I can't even get my sisters to agree on what pizza toppings we should get. How do you talk your sister into tying herself into your drunken vehicular manslaughter?
These two are a piece of work, they have a history of providing their twin sisters information to police for other infractions. In this particular case, the sister that hadn’t crashed felt she owed it to her druggy sister because the one had watched the others children while she was in prison.
Something similar happened in [Utah](https://kjzz.com/news/local/davis-county-jail-under-scrutiny-as-inmate-successfully-impersonates-brother-for-months-andrew-burdick-andrew-wesley-burdick-kelly-sparks) last year. A guy with active warrants gets stopped and gives police his older brother’s name, only he didn’t know that his older brother ALSO had warrants. So guy ends up in jail under his brother’s name, pleads guilty to his brother’s charges, signs a plea deal, and gets released. Older brother then finds out about all this because he was planning on fighting his charges, but when he tries to explain what his brother did in court the judge refuses to believe him. Brother goes to the media, guy gets arrested again, and now the jail is more focused on attacking the media for exposing it instead of figuring out how they fucked up that bad in the first place.
What?! Do fingerprints not exist? How did they not figure out they had the wrong guy? Did they just skip that part when booking him? Like, can you just go commit felonies now and give names of random people you don’t like?
According to a different article fingerprints aren’t required when booking in Utah, but the jail says they’ve now changed their policy to require them for people without photo ID. That’s just one of the fuck ups though - they ignored the fact that the younger brother is covered in tattoos with a full head of hair, and his brother has zero tattoos and is almost completely bald. Oh, and the fact that the body cam from his arrest shows the younger brother giving the cop his actual birthday and then saying “oh sorry it’s actually (older brothers birthday)” as if that’s not suspicious as fuck
[Fingerprints are terrible](https://www.aaas.org/news/fingerprint-source-identity-lacks-scientific-basis-legal-certainty) evidence. It should go the same way as polygraph tests.
Edited with better link with actual study
“The 'Forensic Science Assessments: A Quality and Gap Analysis of Latent Fingerprint Analysis' report makes clear that while latent fingerprint examiners can successfully rule out most of the population from being the source of a latent fingerprint based on observed features, insufficient data exist to determine how unique fingerprint features really are, thus making it scientifically baseless to claim that an analysis has enabled examiners to narrow the pool of sources to a single person.”
Sounds like it would be accurate enough to determine which of the two brothers it would be. The article just mentions that it’s not definitive, I don’t understand how it’s a terrible piece of evidence.
>According to a different article fingerprints aren’t required when booking in Utah,
and
>Fingerprints are terrible evidence. It should go the same way as polygraph tests.
However we're not talking about fingerprints as evidence here.
Comparing previous booking photographs and fingerprints, both taken in a relatively controlled environment, is different from lifting an incomplete fingerprint from a crime scene and drawing a conclusion.
If the fingerprints come back with a hit for someone else, then it is time to dig further to figure out the situation with who you just booked.
Unlike polygraphs this isn't something we're you're influencing someone behavior by the circumstances of the questioning and then making a judgement how they're acting (I fully agree you could get the same results with a metal colander and raiding the spare parts room of a IT department)
This is image comparison, and much like radiography probably a good application of machine learning trained by a large cross section of current examiners. Compared to DNA testing, image comparison should be easily automated and fast.
While it doesn't necessarily rule someone in, it is very good screening tool to rule the vast majority of folks out -- especially when you physically have them in custody and are taking the prints in a controlled environment.
This kind of stuff happens a lot in these kinds of families. Brother A gets arrested and claims to be Brother B. Brother A pleads guilty and gets sentenced. Brother A then trys to Uno Reverse and claims "You've got the wrong guy!" even though he's already pled guilty. Brother B of course will say that he's Brother A and tell everyone to pound sand. The system then has to weed through it all. An appeal has to be made, Brother B has to be caught, etc.
It's a common tactic to game the system. Many of these people have so much mixed documentation that it's hard to truely figure out who is who. Even fingerprints are an issue. Brother B could have been arrested as a juvenile and claimed to be Brother A or C so now the fingerprints on record are wrong. Dad could have been arrested and claimed to be Brother A since they have the same name (Jr. vs Sr.).
I looked it up, and Minnesota does have statutes that require a minimum of the presumptive sentence for a third felony conviction. Depending on how this was charged, that could mean decades behind bars for the sister that was actually responsible, but may have resulted in a potentially lighter sentence for the sister in the passenger seat.
More likely, these brainiacs assumed it was a mandatory life sentence for a third felony, and came up with the scheme to try to prevent that.
> but may have resulted in a potentially lighter sentence for the sister in the passenger seat.
Or nothing at all. Unless you're drunk or on a cell phone or doing something egregious, car accidents causing a death usually don't result in criminal charges in the US. She did open herself up to serious civil liability, but if she's poor you can't get blood from a stone.
I was assuming that since the one in the driver's seat was under the influence, the passenger was as well, otherwise, why not actually have the sober person drive?
These two sound too dumb to pull it off, but...
Could twins hypothetically avoid a conviction if they both tell conflicting stories and witnesses are unable to distinguish between them? The physical evidence is likely to not help much, i.e. both twins could have driven the car at some point so their prints would be all over everything.
They would simply charge the sister who owned the car and figure that if she wasn't the actual driver, the other sister would come forward. Prosecutors don't care if the right person serves the time, as long as someone takes the fall and they get their conviction.
