I've read on a bit and found the additional details about the tape with DNA on it, which makes him look more guilty - but this wasnt mentioned in the wikipedia article, and the phone logs which you mentioned as justification for mass surveillance are less than worthless.
Establishing that both the perp and victim was at the same train station some time during a longish window time doesn't mean jack.
As for DNA I'm not a criminology expert, but if courts don't accept it as conclusive evidence means there's something wrong with it - courts have a long history of accepting official sounding bunk ('expert' witnesses, polygraph etc) in order to manufacture evidence to their conclusions.
Anyways I don't want to detour from my main argument that even from the official PoV the phone evidence is very weak, I'd argue it's meaningless, and using this as justification as mass surveillance is a counterargument if anything.
Though I can imagine it's incredibly easy to deliberately misrepresent it as 'we used digital records to catch a pedo murderer' by dishonest supporters of the policy.
Establishing that both the perp and victim was at the same train station some time during a longish window time doesn't mean jack.
As for DNA I'm not a criminology expert, but if courts don't accept it as conclusive evidence means there's something wrong with it - courts have a long history of accepting official sounding bunk ('expert' witnesses, polygraph etc) in order to manufacture evidence to their conclusions.
Anyways I don't want to detour from my main argument that even from the official PoV the phone evidence is very weak, I'd argue it's meaningless, and using this as justification as mass surveillance is a counterargument if anything.
Though I can imagine it's incredibly easy to deliberately misrepresent it as 'we used digital records to catch a pedo murderer' by dishonest supporters of the policy.