. I read it in her livejournal.

      Google: bringing false hope to thirtysomething geeks since 1998.

    • Yes, and there's not a damn thing spooky about it. It's actually quite useful. I found a short piece of code I wrote this way. I'd lost it in a crash and thought it was gone forever. I'd posted it to a Python newsgroup and it was still on there.

  • sheesh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ezzzD55J ( 697465 ) <slashdot5@scum.org> on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:32PM (#10481047) Homepage
    anything else being ID'd by any other 'technology' and it would've been 'Your rights online' ...
  • "fairly unique " ?

  • I call this google stalking ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by adzoox ( 615327 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:35PM (#10481075) Journal
    I do this all the time with problematic eBayers and Yahoo auction buyers and sellers that I run into.

    I once had a guy email me and accuse me of stealing his Bang & Olufsen turntable that I was selling on ebay. He said he sold one on ebay two weeks prior to my auction and that the bidder (who happened to be 100 miles from me had made a claim that it was broken. He paid out on the claim. He accused me of being in cohorts with someone to pull a fast one and get the turntable, collect on insurance, then resell it on ebay for a double profit.

    Well, I ended up googling his email address. Turns out - I got something to this affect on a "Discreet Personals Website" in Colorado:

    "Male looking for other males for discreet, private meetings - into play, but nothing too rough"

    I emailed him and told him I had found some information about him that I might post to eBayers That Suck dot com.

    He didn't bother me after that.

    I always google any problematic customer to see if they are a complainer on line or have anything "strange" about them - or are possibly on another business's hit list.

    I google potential girlfriends names and if I have them, email addresses.

    If you google my ID; adzoox, it brings up my website and home town of Greenville SC and things about me in the Upstate of South Carolina. Lots of google results are my slashdot posts from the past 3-4 months.

    • This reminds me of something someone did to me when I was looking for a new apartment to share with room mates on CL [slashdot.org] . He came up with a list of things that were basically ture about me, through a simple search, I guess. I was first suprised, & taken aback. I felt violated, in a way, but I guess this is just how things go in our informative society. But then I thought about things a while, and thought that this was actual a good way to weed out potential trouble makers, and also, to scare off others.

    • Re:I call this google stalking ... (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, I ended up googling his email address. Turns out - I got something to this affect on a "Discreet Personals Website" in Colorado:

      "Male looking for other males for discreet, private meetings - into play, but nothing too rough"

      Just curious - would you have held it against him if his email had come up on a straight dating site? That is, would you still have blackmailed him if he had been searching for female company?
      • its worth a shot. HOwever if it was a posting to a straight dating site the other guy might not have shut up so readily.
      • I didn't blackmail him - he was stalking me - literally, he was emailing constantly, he even called, he also made a false report to my better business bureau. I had every right to find out information about him. His information was OUTSIDE the norm, but I would agree, as a straight man, I held bias and stereotype against him - well - it worked.
      • The key is "discreet". Gay/straight has nothing to do with it. There would have been no basis for 'blackmail' had the personal ad said "Gay, Gayer, GAYEST! Flamboyant male, years/light-years out of the closet seeks same for wildly publicised relationship!". He was susceptible to 'blackmail' because he had publicised something he wanted kept private.

    • Re:I call this google stalking ... (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Erhm, y'kno, unless you want other people to have more "Google stalking" material on you, you might want to have written that narrative a little better.

      Right now, it makes it sound as though you were in cahoots with that auction scammer, and that you blackmail your customers :/

      Now, I know that *probably* wasn't your intent, and I know better than to judge a story from only one side of it, but... well, I usually post as though someone were looking over my shoulder... (Hi ECHELON! How's the fnord?)

  • New use (Score:2, Funny)

    by TheRaider ( 820473 )
    New way of using Google to help the cops: Click me [google.com]

    • Re:New use (Score:3, Insightful)

      by BillX ( 307153 )
      Adjust the query thusly, and it will give directions and a street map to them... Clicky [google.com]

      Adjust for actual location/district/beat, of course.

  • Another incidence of google solving crime (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 09, 2004 @03:46PM (#10481145)
    I saw this on a TLC documentary about a year ago. This guy Patrick Critton hijacked a Canadian plane to Cuba back in 1971 and got away. The Canadian police re-opened the case, and searched for the man in all the police databases. Nothing was found. So then they did a Google search on the guys name, and lo and behold, one link from a local newspaper in Westchester County, NY had this guys name. The police went down there and sure enough, it was the same guy, over 30 years later. He had turned his life around and become a pillar in the community, mentor to young kids, etc etc.

    Here's a link
    http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSLaw0206/11_hijacker-cp.ht ml [canoe.ca]
    • Well if he hasn't done anything like that again for 30 years and is now a decent chap, why go chuck him in jail for 10 years? Just for "completeness"?

      Should ask the people who were directly affected by him in the relevant crimes whether they think the world would be a better place with him in jail or not.

      • He was involved in an armed robbery with a fatality (article doesn't mention if he committed the murder). He hijacked a plane.

        Damn right he should go to jail. If society jailed people dependent on their contribution to society, then the socially deprived would spend all their time in jail and the rich would get away with anything.

        Oh wait...
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Will you people stop with the "Nothing to see here" thing? It's getting very tiring, and most of the time it doesn't mean anything.

