Yep, specifically for entering providing the duress password for the ICEstapo agent to into his phone that had GrapheneOS on it to wipe it before handing it over to it was taken by the authorities.
Which led to DHS/CBP prosecuting him for “evidence tampering”.
I’d still rather wipe my phone than openly give it to authorities. Guy should have had a better lawyer. Being arrested for evidence tampering when there is no crime is practically the same as being arrested with the only charge being resisting arrest. Good lawyer gets that case thrown out.
I mean they didn’t specify which PIN they wanted, just that he hand over the PIN for his phone and that he could not speak to anyone (lawyer, someone that knows his rights, etc). I don’t know your definition of duress, but that situation fits mine and I would have given them the same PIN.
The border bitches asked a poorly worded question, made assumptions about the answer, and proceeded to wipe his phone and blame him for it.
Wasn’t a guy persecuted for using kill switch just for that?
Yep, specifically for
enteringproviding the duress password for the ICEstapo agent to into his phone that had GrapheneOS on it to wipe it beforehanding it over toit was taken by the authorities.Which led to DHS/CBP prosecuting him for “evidence tampering”.
I’d still rather wipe my phone than openly give it to authorities. Guy should have had a better lawyer. Being arrested for evidence tampering when there is no crime is practically the same as being arrested with the only charge being resisting arrest. Good lawyer gets that case thrown out.
I’m pretty sure the LEO entered the password, he just provided it.
I mean they didn’t specify which PIN they wanted, just that he hand over the PIN for his phone and that he could not speak to anyone (lawyer, someone that knows his rights, etc). I don’t know your definition of duress, but that situation fits mine and I would have given them the same PIN.
The border bitches asked a poorly worded question, made assumptions about the answer, and proceeded to wipe his phone and blame him for it.
I 100% agree and I didn’t even think about the vagueness of their question given the possible responses.
I was just clarifying that the Leo’s entered the password, not him.
He’s going to be prosecuted, whether he’s found guilty and what he’s found guilty of is still TBD
No. They already had him and the device, and he gave them the wipe pin when they asked him for the unlock pin. That’s destruction of evidence.
Destruction of what evidence? They didn’t have the phone unlocked. How do they even know anything was destroyed?
They’ve got nothing and it’s going be dismissed.
Sure, you try that in court. See how it goes for you.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I doubt any court would agree with you.
I looked it up and they cover the definition pretty well, that’s why i deleted the comment.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232