Everything is not always how it seems in the first sight

Kimmo Huosionmaa


https://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/artikkeli/suuri-suomalainen-oikeusmurha-vaara-mies-saattoi-istua-elinkautisen-hamaraperaisesta-huumemurhasta/6597516

When we are talking about using information telephone's location for tracking some people, we must remember that that thing basis the cellphone. Nobody knows, who carries that cellphone. So anybody could take the cellphone the room table or something and walks away from the flat before the murder.  They might think on the court, that that cellphone was in the hands of somebody else.


Those tracking information proof that cellphone was in somewhere. And it can be given to somebody else. That cell phone could be in somebody else's than it right owner's hands.  Anybody might have that SIM-card or cellphone, and a problem for the defender is that he took a part of that violence.


The problem is in the background of those people. In the court, they must think that cellphone or the SIM-card what was used in the collection of the tracking data was in hands of somebody else than this man, who says that he is innocent. It would be nice to know is that SIM-card a prepaid or normal telephone subscription. And that other person's might claim, that they got that SIM-card from this man for something like paying the bill.


They were narcotics users and perfect targets for that kind of set up. If they took some drugs before the crime, they might not remember even remember how many people were in the flat. In the justice system, there is a problem in this kind of cases, that everybody tells lies when they sit in the court hall, and also judges and police officers hear all the time stories about some "unknown man", who slipped out the murder place.