A word of caution on the automatic respond while driving feature.

mjhubbard

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2010
190
11
0
Visit site
You may have heard of the recent case where a girl was found liable in a civil suit in New Jersey for texting some one she knew to be driving. Though there are currently not many laws on topics such as this, you don't need laws to be able to sue someone in this country.

Many states are considering laws or already allow police to look at phones when investigating an accident. The case above shows that in a suit, the cards are stacked against those who participate in texting while driving, and with good reason.

Motorola's feature to automatically text some one while driving could be a double edged sword in the not so distant future. It could open up the receiver and sender to liability post accident. First it documents quite clearly to the sender that you are driving at which point they would be wise to stop or incur liability in an accident.
But depending how quickly they are texting and the order they register on the phone, it may be too late. Second, you would also then have to prove that it was a new feature or program that sent the text, not your unsafe action. While that may be something you can prove with forensics, it may be a hard case to make to the cop on the side of the road making an arrest in a state that prohibits texting while driving. You may be cleared in the end but still find yourself spending a few nights in jail. And nothing prevents some one from suing you which is a hassle to be avoided.

Sometimes the simplest route is the safest. I will not use the auto response feature of moto assist. I do not want to be put in the situation where I am in an accident shortly after getting a text and by chance cause my self more trouble than good. Simply don't look at the phone while driving, and save yourself the headache.
 

bigv5150

Well-known member
Sep 13, 2011
169
1
0
Visit site
I would guess if this were to happen and the maxx responded with the stock message you are driving it would show that you didn't text your phone did. Thus you would not be liable.
 

mjhubbard

Well-known member
Nov 19, 2010
190
11
0
Visit site
In that case I would agree. But a non techie cop may still lock you up, especially if a death were involved, until they could hash it out. He may disbelieve, thinking you are trying to sell him a story.

And it does not protect the person who texted you if by some electronic fluke they sent a second message right as they get your response that you are driving. You may have just provided them evidence to sue your friend.
 

bigv5150

Well-known member
Sep 13, 2011
169
1
0
Visit site
Lucky for you I am a techie cop. I get what your saying but you would not get arrested on the spot for texting. Lets say you have an accident someone is killed or severely injured and they are going to charge you criminally. All the cop does is take the initial report hell in my town we have a fatal team if we think someone may die or did die they come out and investigate the whole scene. The prosecutors office also comes out it is a huge process. So lets say they do check your phone and see that you received one text and responded to the one text with the cookie cutter maxx response. You are right they would have no idea but once it was explained to them you would be in the clear. There is a lengthy investigation before charges are brought trust me.
 

KWKSLVR

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2011
860
4
18
Visit site
One question. Why are your phones not locked with a password? Frankly (and bear in mind I have multiple friends who are cops), there is no way in hell Law Enforcement is getting the password to my phone. Ship it off and have it cracked, ask/subpoena Verizon for records, whatever. But there is zero chance that I would voluntarily do or give A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G to anyone that is potentially incriminating. No matter how genuinely nice a cop is, he's not the one who will bring charges on you. Further, he is not your friend and you are not his. He has a job to do (a job that he should do as diligently and thoroughly as possible), but at the end of the day it's up to you to know what your rights are and to protect them yourself because it's NOT Law Enforcement's duty to protect them for you. Voluntarily opening your mouth and waving your rights is your decision and it's your own fault for saying or doing something that forfeits those rights. I would (and have) prefer(ed) to look shady or up to no good merely by exercising my rights than to wave those rights because a cop is just trying to do the job he should be doing.

Put a password on your phone. Know what's in your car. Be aware of your surroundings. Don't text and drive.
 

tritium

Member
Dec 18, 2011
6
0
0
Visit site
Your text message records are available from your cell phone carrier via subpoena, they don't need to interrogate your phone.
 

bigv5150

Well-known member
Sep 13, 2011
169
1
0
Visit site
Your text message records are available from your cell phone carrier via subpoena, they don't need to interrogate your phone.