  • eBay for stolen items (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    A friend of mine had his laptop stolen a few years back, and filed a police report. He setup a regional search on eBay to notify him of hits on auctions for the laptop model and make he had. Sure enough, about 6 months later, he got a hit on a laptop with the same make, model, and system specs (the picture of the item also showed a distinct scratch the laptop had).
    He contacted a detective with the sheriff's office and they contacted eBay, got the seller's contact information, and ended up recovering the l

  • Police demographic (Score:4, Insightful)

    by stimpleton ( 732392 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @04:16PM (#10481333)
    "Makes you wonder how it took law enforcement that long to think of this"

    This is of little surprise to me.
    If we look at the demographic that is the police, then the only saving grace is that they would probably contain a small percentage of "forward thinkers" - maybe 2-5% of their number, just as in most organisations.

    Police officers often do not hold any formal qualification outside of high school, or their own training instutions.

    Fundamentaly, police in the field need the ability to arrest, tackle, and subdue violent offenders. The fact is, they need special...uh...abilities, to do this. Not the ability to "think outside the square".

    Later in their career they will graduate to perhaps detective. They then utilize past experiance and gain new initiative.

    They would now have the opportunity and freedom(in work) to move beyond the text book.
    There must be so many "old schoolers" in the police, where challenging tried and true process's requires seniority, an innovative bent, and the ability to say no to the old school.
    • Fundamentaly, police in the field need the ability to arrest, tackle, and subdue violent offenders. The fact is, they need special...uh...abilities, to do this. Not the ability to "think outside the square".

      Huh, most cops make quick assessments of situations and make life and death decisions based on limited information in a very short time frame. To say that they don't "think outside the square" is either ignorant, insulting or both.

      I would recommend asking if your local police department permits "ri

      • "Huh, most cops make quick assessments of situations and make life and death decisions based on limited information in a very short time frame."

        So in other words they make life and death decisions based on (potentially) crappy data? Gee, that makes me feel better :)

        "To say that they don't "think outside the square" is either ignorant, insulting or both."

        Umm, I don't think police as a whole are of significantly above average intelligence. But I could be wrong. Many (most?) are educated, but that has littl

  • Google is a search engine people (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This silly story is like saying, I drove my car around and found the suspect. Wow! My car solved the crime! Google zealots.
  • ... you can of course use Googlism [googlism.com]. :-)

    Hmm, let's see...

    Who is Jugalator?

    1. jugalator is right
    2. jugalator is starting on a dire wolverine

    Well, the first one sounds correct :-), but the second one will surely scare any employers away. :-(
  • Google CSI Miami.
    Google Cold Case.
    or
    NYPD Google.

  • Another headline from a non-thinker (Score:3, Informative)

    by Awptimus Prime ( 695459 ) on Saturday October 09, 2004 @08:22PM (#10482902)
    "Ditter began working on unsolved cases utilizing Google as a tool in that process. Makes you wonder how it took law enforcement that long to think of this."

    Actually, law enforcement has been using internet search engines as long as they have been around. Just because an occasional case manages to get some media attention, does not mean the method is anything new at all.

    Keep in mind, also, that Google has reached near retardation levels of attention in the media. Anything anyone does which results in something positive could just turn up as a media-worthy article to mention Google.

    Look back 6 years and you'll see the same BS with Yahoo.

    I swear, if the public had any less of an attention span, people suffocate from forgetting to breath.
  • Does this mean disallowing google from your robots.txt is obstruction of justice?
  • Just about every variation of the TV show Law and Order (The normal one, Special Victims Unit, and Criminal Intent) has used google in their investigative research. In fact, they've even turned it into a verb:

    "I googled for bla bla bla..."

    Seeing that TV usually mimics reality, I have a feeling that real cops have been using google longer than we think.

    Daniel
  • I have been wondering about this. Earlier this year i was looking at the stats for my personal web page i set up on geocities.

    For some reason i was getting all these hits from google with people typing in "tommy savage" who ran a guest house i stayed at in Amsterdam. Turns out he the law thinks he is some huge drug dealer. Shipping huge amounts of grass into Greece.

    The big question is did all the cops have to do is type his name into google and up pops my website with directions on how to find him?
    I

  • Dumbass, not-news article (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jusdisgi ( 617863 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @02:40AM (#10484397)

    Makes you wonder how it took law enforcement that long to think of this.

    No, not really. I'm pretty sure the cops figured out google a while ago, all around the world. It's just that its successful use is not fucking news!

    What it really makes me wonder is what on earth these guys at CNN were on when they decided to run this.

  • Because they're not very smart (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I had a kid run over my dog a few years ago (like 3) and I got his license plate. The trooper I talked to could find his name and address but it was pretty far away (in the same state) and he couldn't get a phone number for him. It took me one lookup on anywho. When the cop called back I gave him the number and he was astounded that I could get it.
    • When the cop called back I gave him the number and he was astounded that I could get it.

      Similar story for me. Five or six years ago, we were working on adopting our son, and we needed to apply some pressure to the birth father -- he wasn't the type to take responsibility, even when all it would take was signing a paper saying "ok, he's yours". I was able to use various Internet resources to look up the name, address, and telephone number of his employer, and gave that information to the state social wor

Slashdot Top Deals

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Close