A U.S. citizen has asked a court to throw out the government's claim that he gave over a passcode to border authorities that wiped his phone's data, opening up fresh questions about a person's constitutional rights at the U.S. border.
Well, yes. If you didn’t know by now that impeding a federal investigation by destroying records is illegal, then I don’t know what to tell you. (Edit: That said, this was charged under a somewhat different statute. I was trying to answer specifically your question.)
The point in dispute here is that the search was an illegal violation of the Fourth Amendment in the first place, and consequently the wipe proceeding that cannot be prosecuted because the government had no legal right to access that information to begin with – that is, it was always defendent’s to do with whatever they wanted, and they were under no obligation to preserve records.
Edit: I will say I haven’t directly read the defense’s arguments, so there could be more nuance here/I could be outright wrong about the grounds of the argument thanks to the telephone game.
I’d assume based on the specific charge that the hitch the defense is arguing is based on the word:
for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control
If the Government has no lawful authority, then no crime, it’d seem.
It is on the government to prove that the password given caused the wipe which is going to be difficult to do since they seemingly damaged the phone while they had it. All they noted was some flashes and a rebooting phone, so what did they do to fuck it up a private citizens property while they had it in custody?
And to prove he knew he was under investigation. Because their case seems to hinge on the idea that he destroyed evidence while under investigation. They didn’t ask him about the protests. They asked him about CP/CSAM. Is he under investigation for CSAM?
Exactly. Even then, many phones including those by Google and Samsung have the option to wipe themselves after too many failed attempts. Whose to say they didn’t type it in wrong or the individual under duress couldn’t remember their password? Or that the cops intentionally wiped the device to claim the individual was hiding something that they weren’t. I don’t see how any reasonable judge can believe anything the feds claim after they’ve already admitted to lying in court, when they ignore the law and judges orders, oh and on top of it all they protect pedophiles like Trump!
Well, yes. If you didn’t know by now that impeding a federal investigation by destroying records is illegal, then I don’t know what to tell you. (Edit: That said, this was charged under a somewhat different statute. I was trying to answer specifically your question.)
The point in dispute here is that the search was an illegal violation of the Fourth Amendment in the first place, and consequently the wipe proceeding that cannot be prosecuted because the government had no legal right to access that information to begin with – that is, it was always defendent’s to do with whatever they wanted, and they were under no obligation to preserve records.
Edit: I will say I haven’t directly read the defense’s arguments, so there could be more nuance here/I could be outright wrong about the grounds of the argument thanks to the telephone game.
I’d assume based on the specific charge that the hitch the defense is arguing is based on the word:
If the Government has no lawful authority, then no crime, it’d seem.
It is on the government to prove that the password given caused the wipe which is going to be difficult to do since they seemingly damaged the phone while they had it. All they noted was some flashes and a rebooting phone, so what did they do to fuck it up a private citizens property while they had it in custody?
And to prove he knew he was under investigation. Because their case seems to hinge on the idea that he destroyed evidence while under investigation. They didn’t ask him about the protests. They asked him about CP/CSAM. Is he under investigation for CSAM?
Exactly. Even then, many phones including those by Google and Samsung have the option to wipe themselves after too many failed attempts. Whose to say they didn’t type it in wrong or the individual under duress couldn’t remember their password? Or that the cops intentionally wiped the device to claim the individual was hiding something that they weren’t. I don’t see how any reasonable judge can believe anything the feds claim after they’ve already admitted to lying in court, when they ignore the law and judges orders, oh and on top of it all they protect pedophiles like Trump!