Bulldawg wrote:
I happen to be in a Cellebrite class right now, and the instructor mentioned that in this hotel, triangulation places him about 20 miles north.This sounds to me a bit (actually a lot) on the "extreme" (an error of the order of magnitude of 20 miles should mean a spacing among antenna's in roughly the same range) where is your hotel, in the middle of nowhere?
And, still to be picky as I always am, what is the sense of video footage "corroborating"?
I mean, if you actually have a surveillance camera placing the subject in a given place at a given time, who cares about the tower cell data? <img src="images/smiles/icon_eek.gif" alt="Shocked" title="Shocked" />
What if you have video footage of a subject possessing NO phone?
Would it not be enough by itself? <img src="images/smiles/icon_question.gif" alt="Question" title="Question" />
The Court order I referenced rejected a specific "evidence" based on a specific technology/theory, that of Granulization, NOT the "whole" cellular network positioning evidence.
jaclaz
↧