Peter Hurd

EE 394

Dr. Prouty

12/8/22

Alexa as a Witness

In November of 2015, a man from Arkansas was charged with first degree murder after

the police found another man dead in his hot tub. The suspect, James Andrew Bates, had told the

authorities that he invited the victim, Victor Collins, and some other guests over to have some

drinks and watch a football game. With conflicting testimonies from the human witnesses at the

house on that night, the police decided to take an unprecedented move and bag Bates’ Amazon

Echo device as evidence.

These devices, originally released 2014, launched a new wave of “smart-home,” voice-

activated devices that can play music, recite the weather, and browse the internet all via a special

keyword to signal the device to begin listening. To achieve this, however, these devices must

also listen before the keyword is spoken, and some of that data is stored and retained by their

respective companies. Because of this, the authorities in Arkansas seized Bates’ device in the

hopes that it recorded crucial audio evidence to determine what occurred in the moments before

Victor Collins’ death.

This case, and many others like it, provides an example of a unique ethical dilemma

facing today’s engineers. Because of the nature of the engineering profession, these situations

arise often enough to necessitate what is known as a “Code of Ethics”. These codes, which come

from a variety of institutions such as corporations, professional organizations, or unions, help

guide engineers towards making morally sound choices while doing their job. As an example, the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers has published their own version of an ethical

code which includes statements such as “reject bribery in all its forms...” and “avoid injuring

others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious action…”

While codes like the IEEE Code of Ethics provide a quality baseline for moral action,

there can still be a variety of different outcomes based on the beliefs, biases, and experiences of

the people involved in making the final decision. Personally, I guide my ethical decisions

according to a series of virtues like integrity, honesty, and responsibility. To me, responsibility is

arguably the most important virtue because I believe that we all have certain responsibilities to

our fellow humans, and it is imperative that we act in accordance to those responsibilities. This

responsibility often takes the form of heavy reverence towards other people’s physical, mental,

and emotional health and wellbeing.

Looking at the specific case from above, we can perform an ethical analysis on the issue

by considering the follow two perspectives. On one hand, the data engineers at Amazon, and by

extension the company, have a responsibility to respect their consumer’s privacy and exercise

extreme caution when handling their user’s data. The company has a moral obligation to act with

integrity regarding user’s data, and all violations of that integrity can destroy its reputation with

the public and subject them to intense legal scrutiny. On the other, a homicide case such as this

involves one of the most morally reprehensible acts that a person can commit, and it is within the

highest responsibilities of the authorities involved to deliver the proper justice as a response.

Additionally, just as the sensitive data from the Echo device can be used to implicate the suspect

in the crime, it can also be used to exonerate him instead, which is arguably more important

within a legal system that is founded on the idea of “innocent until proven guilty”.
 With these two perspectives explored, it is my belief, and also the belief of my

classmates, that the only morally correct decision within this case is to release the data collect by

the Echo device from the night in question. Because of the loss in human life during that fateful

night, and incomplete evidence that could lead to a wrongful conviction, the government’s

responsibility to uncover the truth far exceeds Amazon’s responsibility to protect user’s privacy

and data. The only potential harm from this decision comes to Amazon’s public relations and

revenue, which I would argue could have been avoided had the company exhibited honesty from

the start. In short, Amazon must have foreseen that the near constant recording method of

operation for its devices would be problematic to some consumers, but they failed to be honest

and upfront about this initial invasion of privacy. Consequently, many consumers made a

partially uninformed decision to buy these devices when they may have opted not to given this

information. Because of this initial dishonesty from Amazon regarding their device’s operation,

the company essential forced themselves to save face by refusing to hand over the Echo data to

the authorities to help demonstrate their commitment to their loyal users, which came at a direct

cost to the victim, the victim’s family, and the suspect involved in the case.

In November of 2015, a dangerous, and potentially costly, precedent was set. This

precedent, which involves the collection of audio data from “smart-home” devices like

Amazon’s Echo, essentially allows for companies like Amazon, Google, and Apple to withhold

the data collected from their voice-activated devices with complete discretion. While it may

appear that this allows for those companies to act with more integrity and responsibility

regarding their user’s privacy and data, it instead enables them to escape scrutiny for their

egregious dishonesty in their advertisements for these products and their methods of operation.

Had the company acted more in accordance with an established code of ethics to begin with, the
entire situation could have been avoided, and we could have determined exactly what happened

on that fateful night.