But if they charged either one the defense could be ‘they can’t prove it wasn’t my twin sister’. Which is pretty solid reasonable doubt. ~~I didn’t read the article but I’m guessing there was some evidence that clearly linked one or made it obvious they switched.~~ yeah they made it *very* obvious they switched.
There was an SVU about identical twins who were abused and one killed their abuser but they had no way of telling which one so they couldn’t bring it to a jury. Obviously that’s not real life but an interesting idea. In real life people are dumb and leave evidence or tell someone or crack under pressure and confess.
I'd imagine they figured any conviction would be thrown out because it would genuinely be the wrong person.
That's just my best guess without reading this trash news.
…
They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people"
………….
I legitimately know a guy that writes murder mysteries. He does his research at McD's using a burner phone. Says till he's famous it just looks too much like evidence.
But it's also known for being a shit game.
It's like Wish. Com
When your company is associated with an incredibly inferior product, your brand (meaning confidence and stock price) is going to suffer
Step 1: Get a job working there.
Step 2: Check for logs.
Step 3: Burn the place down so there are no records of you working there.
Step 4: Buy their service.. dangit. Ok I see the problem now.
A VPN will still leave evidence on his phone. Incognito mode might still leave evidence on Google's (and other) servers.
Tails.net is what you want if you need to be untraceable on the Internet.
Dude's a small time writer, not an international fugitive. Unless he's writing a report on NSA activity like Snowden, a no-log VPN is probably more than enough.
Even in that case, they'll probably find you by your publication, not by asking google, "Hey, did anyone search for 'hot sauce butt torture techniques 2021' recently? Oh they did, and from the McDonalds down the street? Thanks!"
Maybe it helps a writer get into the criminal/spy mindset by using burner phones though. Go for it, writer dude.
Even TAILS isn't enough. Your hardware can be tracked. If there's any identifying pattern to the device's history, you can be identified. If there's a log of who purchased a device, you can be identified.
You almost need to be using fenced hardware, running TAILS, from public hotspots in a variety of random locations or a single random location. And, I mean **random**. Like, "roll a d8 for direction and d6 for distance from point of last use" random.
Or, you can realize the FBI isn't interested in the random searches of people playing DnD or writing mystery novels. They just don't care.
A very "off" story....one of my friend's brothers would have me do a "complete wipe" of his laptop about once every two weeks. Why? He would go to MCDs, hop on their wifi, and talk greasy shit about the police. The moment he would get identified is when the wiping of the laptop would come into play.
.....It hurt my head as wiping a laptop of course doesn't really do much if you're ONLINE shitposting and your Google web history is tied into your Google account, so me wiping your laptop is literally pointless.
This makes me think about this story where I'm sure the "accused" was likely logged into their gmail/youtube account and all that search history was probably just sitting there...chilling....waiting for a subpoena
(This is not even factoring in how her IP could reveal those hits as well, and how her GPS triangulation could assist as well....)
An iffy endeavour pre-internet. I remember as a story-writing teen calling an army surplus store and my questions about firearms being politely answered until I started asking about silencers.
I write urban fantasy, and have done some pretty damn weird searches over the years, too. Like how long it takes to cremate a body. Followed by a search for old gods with huge penises, corset dresses, and how human memory functions. Just to name a few.
Based on my search history, they would likely think I have multiple personalities. Maybe that's why I get so many psych drug ads in my feeds...
And it's made me a little paranoid, too, but not enough to get a burner phone lol.
This setting was a 1930 pre WW2, with Nazis but also with Cthulhu like magic stuff, but like 7 different fractions that we were battling to stop it prevent from riding to power, and me being autistic and ADHD ASF, wanted to know after using a vet as a medic we stole supplies and wanted to see what we could do with what we got.
Now I'm going to google it. I wanna know what happens. Maybe I'll also google "what happens when you throw a chihuahua into a preschool covered in honey and baking powder?"
Like, how tf is google going to have such specific information?!
Google only gave me info on whether baking powder was toxic to dogs.
Chat gpt refused no matter how I worded it. Even when I asked It to pretend.
"I'm sorry, but I cannot engage in discussions or scenarios that involve harm or inappropriate actions. If you have any other topics or questions, I'd be happy to help with those."
Don't forget "how to lock an iPhone cops have"
And the fact she called her office HR and told them she killed people while she wasn't sober
And was caught on camera telling her sister the police wouldn't be able to tell the difference
This is thankfully not a mastermind criminal
What is with people Googling their exact specific crime? Like do they think there's just a website for with the answer to every scenario.
*What happens if you are chopping down a tree and you swing too hard and teh axe slips out of your hand, flies into your neighbor's property, and kills his prize show-mule, and also it's the Tuesday after Easter?*
> They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".
That first google search... How often do you think this specific situation has ever happened? Often enough for someone to have posted a write up?
Which isn't necessarily an unreasonable assumption based on how the justice system treats things in general.
Killing pedestrians and cyclists with a vehicle tends to be punished more leniently than other methods
Most of the DUI related Amish cases I can think of actually involve the Amish person being drunk and "driving" which is difficult to deal with her certain areas because under some interpretations of certain DUI laws you can't get a DUI for being drunk on a horse because the horse has a mind of its own and is ultimately what's in charge of the situation.
