The entire concept of identity is very outdated and the general public understanding of digital identity is not accurate. Scammers are one thing but there are other cases where the Gov't itself can direct actions on your accounts if they have a reason to be looking into you. You do not own your medical records, financial records, location data, bank accounts, or anything else.

In this case, it may not matter that she has the truth on her side. The prosecution already took it far enough to offer her a plea deal. All they technically have to prove is that some piece of a digital trail, like having the phone number in the past, is proof that she is guilty of the crime involved here. Her home mailing address, current phone, devices, lack of travel, no associated facebook accounts, none of it mattered to the point she was arrested, extradited and is now being offered a plea deal for something she didn't do.

It's made more complicated by the fact that a prosecution doesn't really care what is true or not. They are not about to devote resources to finding out if the case they are prosecuting is based on accurate evidence. They have to rely on the police report to do this. And good luck with an Arkansas cop understanding how the scamming world operates. He put down his donut long enough to run a search in LexisNexus to link a phone number. And that is enough for a felony conviction in our corrupt court system.

And this was with her being the target of a scammer! Imagine if the Gov't itself was after you and wanted to sort of coerce and frame you for a crime. Or even just use your accounts against you.

The whole system is corrupt and needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. Starting with the entire concept of IDENTITY.

Digital identity is one thing. But I am curious to hear why you think identity, itself, is very outdated? If that is what you are actually saying.