True but only for about 3-5 days then they are erased and yes if you don't unlock your phone voluntarily we have to get a subpoena. However once we do you have no choice but to unlock it or face being arrested. And you are also correct I am not your friend my job is to find out if you broke the law that is what I get paid to do. You would be surprised what people leave on their cell phones for us to find. I also do not have a problem with someone telling me I am not going to assist you in incriminating myself honestly you would be stupid to do so. I have however found it strange that I have asked for consent to search a vehicle and the driver said yes. I then find drugs which he knew where there. The only thing I can figure is they feel I am asking to be courteous and if they say no I will just search anyway so they say yes.

I have to say texting and driving is extremely dangerous I have pulled over people I swore were drunk weaving into oncoming traffic driving 15-20 mph under the speed limit only to find out they were sober and texting. Honestly it is probably safer to drive buzzed then text. At least you are watching the road and driving cautiously being that you have been drinking and are paranoid of getting pulled over. I mean when your texting your not even looking at the road it's nuts to do it, I'm sure the LOL you were about to text could wait.
 

KWKSLVR

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2011
860
4
18
Visit site
No doubt. However, I'd rather be held in contempt, personally, even knowing I hadn't done anything wrong. It's just the principle of it all and I'm a principled person. Texting and driving dumbfounds me. I drive thousands of miles a month and spend a ton of time on the road most every day traveling from place to place for work and I'm constantly shocked at the number of people who can't walk and chew gum but will text and drive. At the same time, I think it's stupid to have laws against it. All thats happened is that people have gone from texting with their phones up in the air at windshield level, to hiding them down low and taking their eyes off of the road completely as if someone can't tell that you're staring at the floorboard of your car for 10 seconds typing about how OMGRidIkUlOuS one's boss is. Common sense seems to be dead.

I was in a "stand off" with law enforcement several, several months back for almost 2 hours after I followed a guy to his kid's school for a parent teacher conference. To back up, I'm a fraud investigator and mostly deal with worker's comp fraud that has escalated into high dollar lawsuits. Anyway, this meant that I was parked across the street from a school for quite some time. SUPER long story somewhat short, I'm a law abiding citizen, CCWing with a valid permit 500+ feet from a school in a state where it's legal to CCW INSIDE of a school surrounded by 2 detectives and 2 deputies who refused to accept my explanation of who I was and why I was there in addition to refusing to give the owner of our company a call to verify what we do and who we are as well as supplying business license information.

Bear in mind, I understand their perspective. I won't give them any pertinent case information (which is stored on my phone and computer, not on paper). Only notes with an internal case file and date are hand written. And I also refused to tell them who I was watching or what vehicle that person was driving (like I'm too dumb to know that running a tag doesn't tell you the owner). But my explanation for refusal was valid. Telling you the truth, that I'm a investigator investigating potential worker's comp fraud is completely fine. However, telling you who I'm watching is a HIPAA violation which is a spend 1 year and 1 day in prison plus a $50,000 fine FELONY. So there I am trying to be compelled to commit a crime by law enforcement under threat of having my vehicle impounded, my phone and computer confiscated and taken in to wait on "an angry judge who will be more than happy to issue a search warrant for someone who is creeping around a school". And I won't budge.

I mean, the way I saw it was if there's probable cause to impound my vehicle and arrest me after THAT much banter, then we wouldn't be talking anymore. If I could do it all again, I would have stopped talking, given them my lawyer's card and just told them that it would be in everyone's best interest to just go ahead and call the judge. It was a real life example that sometimes knowing the law and knowing your rights makes you look guilty, even though you've never been arrested for a thing.

My point wasn't to be a pain in the **** to a bunch of cops, who, from their perspective are merely trying to figure out who someone is outside of a school that they don't know in the wake of so many mass shootings being plastered all over the news. My point was that none of that mattered. It's not my problem. I wasn't doing anything wrong and I wasn't going to do something wrong by giving them what they wanted to know. That cop didn't know that turning over all my case information was a felony. He's not a lawyer. It's not his job to know. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. No person is getting the password and/or decryption keys to devices that have hundreds of names, DOB's, SSN's and addresses. Eventually the guy I was watching left and I had no idea where he went. The cops backed down and I told the detectives out of courtesy that I would call them if I was ever in the area again. We exchanged numbers and I also suggested that they just take down my information, vehicle description, etc and I could be their first stop in wasting their time if anything ever happened in their random, country bumpkin podunk, middle of no where school and we all shook on it with no ill will.