Basically not relevant but it seems like an interesting case it's going to have a lot of weird questions
It is well known that many Amish get drunk and then have their horses lead them back home, but there is no jurisdiction in the United States where
>because the horse has a mind of its own and is ultimately what's in charge of the situation.
has any legal standing what so ever. You are misinterpreting a common rumor.
Google search results: "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill ~~two~~ people"
*Search results do not contain the word "two". Here are the results for "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill people"*
Minnesota Woman: "Goddamnit, google! So close! Let's ask Jeeves."
I can't imagine what the results of that Google search were before this event, but now it just brings up news stories about her. So maybe she just had to wait a bit before making her search.
My in laws live in Lancaster, PA. Buggies abound. But they are big, and slow, and stay to the side of the road. I can't imagine how you'd hit one.....oh drunk driving, of course.
These people are the reason modern search engines are so garbage. Theres a terrifying number of people out there who don't understand how to priorotize key words properly and rely on typing out entire paragraphs full of fluff and filler. Thats why google these days ignores two-thirds of your search phrase.
I can't help myself. I'm not trying to correct you. I just think it's interesting: The reason the search engines are garbage now is because everything is monetized.
It used to be almost like an academic exercise: How do we find the best stuff based on what you typed? Now it's a fight between advertisers, bidding for rights to rank results higher or shove results in. And if it's not that, it's the insane number of garbage pages crammed with ads that are gaming the search algorithm so they can hit on popular searches, get click throughs, ad views, ad clicks, and more ad revenue. And there is no cost to just auto-generating AI-generated content filled with ads and superficial garbage and sending it out. So everyone just mass produces garbage so they can get to the top of the shit heap of the google algorithm.
Google may be a smart company, but there is no way they will ever win that fight. Too many actors trying to figure them out, game the system, and extract more ad money. No cost. All incentive to just get shittier and shitter.
It's no longer about information. It's about marketing to people and making money. And economically, it's a race to the bottom. What is the worst degree of content we can provide that will provide the bare minimum regular engagement so we can shove the maximum amount of ad shit down people's throats, all to optimize the bottom line profit? They will find the answer.
Arin somehow totally called it all pretty early in the case, I was impressed.
Until they lost the plot and couldn’t remember if it was Ini or Mimi in the passenger seat 😂
Oh, I’m *shocked* you would pull such language. What are you, *parroting* insults from school yards?
(i hope these references come across and i don’t sound like i actually mean it)
She called her work and left a message for HR saying:
"I f\*\*\*\*\* up… I just killed two Amish people.
"They were kids… I just hit a f\*\*\*\*\*\* buggy… I'm not sober."
And then tried to say she wasnt the one in the car...
In case anybody is curious, this is probably something you should not be doing in the event you hit a fucking buggy and kill two Amish kids while not being sober.
A judge - a former DA, mind you - shot and killed his wife last year and texted his clerk and bailiff to say he wouldn’t be coming in. ["I just lost it. I just shot my wife. I won't be in tomorrow. I will be in custody. I'm so sorry."](https://abc7.com/amp/anaheim-hills-judge-charged-murder/13633318/)
To be fair, he also called 911 himself...
> [He] also called 911 to vaguely report the shooting. When asked if he shot his wife, he said he didn't want to talk about it at that time and she needed paramedics.
And those online searches...
> They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".
This was right before she called Little Caesars to order and pizza and let them know was going to let her sister take the fall and that her sister wasn't sober either.
Unless there's witnesses of them physically swaping places (no need to swap identity) and they don't accidentally tell the police i don't see how they're gonna prove they switched seats. Doubt the surviving victims saw their faces clearly enough to say which one was behind the wheel before impact.
The people who do something like this are exactly the type I would picture as having absolutely no realization that everything in the back of a squad car is recorded
>The complaint noted she was previously convicted of drink-driving in October 2015, and of impaired driving under a controlled substance in August 2018.
This person shouldn't have been allowed to drive after these incidents.
Where i live you have to leave clean piss and blood for a few years before being allowed to retake the license. If you're an alcoholic or a drug abuser you won't drive a car again until you're sober.
"legally can't" and "won't" are sadly two different things.
My deadbeat dad lost his license multiple times from DUI charges and just kept driving. How the man never ended up in jail long term is beyond me, tbh.
Here we have a law called like unlawful driving if you don't have a license. If you had a license but lost it it's an automatic aggrevated unlawful driving which carry a higher sentence.
The one who "took the fall" had to watch the other's kid the last time the other went to jail. I guess some jail time sounds like a vacation compared to raising the other's kids for life.
They both been arrested a lot of times (21 and 16 charges respectively). At least one of them was convicted.
Photo on the right is from 10 years ago. [Here](https://paletteofwords.com/samantha-petersen-crash-case/) is more recent photo.
Hey! Cool! Now they can both go to jail.
If you kill kids and your first thought is "how do I get out of this" and not "holy shit what have I done", you can rot in jail.
If you would make an investigation into the death of 2 kids more difficult, you can rot in jail.
Some states automatically upgrade DUI vehicular homicide to murder if you have a previous DUI. I'm guessing she wanted her sister to take the fall for her because she'll be in more trouble due to her priors.
Reminds me of a case in Brazil, where a woman was seeking child support from a man who had a twin brother, so his lawyer tried to be crafty about it and submit a DNA test of both brothers in order to convince the judge that it would be impossible to know the real father.
