That’s a good point, at least on the surface: they should have been able to immediately get the number, either by reading the SIM chip or by calling 911.
What I don’t understand is what specific prejudice the investigation suffered as a result. What were the police not able to do that they should have doe sooner without that number?
About a year back there was a thread about new technology available to police that could suck information out of cell phones. I’m somewhat doubtful the Sanford police have it, but it’s very possible that some state agency has it. But the questions remain. Even if they had technology available to download all the data from Trayvon’s phone, what legal and procedural hoops would they have to jump through to get it and retain it as legally admissible evidence? And what might there be on the phone that would be of any value to the investigation?
I’m gonna choose to believe that Trayvon decided to record the whole event, both audio and video. Sure, that’s the ticket!
I don’t know. Maybe we’re just running out of things to argue about. Identifying the body? I guess finding the girlfriend right away might have had some influence on the investigation.
Do the dead have an expectation of privacy? Would the police really need a warrant to search hiis phone? What if Trayvon Martin had a car parked at the scene? Could the cops have slim jimmed the lock that night and searched it?
The only thing I can think of is notifying Trayvon’s family sooner. They apparently didn’t get the news for 3 days. I suppose that might be relevant to the investigation because questioning the family would have helped to establish a timeline, and fresher memories are better.
Um, yes, to get a PAC code and get the phone unlocked (it would still take a day or two). That is not ‘hacking the phone’ which I’m sure would be a lot harder.
‘Junior CSI.’ :rolleyes: Throwing around little insults doesn’t make you look good, you know.
They got the news the day after the incident.
Apologies. I mis-remembered. You are correct.
The device mentioned in that thread is the Cellbrite UFED Forensic System. Here is the user manual. (PDF)
Chapter 7 explains that you need unlocked access to a smartphone in order to access the phone memory space:
Does anyone have any cite, other than a vague reference to Google, that claims there is a way to hack into a locked iPhone or similar generation smartphone and retrieve data?
Perhaps, but finding the number of the phone would not have led to the girlfriend right away. The police would still need to get a warrant to get the phone company to release the call records.
No, no warrant needed to search his phone. But if the phone was locked, then they would have had a difficult time searching it-- the problem there is practical, not legal.
A PAC code is used to transfer a SIM card to use another phone number. It appears you know that based on your second sentence, but I write in this detail in the belief that some people are Googling “unlock phone” and seeing these kinds of results.
It is also possible that they are seeing techniques to jailbreak phones, or remove the lock that forces a phone to use a particular provider.
So to be clear for all readers: I am talking about a way to take a locked smartphone and retrieve the data from that phone’s memory.
There is more than one way to protect data on a smartphone. When someone says a phone is locked, I’m assuming it is akin to the four digit code on an iPhone. You’ll notice that link applies to the previious version but these exploits have been occurring with each generation.
Apparently the swipe code on Android phones is giving the FBI fits:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/fbi-android-phone-lock/
His father found out the next day when he called 911 and a police detective came by his girlfriend’s town home.
What you call “legal and procedural hoops”, I call police work. My initial musings were about whether they thought to check the phone for relevant pictures, video or texts but a scenario where they did think about it but couldn’t be bothered to do some paperwork hadn’t occurred to me. Yikes.
The chances are admittedly slim, but to utterly dismiss the chance of finding anything of value would be poor investigative work. The phone could contain texts of Martin’s plans to case the neighbourhood for houses to rob, or a picture of Zimmerman’s car captioned “Check out the dude following me; I hope he approaches me so I can kill him with my bare hands”. 
Unlocking the phone would have meant they would have found out that Trayvon had been on the phone just a minute before his death.
You don’t have to subpoena phone records to find this out. Just looking at the time stamps of the most recent calls would have indicated this.
If there had been uncertainty about the accuracy of the time stamps, they could have simply called the number of the last call made/received and talked to the girlfriend…instead of waiting to hear her statement from Martin’s lawyer.
I’m really not understanding why people don’t see why the cell phone is important here. If it hadn’t been for the girlfriend’s testimony, we’d still be operating under the assumption that Trayvon hadn’t been actively avoiding Zimmerman til the last minute before his death. She actually confirms what Zimmerman says happened. But that’s beside the point. The girlfriend could have been anyone. He may have called a friend and left a hysterical voice mail laying out the details of what was happening to him before Zimmerman shot him. That critical piece of evidence could have gone uncollected for almost a week, simply because they were inept.
They simply didn’t try very hard figuring out that damn cell phone. It’s crazy to think otherwise.
If you actually read your own cite, the access is limited to the phone book app. Not call history, text messages, photos, etc.
No, Zimmerman insulted Martin indirectly by asking him what he was doing there.
Again, Zimmerman knew the police were on their way and would be there momentarily. Grabbing a complete stranger and handing him over to the police would be a crime.
Actually that’s not true. Kids do it all the time. I personally know people who were assaulted just walking or biking around and you see this on the news. Just this week there were 3 instancesin the news alone. But Martin had a reason for it and also didn’t know the police were on their way.
Again - how do you know?
Yes, that link applies to a flaw in IOS that’s more than three years old.
Is there a current similar flaw, one that the police should have known about now?
Exactly what I’m talking about. Are the FBI incompetent in the linked story?
See, my complaint is that there is a general claim that police should just be able to break into a locked phone, and their failure signals incompetence.
I don’t agree. But no one, including you, Blank, have provided a link to current gen smartphones to show how that can be done, specifically.
Do the proponents of this idea just sort of imagine that OF COURSE police have access to super-advanced hackerz tek that the public does not?
Ok, so explain exactly what the police should have done to unlock the phone, please. You know, if they had been trying hard.