If I didn't know enough of the law pertaining to my field of employment, I could have committed a serious crime. Never consent to giving your password. Never consent to a search. Even if it's your car, you don't know what's in it. For all you know your buddy on Lortab for his back had a tablet slip out of his pocket and underneath your seat unknown to either of you, and there you are getting handcuffs tossed on you because you have a prescription narcotic that you don't have a prescription for in your possession. You thought you were doing the right thing and just being helpful to a tired cop at the end of his shift just trying to do a thankless, overly scrutinized job, but instead you just put yourself in a bind considering that a lot of cops don't necessarily have the leeway to just let someone go in that situation.

Lock your phone, lock your computer, don't consent to jack, know your rights, because it's more than just guilty people that need them. I hope I don't sound like a cop basher because I'm not. Most cops do an awesome job. It's a hard job and they don't get enough credit for all that they do and we tend to be way to hard on that entire profession. But you always have to look out for yourself even if you can't possibly fathom a reason why you need to.
 

thegrants82

Banned
May 8, 2013
957
0
0
Visit site
One question. Why are your phones not locked with a password? Frankly (and bear in mind I have multiple friends who are cops), there is no way in hell Law Enforcement is getting the password to my phone. Ship it off and have it cracked, ask/subpoena Verizon for records, whatever. But there is zero chance that I would voluntarily do or give A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G to anyone that is potentially incriminating. No matter how genuinely nice a cop is, he's not the one who will bring charges on you. Further, he is not your friend and you are not his. He has a job to do (a job that he should do as diligently and thoroughly as possible), but at the end of the day it's up to you to know what your rights are and to protect them yourself because it's NOT Law Enforcement's duty to protect them for you. Voluntarily opening your mouth and waving your rights is your decision and it's your own fault for saying or doing something that forfeits those rights. I would (and have) prefer(ed) to look shady or up to no good merely by exercising my rights than to wave those rights because a cop is just trying to do the job he should be doing.

Put a password on your phone. Know what's in your car. Be aware of your surroundings. Don't text and drive.
Lol! Nice rant Poindexter but no one needs your phone because its in you records.......

Posted via Android Central App
 

thegrants82

Banned
May 8, 2013
957
0
0
Visit site
No doubt. However, I'd rather be held in contempt, personally, even knowing I hadn't done anything wrong. It's just the principle of it all and I'm a principled person. Texting and driving dumbfounds me. I drive thousands of miles a month and spend a ton of time on the road most every day traveling from place to place for work and I'm constantly shocked at the number of people who can't walk and chew gum but will text and drive. At the same time, I think it's stupid to have laws against it. All thats happened is that people have gone from texting with their phones up in the air at windshield level, to hiding them down low and taking their eyes off of the road completely as if someone can't tell that you're staring at the floorboard of your car for 10 seconds typing about how OMGRidIkUlOuS one's boss is. Common sense seems to be dead.

I was in a "stand off" with law enforcement several, several months back for almost 2 hours after I followed a guy to his kid's school for a parent teacher conference. To back up, I'm a fraud investigator and mostly deal with worker's comp fraud that has escalated into high dollar lawsuits. Anyway, this meant that I was parked across the street from a school for quite some time. SUPER long story somewhat short, I'm a law abiding citizen, CCWing with a valid permit 500+ feet from a school in a state where it's legal to CCW INSIDE of a school surrounded by 2 detectives and 2 deputies who refused to accept my explanation of who I was and why I was there in addition to refusing to give the owner of our company a call to verify what we do and who we are as well as supplying business license information.

Bear in mind, I understand their perspective. I won't give them any pertinent case information (which is stored on my phone and computer, not on paper). Only notes with an internal case file and date are hand written. And I also refused to tell them who I was watching or what vehicle that person was driving (like I'm too dumb to know that running a tag doesn't tell you the owner). But my explanation for refusal was valid. Telling you the truth, that I'm a investigator investigating potential worker's comp fraud is completely fine. However, telling you who I'm watching is a HIPAA violation which is a spend 1 year and 1 day in prison plus a $50,000 fine FELONY. So there I am trying to be compelled to commit a crime by law enforcement under threat of having my vehicle impounded, my phone and computer confiscated and taken in to wait on "an angry judge who will be more than happy to issue a search warrant for someone who is creeping around a school". And I won't budge.