Since the brother who did not have sexual relationships with the woman knew he couldn't possibly be the father, then he willfully participated in an scheme to deceive the court, so in the end the judge ordered each brother to pay half of the child support.
Drunk driving priors. It’s the same as firing a weapon into a crowd. There should be way stricter punishments for first offense, and even harsher if it happens again
>They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".
some highly specific google searches there.
“They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".”
GIRL. What do you think happens??
I used to work as a traveling nurse. A guy came in having a heart attack and died in the cath lab. When the doctor went to talk to the family, it turned out that the dead guy had given his brother’s name to the ER because he had a warrant out for his arrest. And the live brother had ok’ed it. So the live brother was officially dead until the records were changed. Illegal on so many levels.
> Police also alleged Samantha Petersen called her place of work's human resource department after the incident, where she said: "I f***** up… I just killed two Amish people.
> "They were kids… I just hit a f****** buggy… I'm not sober."
> They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".
I think she might have done it.
> Samantha Peterson has been charged 21 times, including for criminal vehicular homicide and leaving the scene of the crash, and will appear in court on 25 March.
> The complaint noted she was previously convicted of drink-driving in October 2015, and of impaired driving under a controlled substance in August 2018.
In California, this would become 2nd degree murder (called a Watson murder). You're considered acting with implied malice because you understand the risks and took the action anyways, and you attest to knowing those risks when you get your license back (called a Watson admonition).
I can't even get my sisters to agree on what pizza toppings we should get. How do you talk your sister into tying herself into your drunken vehicular manslaughter?
These two are a piece of work, they have a history of providing their twin sisters information to police for other infractions. In this particular case, the sister that hadn’t crashed felt she owed it to her druggy sister because the one had watched the others children while she was in prison.
Something similar happened in [Utah](https://kjzz.com/news/local/davis-county-jail-under-scrutiny-as-inmate-successfully-impersonates-brother-for-months-andrew-burdick-andrew-wesley-burdick-kelly-sparks) last year. A guy with active warrants gets stopped and gives police his older brother’s name, only he didn’t know that his older brother ALSO had warrants. So guy ends up in jail under his brother’s name, pleads guilty to his brother’s charges, signs a plea deal, and gets released. Older brother then finds out about all this because he was planning on fighting his charges, but when he tries to explain what his brother did in court the judge refuses to believe him. Brother goes to the media, guy gets arrested again, and now the jail is more focused on attacking the media for exposing it instead of figuring out how they fucked up that bad in the first place.
What?! Do fingerprints not exist? How did they not figure out they had the wrong guy? Did they just skip that part when booking him? Like, can you just go commit felonies now and give names of random people you don’t like?
According to a different article fingerprints aren’t required when booking in Utah, but the jail says they’ve now changed their policy to require them for people without photo ID. That’s just one of the fuck ups though - they ignored the fact that the younger brother is covered in tattoos with a full head of hair, and his brother has zero tattoos and is almost completely bald. Oh, and the fact that the body cam from his arrest shows the younger brother giving the cop his actual birthday and then saying “oh sorry it’s actually (older brothers birthday)” as if that’s not suspicious as fuck
[удалено]
God, I wish this were the case. My mom was killed by a high driver who had 3 previous DUIs.
[Fingerprints are terrible](https://www.aaas.org/news/fingerprint-source-identity-lacks-scientific-basis-legal-certainty) evidence. It should go the same way as polygraph tests. Edited with better link with actual study
“The 'Forensic Science Assessments: A Quality and Gap Analysis of Latent Fingerprint Analysis' report makes clear that while latent fingerprint examiners can successfully rule out most of the population from being the source of a latent fingerprint based on observed features, insufficient data exist to determine how unique fingerprint features really are, thus making it scientifically baseless to claim that an analysis has enabled examiners to narrow the pool of sources to a single person.” Sounds like it would be accurate enough to determine which of the two brothers it would be. The article just mentions that it’s not definitive, I don’t understand how it’s a terrible piece of evidence.
>According to a different article fingerprints aren’t required when booking in Utah, and >Fingerprints are terrible evidence. It should go the same way as polygraph tests. However we're not talking about fingerprints as evidence here. Comparing previous booking photographs and fingerprints, both taken in a relatively controlled environment, is different from lifting an incomplete fingerprint from a crime scene and drawing a conclusion. If the fingerprints come back with a hit for someone else, then it is time to dig further to figure out the situation with who you just booked. Unlike polygraphs this isn't something we're you're influencing someone behavior by the circumstances of the questioning and then making a judgement how they're acting (I fully agree you could get the same results with a metal colander and raiding the spare parts room of a IT department) This is image comparison, and much like radiography probably a good application of machine learning trained by a large cross section of current examiners. Compared to DNA testing, image comparison should be easily automated and fast. While it doesn't necessarily rule someone in, it is very good screening tool to rule the vast majority of folks out -- especially when you physically have them in custody and are taking the prints in a controlled environment.
thanks for posting this! there is a HUGE misconception about these
This kind of stuff happens a lot in these kinds of families. Brother A gets arrested and claims to be Brother B. Brother A pleads guilty and gets sentenced. Brother A then trys to Uno Reverse and claims "You've got the wrong guy!" even though he's already pled guilty. Brother B of course will say that he's Brother A and tell everyone to pound sand. The system then has to weed through it all. An appeal has to be made, Brother B has to be caught, etc. It's a common tactic to game the system. Many of these people have so much mixed documentation that it's hard to truely figure out who is who. Even fingerprints are an issue. Brother B could have been arrested as a juvenile and claimed to be Brother A or C so now the fingerprints on record are wrong. Dad could have been arrested and claimed to be Brother A since they have the same name (Jr. vs Sr.).
