Cops behind the 8 ball yet once again!


A friend of mine in Atlanta who happens to be a law professor sent me this today.

Like in Long Beech California and an NBC interview of the cops that were "stumped" as to how thieves could possibly enter vehicles with their own key fobs, which to them was "impossible" with rolling code technology requiring a programmed key fob to unlock the doors.
What? do they think each time the auto manufacturer comes out with sophisticated technology, game over for the thief?
Let me put this so that all can understand. The technology employed by the manufacturer is already three years old on a brand new vehicle. It takes approximately three years from the drawing board until implemented on the production line. The ordinary computer in today's technology world is obsolete in 6 months!
Worse yet, because of tooling and production costs, many of these systems are not updated or replaced with newer technology. The GM PK III transponder system was introduced on the 1997 Buick Road Master and Cadillac Catera. All manufacturers are similar and do not come out with an upgraded transponder theft deterrent every year.
The Rolling code technology for locking and unlocking doors from the auto manufacturer was far behind the after market alarm manufacturers who introduced this technology in 1994. The reason for the changed to rolling code, in which the code changed was because someone developed a black box available even at JC Whitney for less than a $100, that made it so a thief could snatch the code from the key fob out of the air. The owner would lock the vehicle with the key fob and the thief could unlock the door using their code!
See, I don't deal too much in the world of theory and deal in real life. Something forensic locksmiths when determining how a stolen vehicle was last driven with the simplistic examination of an ignition lock.
With all this, my question would be; how many of these stolen vehicles that obviously had not been recovered up to now, were denied payment on an auto theft claim on a forensic locksmith's report?
Don't think that any insurance company would be stupid enough to deny an insurance claim on a non-recovered vehicle? Want to bet? State Farm does. ICBC does. Manitoba Insurance does. Progressive has. I am sure there are many others, just on a forensic locksmith's forensic examination of the insured's keys. No ignition to examine. No transponder theft deterrent (anti theft as they refer to it) to examine, and no vehicle to examine. Yet plaintiff attorneys are commonly oblivious to the obvious and try to figure out the motivation of the thief, which by the way they know nothing about. They don't understand auto theft, forensics and the purpose of the defense using their star witness a forensic locksmith that would not know a stolen car if he was sitting in one to confuse the courts, who too know absolutely nothing accept the antiquated methods seen on TV like hot wiring from 196 and older vehicles.
Cops have no understanding of modern methods as this article points out, APD had never seen this before! Welcome to my world!