MB refuses to help police.

VINMAN · 07-25-2007, 05:26 AM

Mercedes Benz refuses to help police in a fatal hit and run. This kind of crap really burns me.

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_6372968

Dantilla · 07-25-2007, 05:31 AM

Pretty slippery slope when the government can demand to know where your car is at all times. Where do you draw the line?

M-B did the right thing.

onewhippedpuppy · 07-25-2007, 05:36 AM

Suprising they defied a court order. Before going back to college I spent some time as a tech for Detroit Diesel (semi engine maker), we had several cases where our ECUs were subpoenaed for court cases. Our ECUs logged data for the truck for an extended period of time, and not just engine data. Average speed, max speed, throttle position, brake usage, etc. All was logged against time. So truck owners could have us link to the computer, and find out how fast their drivers were going at any given point in time. Cool, but scary technology. We were specifically told that we were not to release the information, unless it was the owner of the truck, or a court order.

GM has also been involved in similar cases, where data from their "black box" onboard the car has been used in court. Seems like the GM box only records a set small time period, in a constant loop. Still, somewhat scary, big brother type stuff.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

All the more reason I like older cars with as little electonics crap as possible. Not that I'm planning on hit-and-running someone, but the intrusiveness/misuse of technology is going way too far.

Rick Lee · Rick Lee's Garage

There was a recent case in England where BMW helped the cops track down a guy who had been photographed grossly exceeding the speed limit, but whose plate was unclear in the photos. Turns out he was the only guy in that town with that model of bike, so he wasn't hard to find.

Jeff Higgins · 07-25-2007, 06:22 AM

Funny that a German owned company seems to have a better grasp of the limitations we (the U.S.) place on our authorities than most Americans have. They have done the right thing. The line needs to be drawn somewhere on this kind of use of monitoring technology.

MRM · 07-25-2007, 06:24 AM

Almost all recent GM models will show basic information on engine speed and braking for the 30 seconds or so before an accident. Depending on the GM model and year (and most vehicles manufactured in the last couple of years) complete black data is recorded. The technology is so well developed that the software to read the black box is widely available. Almost any accident reconstructionist in the US can download the data directly without bothering with GM. I'm not up to date on other manufactuers but I would expect the same is true for almost all manufacturers.

id10t · 07-25-2007, 06:30 AM

Jeff - I think the Germans have seen and still remember what happens when there are no/few limitations on Gov't power..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Funny that a German owned company seems to have a better grasp of the limitations we (the U.S.) place on our authorities than most Americans have. They have done the right thing. The line needs to be drawn somewhere on this kind of use of monitoring technology.

Mo_Gearhead · 07-25-2007, 06:34 AM

Not to hijack the thread but this high tech. crap is interesting.

Who has a vehicle with the OnStar option? Does a light come on when you are chatting with the operator? I know they can initiate the conversation to a vehicle, correct?

I envision bored dispatchers, sitting for long hours alone, switching on cars at random, just to "listen in" on what conversations may be taking place in vehicles.

Can this be done?

sammyg2 · 07-25-2007, 07:21 AM

Oh sure, protect the lowlife hit and run murderer. MB can bite me.
All the police want to know is where the car is. What is the big deal? You wanna know where my car is? It's in my garage. Wanna know where my truck is? It's in the parking lot where I work. That didn't hurt at all. The world did not come to an end and my rights were not violated.

See, if you are not a criminal you have nothing to hide or worry about. If you are doing something you shouldn't be doing, you should worry.

Dantilla · 07-25-2007, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg2

See, if you are not a criminal you have nothing to hide or worry about.

I just said it is a slippery slope. Finding a criminal is good. When it comes to being able to remotely limit the speed of a car, something that has already been discussed, we loose freedom. Some rental car companies have already issued fines to customers when the black boxes notified the company that the car was driving excessively fast.