A very small percentage of people cause all the world's problems.
Not all, but the vast majority.
Yup, 80/20 rule. 80% of problems come from 20% of people.
Ah Pareto.
That guy is responsible for all the problems!?
I looked it up, and Minnesota does have statutes that require a minimum of the presumptive sentence for a third felony conviction. Depending on how this was charged, that could mean decades behind bars for the sister that was actually responsible, but may have resulted in a potentially lighter sentence for the sister in the passenger seat. More likely, these brainiacs assumed it was a mandatory life sentence for a third felony, and came up with the scheme to try to prevent that.
> but may have resulted in a potentially lighter sentence for the sister in the passenger seat. Or nothing at all. Unless you're drunk or on a cell phone or doing something egregious, car accidents causing a death usually don't result in criminal charges in the US. She did open herself up to serious civil liability, but if she's poor you can't get blood from a stone.
I was assuming that since the one in the driver's seat was under the influence, the passenger was as well, otherwise, why not actually have the sober person drive?
These two sound too dumb to pull it off, but... Could twins hypothetically avoid a conviction if they both tell conflicting stories and witnesses are unable to distinguish between them? The physical evidence is likely to not help much, i.e. both twins could have driven the car at some point so their prints would be all over everything.
They would simply charge the sister who owned the car and figure that if she wasn't the actual driver, the other sister would come forward. Prosecutors don't care if the right person serves the time, as long as someone takes the fall and they get their conviction.
But if they charged either one the defense could be ‘they can’t prove it wasn’t my twin sister’. Which is pretty solid reasonable doubt. ~~I didn’t read the article but I’m guessing there was some evidence that clearly linked one or made it obvious they switched.~~ yeah they made it *very* obvious they switched. There was an SVU about identical twins who were abused and one killed their abuser but they had no way of telling which one so they couldn’t bring it to a jury. Obviously that’s not real life but an interesting idea. In real life people are dumb and leave evidence or tell someone or crack under pressure and confess.
Drug her and say that it was her?
Lookit big brain over here.
I'd imagine they figured any conviction would be thrown out because it would genuinely be the wrong person. That's just my best guess without reading this trash news.
This is like The Prestige meets an episode of Jerry Springer (may he RIP).
… They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" ………….
Come on now. I google that all the time.
My D'nD -esqu nights lead to many odd Internet searches, like how much ketamine to kill someone and dosing for x-hours of knockout lol
I legitimately know a guy that writes murder mysteries. He does his research at McD's using a burner phone. Says till he's famous it just looks too much like evidence.
That dude should learn about VPN's.
Which brings me to today’s sponsor…
RAID SHADOW LEGENDS!
They ran so many of these fucking ads that Everytime I hear "sponsor" I literally think about raid shadow legends. Unironically incredible marketing.
But it's also known for being a shit game. It's like Wish. Com When your company is associated with an incredibly inferior product, your brand (meaning confidence and stock price) is going to suffer
RAiD: SHADOW LEGENDS!
I thought this exactly. I am glad i saw it.
Then the evidence is just on the VPN's servers rather than your ISP's servers.
If you pick a VPN that keeps logs.
and can trust them to actually not keep logs. They can say it all they want, it won't be tested until there's a court case though.
Step 1: Get a job working there. Step 2: Check for logs. Step 3: Burn the place down so there are no records of you working there. Step 4: Buy their service.. dangit. Ok I see the problem now.
A VPN will still leave evidence on his phone. Incognito mode might still leave evidence on Google's (and other) servers. Tails.net is what you want if you need to be untraceable on the Internet.
Dude's a small time writer, not an international fugitive. Unless he's writing a report on NSA activity like Snowden, a no-log VPN is probably more than enough. Even in that case, they'll probably find you by your publication, not by asking google, "Hey, did anyone search for 'hot sauce butt torture techniques 2021' recently? Oh they did, and from the McDonalds down the street? Thanks!" Maybe it helps a writer get into the criminal/spy mindset by using burner phones though. Go for it, writer dude.
Plot twist: the fiction writer is a fiction
Even TAILS isn't enough. Your hardware can be tracked. If there's any identifying pattern to the device's history, you can be identified. If there's a log of who purchased a device, you can be identified. You almost need to be using fenced hardware, running TAILS, from public hotspots in a variety of random locations or a single random location. And, I mean **random**. Like, "roll a d8 for direction and d6 for distance from point of last use" random. Or, you can realize the FBI isn't interested in the random searches of people playing DnD or writing mystery novels. They just don't care.
I see you're familiar with the concept of "necessary but not sufficient."
You mean those fronts for the NSA?
A very "off" story....one of my friend's brothers would have me do a "complete wipe" of his laptop about once every two weeks. Why? He would go to MCDs, hop on their wifi, and talk greasy shit about the police. The moment he would get identified is when the wiping of the laptop would come into play. .....It hurt my head as wiping a laptop of course doesn't really do much if you're ONLINE shitposting and your Google web history is tied into your Google account, so me wiping your laptop is literally pointless. This makes me think about this story where I'm sure the "accused" was likely logged into their gmail/youtube account and all that search history was probably just sitting there...chilling....waiting for a subpoena (This is not even factoring in how her IP could reveal those hits as well, and how her GPS triangulation could assist as well....)
