Jan 27, 2009 at 12:40pm ET by Greg Sterling
CNET reports on a conviction based in part on search query logs from Google that was upheld on appeal:
A physical search of Justin’s computer revealed that a few months before the murder, he had searched for terms including “trauma, cases, gunshot, right chest” and “Florida & divorce.” Prosecutors had also discovered that the defendant downloaded a suggestive Guns N’ Roses song called “Used to Love Her” and then deleted it a few weeks later, after his wife’s death.
The lyrics: “I used to love her, but I had to kill her / I had to put her / Six feet under / And I can still hear her complain.”
The jury convicted Justin and he was sentenced to life in prison. He appealed on grounds that the evidence was wholly circumstantial and insufficient for conviction. A Florida state appeals court upheld his conviction and sentence.
At first blush this may be surprising and prompt responses like: I’d better be careful what I search for. It also might make people think that there’s a first amendment problem lurking somewhere in here.
However the search queries were used as evidence of the husband’s mens rea — or guilty mind. It would be very similar to a third party (say a co-worker or associate of the husband) repeating in court a conversation that he was a part of in which the husband said things that were suggestive of a desire to kill his wife. That would constitute hearsay but would be allowed in under one of the numerous criminal hearsay exceptions.
Unless there’s eyewitness testimony or its equivalent (video) or DNA evidence, most criminal convictions rely on some degree of circumstantial evidence and require the jury to draw inferences of guilt or intent from that evidence.
Increasingly this sort of search query evidence is coming in to show intent or otherwise to support a finding of criminal behavior. Indeed, search query logs have been called “the database of intentions.” In this case that was also true — in a much more sinister way.
Share, Bookmark & Discuss This Article
More:
Keep Updated: News Via Email | News Via RSS Feed | News Via Twitter
See more stories like this in the Members Library! Check out the Google: Legal sections of the Members Library where this story is filed. Members also get access to exclusive video content, a members-only weekly & monthly newsletter, plus more. Check out all the benefits!
TOP STORIES
SEARCH NEWS BRIEFS
FEATURES & ANALYSIS
RECENT COMMENTS
Stay on top of all the search news with our daily summary, the SearchCap newsletter. View a sample ›
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
SMX Web Site » | SMX Difference » | SMX News »
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
Featured sites from our Blogroll
Become a premium member today and receive:
Hi Greg
I am compelled to comment on some ambiguity in this article that is damaging to the industry in which you and I work.
There is a lot of unhealthy paranoia out there regarding visitor privacy.
Knowing what visitors do in the aggregate and without any personally identifiable information is innocuous and helpful. Web-site owners can use that data to improve their sites and visitors will have improved websites to visit.
The opening sentence ” .. based in part on search query logs from Google … ” misleads readers to believe that Google had all the data necessary to tie the search query to Justin.
Does that quote refer to “A physical search of Justin’s computer revealed” or was that done after Google had provided data from their own servers.
It requires far more thought than most readers have time for to realize that one cannot go to Google until the search terms are extracted by physical search.
The result is that readers walk away unnecessarily heightened paranoia.
Google, in particular, is upfront and honest about its use of data. (See http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacy_faq.html)
Brian Katz – VKI Studios