katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 66,934
- Reaction score
- 228,358
I saw that too and it had me a bit concerned. Then I saw this, which was posted in thread#92--post#984....JePopIn the following link, the Curriculum Vitae of Sy Ray, the D’s cell phone expert, states he has testified over 100 times, and all case work prior to November 2023 was as a prosecution witness.
Interesting.
https://gazette.com/premium/colorado-judge-finds-sea-of-unreliability-in-cellphone-mapping-data-used-by-police/article_331decc0-4c0d-11ed-986b-cbb1f65714dc.html'
"Colorado judge finds "sea of unreliability" in cellphone mapping data used by police"
"The judge did not take aim at all cellphone mapping data, which is widely used by law enforcement. Rather his ruling was limited to Trax mapping software from Chandler, Ariz.-based ZetX, which produces aerial maps prosecutors and police use to estimate the location of a defendant’s cellphone during an alleged crime. In 2021, the analytics data corporation LexisNexis acquired ZetX.""In sum, Trax and its methods have been routinely (and sharply) admonished by the scientific and legal community, and the people haven’t directed the court to any evidence showing otherwise,” Villaseñor wrote in his ruling excluding the use of the Trax technology in the stalking criminal case."
"Villaseñor found that Ray, who did not return telephone messages seeking comment for this article, was not a credible witness."
“He inflated his credentials, inaccurately claiming to be an engineer,” the judge wrote in his ruling, stressing that Ray had testified that he is “more of an engineer than an engineer.”
“Most compelling are the complete absence of data to support Trax’s purported error rate and the scientific community’s wholesale rejection of Trax’s methods,” Villaseñor wrote in his ruling, noting that he had found three other rulings from judges rejecting Trax-related evidence or expressing skepticism of that evidence."