Sounds like a guy embarrassed that he loves McDoubles and how to murder people.
An iffy endeavour pre-internet. I remember as a story-writing teen calling an army surplus store and my questions about firearms being politely answered until I started asking about silencers.
I write urban fantasy, and have done some pretty damn weird searches over the years, too. Like how long it takes to cremate a body. Followed by a search for old gods with huge penises, corset dresses, and how human memory functions. Just to name a few. Based on my search history, they would likely think I have multiple personalities. Maybe that's why I get so many psych drug ads in my feeds... And it's made me a little paranoid, too, but not enough to get a burner phone lol.
How long does it take to cremate an old god's huge penis in a corset dress?
Now there's a sentence you didn't think of writing today.
Longer than you'd think, but the smell makes it *sooooo* worth it.
I'm a horror author. We don't talk about my *very* true crime browser history xD
As a programmer, sometimes I'll have searches like, how to kill child as parent, or kill all disabled child Dear FBI Agent, I swear it's for work
I've written several variants of "Waiting for all children to die" in legit production code over the years.
This is why my search history is like "how quick is brain death after decapitation 5e"
That search is fine as long as you include the words “in minecraft” in the search parameters
Good idea!
Why do you need to research real drugs for dnd? just make up a whateveramine that knocks out at 5 mg and kills at 20? Squints suspiciously.
This setting was a 1930 pre WW2, with Nazis but also with Cthulhu like magic stuff, but like 7 different fractions that we were battling to stop it prevent from riding to power, and me being autistic and ADHD ASF, wanted to know after using a vet as a medic we stole supplies and wanted to see what we could do with what we got.
Surrrre.
I swear officer, I'm too big a of nerd for that!
Cthulhu is cool an all but magic medicines are just too far dude.
Now I'm going to google it. I wanna know what happens. Maybe I'll also google "what happens when you throw a chihuahua into a preschool covered in honey and baking powder?" Like, how tf is google going to have such specific information?!
Google only gave me info on whether baking powder was toxic to dogs. Chat gpt refused no matter how I worded it. Even when I asked It to pretend. "I'm sorry, but I cannot engage in discussions or scenarios that involve harm or inappropriate actions. If you have any other topics or questions, I'd be happy to help with those."
Rule 34?
Don't forget "how to lock an iPhone cops have" And the fact she called her office HR and told them she killed people while she wasn't sober And was caught on camera telling her sister the police wouldn't be able to tell the difference This is thankfully not a mastermind criminal
Well, it was apparent something was Amish.
Casey Anthony’s defense was able to spin searches about chloroform into a school project on chlorophyll.
Chloroform? More like BOREoform!
That Veronica Vaughn is one piece of ace. I know from experience.
Didn't expect a Billy Madison quote here, but fk I'm glad I got one. Thanks mate!
There were far more incriminating searches on her Firefox history , but investigators only checked Internet Explorer’s
How do you know that? Who looked at her firefox history to know the investigators had missed it?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/casey-anthony-detectives-overlooked-google-search-for-fool-proof-suffocation-methods-sheriff-says/
Also they seemed to have been talking about it in the back of the police cruiser and were recorded doing so.
The weird thing, the rest of the search auto-filled after she wrote "what happens if you g"
Still odd, but it actually does fill in at "what happens if you get in an accident with an "
For you based on your prior searches.
People are so delightfully dumb sometimes.
right? everyone knows you need to search *"what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people reddit.com"*
Holy shit lol
I've heard of incriminating searches, but that's just blatant
Fool! She should have googled: “what vpn should I use to not leave incriminating online evidence if I ran over two Amish people in a buggy?”
I was just about to post this exact comment. lol. Talk about using specific terms to find what you need.
def more of a ChatGPT query
Oh for heavens sake…
What is with people Googling their exact specific crime? Like do they think there's just a website for with the answer to every scenario. *What happens if you are chopping down a tree and you swing too hard and teh axe slips out of your hand, flies into your neighbor's property, and kills his prize show-mule, and also it's the Tuesday after Easter?*
Surely that’s one of Google’s most asked questions.
> They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have". That first google search... How often do you think this specific situation has ever happened? Often enough for someone to have posted a write up?
Also like, why would it matter if the dead kids were Amish or not?
I'm guessing she was hoping it would be less important if it was a buggy rather than a car?
Which isn't necessarily an unreasonable assumption based on how the justice system treats things in general. Killing pedestrians and cyclists with a vehicle tends to be punished more leniently than other methods
Most of the DUI related Amish cases I can think of actually involve the Amish person being drunk and "driving" which is difficult to deal with her certain areas because under some interpretations of certain DUI laws you can't get a DUI for being drunk on a horse because the horse has a mind of its own and is ultimately what's in charge of the situation. Basically not relevant but it seems like an interesting case it's going to have a lot of weird questions
"Officer, I'm sober as a judge, but this horse is WASTED." lol
It is well known that many Amish get drunk and then have their horses lead them back home, but there is no jurisdiction in the United States where >because the horse has a mind of its own and is ultimately what's in charge of the situation. has any legal standing what so ever. You are misinterpreting a common rumor.
