The more we allow the gadgets to know about us, the more they grab and remember. Having said this, when the 57-year-old lady, Myrna Nilsson was found dead in Adelaide, Australia, the police thought that they would examine the Apple Watch she had been wearing in order to see as to what it could tell them about the things that had happened.

In accordance with the reports of Australian Broadcasting Corporation, the prosecutors last week presented the evidence from the watch that seemed to contradict the whole story told by the daughter-in-law of Nilson, Caroline Nilsson. For about two years, the police had suspected Caroline Nilsson of having been involved in the case. However, they arrested her only last month, after thoroughly analyzing the data from the Apple watch. Her claim was that a group of men followed her mother-in-law and the lady had argued with them for about 20 minutes outside her home.

Caroline Nilsson, who has been charged with the murder of her mother-in-law, said that she had been tied up in the house by the alleged intruders. She said that she had raised the alarm immediately after the attackers left the house. Instead, the prosecutors said that the emergence of Caroline Nilsson from the home at 10:10 p.m. was totally inconsistent with the Apple Watch data of Myrna Nilsson that had recorded physical activity and the heart rate numbers. That received data suggested that Myrna Nilsson had gone into a shock around 6:38 p.m. and certainly had been dead by 6:45 p.m., well in advance before her daughter-in-law sent the notification to the authorities.

Prosecutor Carmen Matteo reportedly said in court that the evidence received from the Apple iWatch is a foundational piece of evidence for demonstrating the falsity of the defendant’s account to the police. In further addition to it, she said that there was no DNA evidence that any attackers had been in the house. Moreover, while Caroline Nilsson had claimed that the men had arrived at the home in a utility vehicle; the neighbors said that they had seen no vehicle of that kind parked outside the house. Apple did not immediately comment anything on the matter.

According to the statements said by a spokeswoman for the South Australia Police Department, it is not the South Australia Police policy to comment on matters which are currently before the courts. She even extended the words of Superintendent Des Bray, the officer in charge of major crime for the police department, prior to the arrival of the case in the court. He said that the police would like to reassure the community that that was not a random incident and not a home invasion.

This is not actually the first time that an advanced gadget has been used by police in order to obtain the evidence. Nearly two years ago, the police in Arkansas asked for the access to an Amazon Echo that they hoped would provide the recordings in a house in which a man had been discovered to have strangled in the bath.