I mean, the way I saw it was if there's probable cause to impound my vehicle and arrest me after THAT much banter, then we wouldn't be talking anymore. If I could do it all again, I would have stopped talking, given them my lawyer's card and just told them that it would be in everyone's best interest to just go ahead and call the judge. It was a real life example that sometimes knowing the law and knowing your rights makes you look guilty, even though you've never been arrested for a thing.

My point wasn't to be a pain in the **** to a bunch of cops, who, from their perspective are merely trying to figure out who someone is outside of a school that they don't know in the wake of so many mass shootings being plastered all over the news. My point was that none of that mattered. It's not my problem. I wasn't doing anything wrong and I wasn't going to do something wrong by giving them what they wanted to know. That cop didn't know that turning over all my case information was a felony. He's not a lawyer. It's not his job to know. But at the end of the day, it doesn't matter. No person is getting the password and/or decryption keys to devices that have hundreds of names, DOB's, SSN's and addresses. Eventually the guy I was watching left and I had no idea where he went. The cops backed down and I told the detectives out of courtesy that I would call them if I was ever in the area again. We exchanged numbers and I also suggested that they just take down my information, vehicle description, etc and I could be their first stop in wasting their time if anything ever happened in their random, country bumpkin podunk, middle of no where school and we all shook on it with no ill will.

If I didn't know enough of the law pertaining to my field of employment, I could have committed a serious crime. Never consent to giving your password. Never consent to a search. Even if it's your car, you don't know what's in it. For all you know your buddy on Lortab for his back had a tablet slip out of his pocket and underneath your seat unknown to either of you, and there you are getting handcuffs tossed on you because you have a prescription narcotic that you don't have a prescription for in your possession. You thought you were doing the right thing and just being helpful to a tired cop at the end of his shift just trying to do a thankless, overly scrutinized job, but instead you just put yourself in a bind considering that a lot of cops don't necessarily have the leeway to just let someone go in that situation.

Lock your phone, lock your computer, don't consent to jack, know your rights, because it's more than just guilty people that need them. I hope I don't sound like a cop basher because I'm not. Most cops do an awesome job. It's a hard job and they don't get enough credit for all that they do and we tend to be way to hard on that entire profession. But you always have to look out for yourself even if you can't possibly fathom a reason why you need to.

I only had the patience for a couple sentences but this is just too funny.... .

Posted via Android Central App
 
Last edited:

KWKSLVR

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2011
860
4
18
Visit site
Lol! Nice rant Poindexter but no one needs your phone because its in you records.......

Posted via Android Central App
Reading comprehension much, bro? If I was ranting, you'd know it. ;) The contents on your SDCard are not in your records. Like it was mentioned, SMS/MMS are only available for a few days. Not putting a simple password on your phone is just stupid because you never know what someone will do when they get a hold of it. Case in point.
 

Optimus Prune

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2012
84
0
0
Visit site
Reading comprehension much, bro? If I was ranting, you'd know it. ;) The contents on your SDCard are not in your records. Like it was mentioned, SMS/MMS are only available for a few days. Not putting a simple password on your phone is just stupid because you never know what someone will do when they get a hold of it. Case in point.

Trolls don't read.

Sent from a Droid Maxx.
 

FrogVomit

Well-known member
Nov 9, 2009
87
1
0
Visit site
Actually, she was NOT found liable:

"Judge David Rand found that Colonna was not liable for the accident, insisting that drivers alone are responsible for their actions."

However:

"Three appeals court judges found merit in the Kuberts' argument: "We hold that the sender of a text message can potentially be liable if an accident is caused by texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to know that the recipient would view the text while driving and thus be distracted.""

"the judges determined that she was unaware that Best was driving at the time. That decision was informed, in part, by Colonna's age at the time of the incident (she was 17) and by the fact that she regularly sent over 100 text messages per day, apparently clueless about what recipients might be doing at the time."
 

Forum statistics

Threads
943,007
Messages
6,916,863
Members
3,158,772
Latest member
Laila Nance