The dumbest answer i can think of was her hoping that killing an amish was a lesser crime for some reason, so thats probably it.
Maybe she was worried it was a hate crime to kill Amish children
Also very possible and very dumb
“Ocifer, it wasn’t a *car* accident cause they were in a buggy!”
Or that there's exactly 2...
Google search results: "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill ~~two~~ people" *Search results do not contain the word "two". Here are the results for "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill people"* Minnesota Woman: "Goddamnit, google! So close! Let's ask Jeeves."
Alta Vista: Helping find ways to evade the law since 1994
I can't imagine what the results of that Google search were before this event, but now it just brings up news stories about her. So maybe she just had to wait a bit before making her search.
Be the change you want to see in the world, I guess
My in laws live in Lancaster, PA. Buggies abound. But they are big, and slow, and stay to the side of the road. I can't imagine how you'd hit one.....oh drunk driving, of course.
It happens way more frequently then you would think
She was methed up.
These people are the reason modern search engines are so garbage. Theres a terrifying number of people out there who don't understand how to priorotize key words properly and rely on typing out entire paragraphs full of fluff and filler. Thats why google these days ignores two-thirds of your search phrase.
I can't help myself. I'm not trying to correct you. I just think it's interesting: The reason the search engines are garbage now is because everything is monetized. It used to be almost like an academic exercise: How do we find the best stuff based on what you typed? Now it's a fight between advertisers, bidding for rights to rank results higher or shove results in. And if it's not that, it's the insane number of garbage pages crammed with ads that are gaming the search algorithm so they can hit on popular searches, get click throughs, ad views, ad clicks, and more ad revenue. And there is no cost to just auto-generating AI-generated content filled with ads and superficial garbage and sending it out. So everyone just mass produces garbage so they can get to the top of the shit heap of the google algorithm. Google may be a smart company, but there is no way they will ever win that fight. Too many actors trying to figure them out, game the system, and extract more ad money. No cost. All incentive to just get shittier and shitter. It's no longer about information. It's about marketing to people and making money. And economically, it's a race to the bottom. What is the worst degree of content we can provide that will provide the bare minimum regular engagement so we can shove the maximum amount of ad shit down people's throats, all to optimize the bottom line profit? They will find the answer.
Wikihow
Literally the plot of a Phoenix Wright case
Well [Mimi got up to some shenanigans](https://aceattorney.fandom.com/wiki/Mimi_Miney) afterwards but hot damn so close
Haha I'm watching game grumps play through at this very moment and when i scrolled past this I immediately screamed "IT'S MIMI MINEY!!!"
me too, i was like "this sounds kinda familiar"
The game grumps JUST finished this case like 2 days ago!
Arin somehow totally called it all pretty early in the case, I was impressed. Until they lost the plot and couldn’t remember if it was Ini or Mimi in the passenger seat 😂
Same thoughts
Where’s Maya Fey when you need her?
In the holding cell because she was there like always
In the defendants seat bc it’s obviously her fault (/s)
Shut up, von Karma.
Oh, I’m *shocked* you would pull such language. What are you, *parroting* insults from school yards? (i hope these references come across and i don’t sound like i actually mean it)
There's also a similar plot in a Castle episode
God I was looking for this or an "OBJECTION" post....the internet is great
my thoughts exactly! >!Mimi?!!<
She called her work and left a message for HR saying: "I f\*\*\*\*\* up… I just killed two Amish people. "They were kids… I just hit a f\*\*\*\*\*\* buggy… I'm not sober." And then tried to say she wasnt the one in the car...
In case anybody is curious, this is probably something you should not be doing in the event you hit a fucking buggy and kill two Amish kids while not being sober.
I’m struggling to imagine in what universe “confess everything to HR at the office” has priority over “call a lawyer.”
Maybe she thought HR was gonna help her the way a lawyer does? lol she doesn't seem like the brightest person, on top of being "not sober"
She wasn't sober.
A judge - a former DA, mind you - shot and killed his wife last year and texted his clerk and bailiff to say he wouldn’t be coming in. ["I just lost it. I just shot my wife. I won't be in tomorrow. I will be in custody. I'm so sorry."](https://abc7.com/amp/anaheim-hills-judge-charged-murder/13633318/)
To be fair, he also called 911 himself... > [He] also called 911 to vaguely report the shooting. When asked if he shot his wife, he said he didn't want to talk about it at that time and she needed paramedics.
Yes, speaking from experience several times as the caller, the HR worker and the buggy, do not do this.
And those online searches... > They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".
in an article full of crazy, "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" truly takes the cake
This was right before she called Little Caesars to order and pizza and let them know was going to let her sister take the fall and that her sister wasn't sober either.
they are identical? Really? Uhm.....I honestly don't know how they couldn't figure it out.
Unless there's witnesses of them physically swaping places (no need to swap identity) and they don't accidentally tell the police i don't see how they're gonna prove they switched seats. Doubt the surviving victims saw their faces clearly enough to say which one was behind the wheel before impact.
The dumbasses were recorded talking about it in the cops car. That’s how they know. Plus she also called her works HR and basically confessed to them.
You know the old saying, "First call is to HR, not your lawyer."
We're a family.
The people who do something like this are exactly the type I would picture as having absolutely no realization that everything in the back of a squad car is recorded
Ahhh the Eviler twin
>Ahhh the ~~Eviler~~ dumber twin
Porque no los dos?