VINMAN · 07-25-2007, 07:29 AM

We recently had a case here in NJ where a State trooper blew a stop sign and killed two girls. The SP denied any wrong doing. When the data recorder was pulled from the Crown Vic and sent to Ford, it came back that he was doing 75mph(in a 35 zone). He never touched the brakes. Was not responding to a call, had no lights and siren He was charged with 2 counts of vehicular homicide.

onewhippedpuppy · 07-25-2007, 07:29 AM

I agree with that part, but where do you draw the line? What if they want information about how fast you are going? How fast you have been? Your car has that information (if it's newer), do you want to open the door to govt access?

If it were just a hit and run, it would be ok. But, the govt has the "you give an inch, they take a mile" philosophy.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

I agree with that part, but where do you draw the line? What if they want information about how fast you are going? How fast you have been? Your car has that information (if it's newer), do you want to open the door to govt access?

If it were just a hit and run, it would be ok. But, the govt has the "you give an inch, they take a mile" philosophy.

Precisely. They've proven that they can't be trusted to restrain themselves. That's why we have things like "civil rights", although with each passing day, those seem to be more and more of a passee notion also.

I'm siding with MB on this one. Sorry guys, I think they're doing the right thing. There's enough g-damn surveillance of anything and everything out there as it is. We certainly don't need our cars spying on us too.

Neilk · 07-25-2007, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg2

See, if you are not a criminal you have nothing to hide or worry about. If you are doing something you shouldn't be doing, you should worry.

Sammy, the above quote is pretty dangerous and is our Administration's current way of reducing our liberties.

I have strong feelings about the invasion of privacy, but when it involves an injury or death, then I think MB is wrong. Why can't they release just the pertinent data of "Yes the person was in the vicinity" or "No the person wasn't in the vicinity"? I guess MB might be afraid to allow a precedent for future cases like divorce attorneys subpoenaing MB to find out where a spouse might have been.

VINMAN · 07-25-2007, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neilk

I have strong feelings about the invasion of privacy, but when it involves an injury or death, then I think MB is wrong. Why can't they release just the pertinent data of "Yes the person was in the vicinity" or "No the person wasn't in the vicinity"? I guess MB might be afraid to allow a precedent for future cases like divorce attorneys subpoenaing MB to find out where a spouse might have been.

I agree.
Nobody on here is more anti-Big Brother/ techology than me. But when it comes to criminals, especially the taking of a life. You should be able to use every methods possible and available.

If this woman was the daughter or wife or sister of anyone on on here, you guys would be kicking down MB's door to get them to release the info. Dont even try to deny it!

Hendog · Hendog's Garage

The person responsible for this death is disgusting and should be nailed by the law.

Now, onto the topic at hand. Who owns the information? The car is the property of the person who purchased it and so is the information residing within it. The law is putting MB in a position in which MB has no right to retrieve that info, no? The car is registered to someone other than the suspect BTW, a relative according to the article.

stomachmonkey · 07-25-2007, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hendog

The person responsible for this death is disgusting and should be nailed by the law.

Now, onto the topic at hand. Who owns the information? The car is the property of the person who purchased it and so is the information residing within it. The law is putting MB in a position in which MB has no right to retrieve that info, no? The car is registered to someone other than the suspect BTW, a relative according to the article.

Interesting.

Could it be that the MB lawyers are doing them a favor? Wonder if recovering the vehicle (evidence) in this manner is even admissable if not a grounds for appeal.

I have no idea, not a lawyer but I watch actors play them on TV.

osidak · 07-25-2007, 10:41 AM

About the best thing MB has done recently

And for those that fall in the catagory of "if you are not doing anything wrong...."

Please report to the local doctors office and have the gps enable tracking chip inserted into your skull so the gov and track your every move with total ease.

widebody911 · widebody911's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg2

See, if you are not a criminal you have nothing to hide or worry about.

So, you don't mind us watching your wife take a shower? I figured you'd be pissed when I uploaded the video to YouTube.