No problem.
I doubled checked with my partner that our cameras have an active subscription.
Cops have detained someone for questioning.
Already released after questioning and searching the person of interest’s home.
Safe to say that this is not a criminal mastermind.
First, he appears to have a gun shoved into his pants. I’m not a firearms expert, but that seems like a bad idea. Don’t people usually use holsters?
Second, he appears flumoxed by the camera. He first tries to cover it with his hand, and then grabs some grass from the lawn to cover it with, before ripping it off the wall.
ETA Third, he didn’t think to use a headlamp, and resorts to putting his flashlight in his mouth.
Actuall, nighttime security cameras use active near-visible IR LEDs to illuminate the target. Since it’s not visible light, the image is in black and white only. Nothing to do with the temperature of the target. You’re describing passive IR cameras, more expensive, and wouldn’t have anywhere near the same level of detail.
That overnight stuff was like mystery porn.
I stayed up way too late watching it. CNN did 3 hours, I think.
And it turns out it is probably nothing.
Gahhhhh
Yeah, a pistol shoved into the front of your pants is dumb, but seems to not be uncommon, especially among particularly dumb low-level criminals, and those trying to look like “cool” gangsters they see in videos, I suppose.
Make sure the safety is on, you don’t want to go off half-cocked.
It was probably a “bite light” which is designed to be used in the mouth.
D’oh!
LOL The criminal’s destruction of the camera and network connection ended the writing to the cloud. Saving what was recorded minutes earlier.
Google still had to work some magic to retrieve the video. Because it wasn’t formally saved under a paid subscription account.
Has any of the reporting mentioned an alarm?
Isn’t that standard with a paid security installation?
This conflicts with CNN’s reporting, based on info from a source with knowledge of the investigation, that it took Google several days to recover the data because it had been deleted. I don’t think this “expert” is correct.
I don’t know zip about home security. That expert could easily be wrong.
Here is a CBS report that is much better and doesn’t mention damaged cameras.
Could be a huge break in the case if DNA is recovered from inside the glove and tested.
Buying a Nest doorbell is not the same as buying a comprehensive home security system. She might have had both.
But most people buying Nests are doing it as the Cheap Charlie way to avoid the expense of an actual comprehensive alarm / intrusion / monitoring system. Which can get real pricy.
So I’ll suggest the presence of a Nest-brand doorbell cam works against, not towards, the probability they have a more complete system.
Most of my friends who buy a nest doorbell are looking for a doorbell, not a home security system. It’s a very flexible doorbell, that even lets you answer when you aren’t home.
Anyone heard what the emergency turn-around time is for DNA tests? I’d expect to find taces of sweat and sloughed off skin cells inside a glove.
There’s no guarantee any recovered DNA will match with anyone in CODIS (Combined DNA Index System). It can happen.
Now it’s reported a pair of gloves was recovered. That doubles the chance of recovering useable DNA.
No it doesn’t. That’s not how it works because if one glove doesn’t have anything, it’s much more likely that the other one also doesn’t.
Breaking News
Doesn’t add up. If she died at the scene, wouldn’t criminals just leave ASAP?
Recently disturbed soil should have been obvious day 1.
CNN live feed