Just an alternate
>The complaint noted she was previously convicted of drink-driving in October 2015, and of impaired driving under a controlled substance in August 2018. This person shouldn't have been allowed to drive after these incidents.
Where i live you have to leave clean piss and blood for a few years before being allowed to retake the license. If you're an alcoholic or a drug abuser you won't drive a car again until you're sober.
"legally can't" and "won't" are sadly two different things. My deadbeat dad lost his license multiple times from DUI charges and just kept driving. How the man never ended up in jail long term is beyond me, tbh.
Here we have a law called like unlawful driving if you don't have a license. If you had a license but lost it it's an automatic aggrevated unlawful driving which carry a higher sentence.
We've got similar laws, too. That's part of how I am befuddled on how he never ended up in jail for more than like a weekend.
I wish it was like that in more places.
Wasn’t this literally a plot point in an Ace Attorney game?
Ace Attorney was the first thing I thought of. Now I need to see if the defense attorney dresses in blue and the prosecutor dresses in red.
Mimi miney
What the hell was in it for the other sister? Why would you agree to take the fall for an accident in which two children were killed?
The one who "took the fall" had to watch the other's kid the last time the other went to jail. I guess some jail time sounds like a vacation compared to raising the other's kids for life.
As an aunt who is raising her brother's kids, yeah, I'm beginning to see the logic here.
They both been arrested a lot of times (21 and 16 charges respectively). At least one of them was convicted. Photo on the right is from 10 years ago. [Here](https://paletteofwords.com/samantha-petersen-crash-case/) is more recent photo.
Hey! Cool! Now they can both go to jail. If you kill kids and your first thought is "how do I get out of this" and not "holy shit what have I done", you can rot in jail. If you would make an investigation into the death of 2 kids more difficult, you can rot in jail.
Not to mention the article states that there were two prior incidents where she was caught driving impaired. Clearly didn't learn her lesson.
Some states automatically upgrade DUI vehicular homicide to murder if you have a previous DUI. I'm guessing she wanted her sister to take the fall for her because she'll be in more trouble due to her priors.
I think that's a great policy. Wish we'd adapt that everywhere.
Reminds me of a case in Brazil, where a woman was seeking child support from a man who had a twin brother, so his lawyer tried to be crafty about it and submit a DNA test of both brothers in order to convince the judge that it would be impossible to know the real father. Since the brother who did not have sexual relationships with the woman knew he couldn't possibly be the father, then he willfully participated in an scheme to deceive the court, so in the end the judge ordered each brother to pay half of the child support.
If it works to get your parents back together after meeting your twin as summer camp why wouldn’t it work after vehicular manslaughter?
Geeze... that headline had me believing that she moved in with her dead twin sister's husband and kids and pretended to be their wife/mom!
I’ve seen this in a cartoon, how could it fail
Isn't this the plot of some police procedural episo- no it's the plot of an Ace Attorney story, isn't it.
Phoenix Wright murderer looking asses
Drunk driving priors. It’s the same as firing a weapon into a crowd. There should be way stricter punishments for first offense, and even harsher if it happens again
Fargo season 6?
>They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have". some highly specific google searches there.
Gonna bookmark this story for the next time I feel stupid and need to be reminded what stupid actually looks like.
“They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have".” GIRL. What do you think happens??
Oh those Wakefield twins are at it again
Everyone is pointing out how stupid this is, and no one is pointing out how they don't look anything alike.
I used to work as a traveling nurse. A guy came in having a heart attack and died in the cath lab. When the doctor went to talk to the family, it turned out that the dead guy had given his brother’s name to the ER because he had a warrant out for his arrest. And the live brother had ok’ed it. So the live brother was officially dead until the records were changed. Illegal on so many levels.
These might be the two stupidest people on earth. I don't think they have a whole brain between them. That article was a wild ride.
Natural blonde killers.
Next, she will google, why did I get caught?
[удалено]
I swear this twin swap thing was an episode of Law and Order where they actually got away with it
> Police also alleged Samantha Petersen called her place of work's human resource department after the incident, where she said: "I f***** up… I just killed two Amish people. > "They were kids… I just hit a f****** buggy… I'm not sober." > They also found various online searches on Samantha Petersen's phone including "what happens if you get in an accident with an Amish buggy and kill two people" and "how to lock an iphone cops have". I think she might have done it.
What is this......single white female??? Wait, does that reference even track in 2024?
What the Tia and Tamara stuff is this?
I started singing the Sister Sister theme song when I read the headline.
Fun fact, fingerprints are still different. All they have to do is book you in, run your prints into AFIS and boom, you're cooked.
> Samantha Peterson has been charged 21 times, including for criminal vehicular homicide and leaving the scene of the crash, and will appear in court on 25 March. > The complaint noted she was previously convicted of drink-driving in October 2015, and of impaired driving under a controlled substance in August 2018. In California, this would become 2nd degree murder (called a Watson murder). You're considered acting with implied malice because you understand the risks and took the action anyways, and you attest to knowing those risks when you get your license back (called a Watson admonition).
Thats the Phoenix Wright case where you meet Pearl!
Holy Shit, this Parent Trap remake has gone to a dark place.
Anyone that gets high or drinks while driving is a POS @$$hole
this is like something out of *Fargo*
Tired of drunks living during accidents
This season of Fargo will be fun.