Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 615 posts

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#131

Post by Consultant32452 »

anonymousiam wrote: post #109
Consultant32452 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The fallacy of this analogy is that Law/Constitution being valued by conservatives refers to the direct rights of an individual, whereas Gun Free Zones are not a "right" of an individual, and actually infringes on the right of other individuals to "keep and bear arms".

That's not the meaning of the analogy.

A Constitutional right or law prevents the state from harming you in exactly the same way a gun free zone sign stops a school shooter from murdering you.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#132

Post by Klathmon »

35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote: post #92
oogali wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A former colleague summarized this as "you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride". Meaning, your exit via means of reciting legal code matters in a court room or in front of a prosecutor, but it won't get you out of the ride to the police station -- or in this case: a trip to the coercion back room.

I listened to a legal symposium once that was held by lawyers who specialize in self defense/use of force. Think "I have a concealed weapon and I killed someone in self defense - now what?" They all agreed that their clients worry far too much about being arrested. Their legal advice was unanimous: you just took someone's life, you are absolutely going to be arrested, nothing you could possibly say will change that.…

>A night or two in jail won't change your life

A night or two in jail absolutely can change your life.

A night or two in jail means not being able to pick your kid up from daycare or take care of pets/family, A night or two in jail means missing work without any notice. Hope your boss is understanding, because if you lose your job you're on your way to losing everything.

A night or two in jail means you now need enough in savings to get your car out of the impound lot, pay bail if needed, pay for a lawyer, and have a couple of years to spend on defending yourself in court or you might actually go away for a longer time.

A night or two in jail means having an arrest record, if you live in a state with "sunshine laws" you'll forever get extortion calls about how they'll remove your mugshot and information from their website for $500. That makes getting future jobs harder, or you need to spend even more time and money getting the records sealed/removed.

And that's not even touching on the physical toll that being arrested and treated like sub-human has on you. Being shoved to the ground, physically thrown into a cell, fearing for your life while multiple guns are pointed at your head knowing you are one misunderstanding away from dying, getting tazed while multiple cops laugh and yell for you to stop resisting.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#133

Post by quacked »

macintux wrote: post #96
sethammons wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> political persuasion and education level Sorry, I'm not following. My understanding is that the job attracts bullies and I see bullies from all political persuasions and all education levels.

I think the recently-departed administration in the U.S. has done a good job of helping bullies self-select themselves into its party.

I find that bullies can be found in equal proportions in both parties, but I do agree that the type of bully who is willing to walk the street with a gun in the name of justice does have a more welcoming home in one major party than the other.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#134

Post by giantg2 »

shwoopdiwoop wrote: post #107
pdimitar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. My philosophy is to always cooperate (unless they ask for something super egregious) and show myself as friendly. This immediately reduces the alarms in their heads. I even say things like "sure guys, here are my docs, here are the contents of my backpack, hope you catch the guy you are after" and smile. Very often the mere fact that you are not trouble makes them pay less attention and the whole thing ends real…

This is terrible advice.

In some instances maybe, in others it might be good. It can also be a gamble.

If you're afraid for your safety or they are clearly overstepping their bounds, then complying and fighting it in court is basically the only option (even though it's possible you still get screwed). Otherwise, knowing an asserting your rights can be good, but you have to hope the cop isnt unhinged, dirty, or totally incompetent.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#135

Post by pdimitar »

adwn wrote: post #123
pdimitar wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. A better reply is: "I am here to state an observation and not to prove anything to anyone since it's not a court room. Believe me if you want, I'll not stick around to find out".

Well, have you observed that behavior first-hand? Did someone you know and trust observe it first-hand and tell you about it? Etc. We don't ask you to "prove" anything, but some more information instead of vague hints would be helpful.

I thought the standard benefit of the doubt implies that I am not here to tell stories just because I am bored.

I've known such people, yes, three of them. Law-abiding normal people whose only mistake was that they were in a hurry and were slightly rude to the police officers because of it.

Technically, each and every claim of somebody can be disputed to death. That's why I invoked your right to not trust what strangers say on the internet. Still, I thought it was a given that I have some exposure to the claimed phenomena.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#136

Post by [deleted] »

pdimitar wrote: post #53

Formally the police can't demand a lot of stuff. Informally, they'll put you in a room and tell you that they have the legal right to keep you anywhere from 24 to 72 hours in there and they definitely can make you reconsider during that period -- to put it very mildly. Hint: some cops are really good in the skill of inflicting pain to people without lasting medical trace to prove it afterwards. Until there's true acc…

[deleted]

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#137

Post by codezero »

colinmhayes wrote: post #122
codezero wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

85% of the people in Rikers haven’t been convicted of anything.

Rikers is a jail, not a prison. Jails are meant to hold people who have not yet completed their trial. Once you're convicted you get sent to prison.

Exactly the point. The police can waste your time. Those people can’t go to work and will likely lose their job because they are being jammed up by police.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#138

Post by rootusrootus »

pdimitar wrote: post #117
adwn wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They asked for any evidence beyond "it's like this, trust me" and you answered with "really, it's like this, trust me" . Do you realize that if someone isn't convinced after the first "trust me", they won't be convinced by the second "trust me"?

Sure. A better reply is: "I am here to state an observation and not to prove anything to anyone since it's not a court room. Believe me if you want, I'll not stick around to find out".

That amounts to taking a dump in the middle of the conversation and walking away. If you aren’t here to participate in the discussion why say anything at all?

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#139

Post by ceejayoz »

Klathmon wrote: post #132
35fbe7d3d5b9 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I listened to a legal symposium once that was held by lawyers who specialize in self defense/use of force. Think "I have a concealed weapon and I killed someone in self defense - now what?" They all agreed that their clients worry far too much about being arrested. Their legal advice was unanimous: you just took someone's life, you are absolutely going to be arrested, nothing you could possibly say will change that.…

>A night or two in jail won't change your life A night or two in jail absolutely can change your life. A night or two in jail means not being able to pick your kid up from daycare or take care of pets/family, A night or two in jail means missing work without any notice. Hope your boss is understanding, because if you lose your job you're on your way to losing everything. A night or two in jail means you now need enou…

> A night or two in jail absolutely can change your life.

I think the idea is "you're (probably) not going to talk your way out of that night in jail if it's a homicide scenario".

(And that you might talk yourself into a much longer stay in trying to do so.)

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#140

Post by giantg2 »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #131
anonymousiam wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fallacy of this analogy is that Law/Constitution being valued by conservatives refers to the direct rights of an individual, whereas Gun Free Zones are not a "right" of an individual, and actually infringes on the right of other individuals to "keep and bear arms".

That's not the meaning of the analogy. A Constitutional right or law prevents the state from harming you in exactly the same way a gun free zone sign stops a school shooter from murdering you.

It probably would have been more clear if that was stated this way. The analogy could have multiple levels of meaning.
Post reply on HN