Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which is why I refuse to travel outside of the Schengen area That’s really a crazy mindset man. The US receives ~100m foreign visitors annually. There is nothing special about you, they don’t care about your Facebook profile. Worst comes to worst, you just refuse to unlock your device and they deport you back to where you came from.
> Worst comes to worst, you just refuse to unlock your device and they deport you back to where you came from. Who says they won't image my device using yet-unknown zero day exploits, or that I get it back at all? And I'd still be out thousands of dollars in travel costs.
Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
431–440 of 615 posts
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#432This happened to me. The police wanted my password and refused my right to silence, wouldn't let me call a lawyer. I wouldn't talk. Then they threatened my wife and I gave up my password to stop them from hurting her. The password was suppressed by the court, but they let the police use it anyway because one of the officers (with no formal computer qualifications) testified he could have broken 2048-bit AES encryptio…
I've experienced similar issues with judges. When evidence hinges on something very technical - they generally allow it and place the burden of arguing it on the defense. ...which often allows any other evidence gotten by that means. ...and even if/when it's struck out - the prosecutor uses some parallel construction argument to say they could have gotten the evidence through another means. ...and the judge usually accepts that too.
The prosecutor also then takes things like hearsay, circumstantial evidence, and literal misrepresentations to build a seemingly huge case against the defendant. It's a form of intimidation to accept a plea deal.
I've seen TONS of defendants admit to crimes they didn't commit in plea deals, just because it's such a huge and long uphill battle to fight every single bogus charge.
These aren't straight up innocent or perfect people. They're usually guilty of something minor - like small-time possession / solicitation / parole violation / DUI / etc... But what happens is that when you're guilty of anything, the judge treats you like you're guilty of EVERYTHING, and the prosecutor loads up the charges with anything they can think of to take advantage of that.
Most defense attorneys hate these cases because clients can't pay, so they encourage them to settle for a plea deal - even if it includes admitting to stuff they didn't do. ...and most defendants accept it so they can move on with their lives and avoid prison time.
So yeah, people with money hire $700/hr attorneys, and they absolutely make things go away. Even prosecutors drastically change demeanor when they see a defendant with a high-priced lawyer, because the prosecutor doesn't want to invest a lot of time on any specific case - and doesn't want his office or the police/investigators to be held up to scrutiny with various subpoenas - so charges drop off much more easily, and/or defendants get off with misdemeanor in a good plea deals.
The point of this story is to help shed some naiveté that you might have about the system ultimately being fair - even through the long and expensive appeals process. It isn't. ...and most defendants don't have the time or money to pursue appeals. And moreover, when tech is involved, it is markedly even less fair because the judge doesn't understand the tech, and so will believe whatever BS the prosecutor makes up.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you talking about a judge, or a jury? An officer of the court is compelled to tell the truth, under oath or not. A jury is not required to give an officer of the court any more weight than they give to anyone else.
The trooper lied to "the court", twice. It was a bench trial. Both lies took place in front of the magistrate with no jury present. I have documentation that shows the statement were factually incorrect and that for one of those statements he said the opposite a few minutes beforehand and the evidence supports the out-of-court statement.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unlikely, in my courtroom experience. I would highly recommend making sure the police can't get to your data. It is unlikely you will be charged with anything. And what you get charged with if they get to your data might be 1000X worse than any minor obstruction of justice charge, depending on what sort of crime you are committing.
What crime were you charged with?
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#435This happened to me. The police wanted my password and refused my right to silence, wouldn't let me call a lawyer. I wouldn't talk. Then they threatened my wife and I gave up my password to stop them from hurting her. The password was suppressed by the court, but they let the police use it anyway because one of the officers (with no formal computer qualifications) testified he could have broken 2048-bit AES encryptio…
Also, if you do use biometrics and ever find yourself in a sticky situation most modern operating systems have built in features to quickly disable them on demand. iOS, for example, allows you to quickly disable Face/Touch ID by holding the side+any volume button for two seconds and then quickly tap the side button again when the shutdown slide appears.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
What crime were you charged with?
Per his other comments, he spent 8+ years in Cook County so it would almost certainly have to be first degree murder.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is 100% a bad faith question. And even if it's being asked in good faith, it's entirely irrelevant. It's essentially whataboutism. But I'll address it anyways. If I have an abusive co-worker in my tech job and my manager and HR refuse to do anything about it, it just makes work suck. But an abusive cop ruins lives with bullshit charges and bullshit handling of innocent people. In worst-case scenarios, they're mu…
It's not in bad faith, but it is rhetorical: people protecting their own, at an industry or occupational level, is the rule, not the exception.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#438This happened to me. The police wanted my password and refused my right to silence, wouldn't let me call a lawyer. I wouldn't talk. Then they threatened my wife and I gave up my password to stop them from hurting her. The password was suppressed by the court, but they let the police use it anyway because one of the officers (with no formal computer qualifications) testified he could have broken 2048-bit AES encryptio…
> he said he would unsolder the chips off the circuit board and put them onto another board ... The judge allowed the testimony and believed it. I've experienced similar issues with judges. When evidence hinges on something very technical - they generally allow it and place the burden of arguing it on the defense. ...which often allows any other evidence gotten by that means. ...and even if/when it's struck out - the…
How many hours of attorney-work should one expect to budget for?
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t you mean 8 months? In Illinois you can only be sentenced to less than a year in county jail unless you are awaiting trial in which case 8 years seems a bit much.
No, I mean 8 years. Over 8 years. I'm still in custody now. There are others in the jail for almost 12 years.. here are the stats: https://www.cookcountysheriff.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09...
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I live in a country with 4 times more homicides than the US after adjusting for population. Our laws state very clearly that the police does not get much extra immunity either (although, corruption gets in the way there), and our courts have no trouble at all to discard any piece of information the police acquires while they have a gun pointed at somebody's head. I really don't understand how the US justice…
The police in the US can point a gun at you and get you to comply, but if you think the courts are going to accept evidence collected while that gun is unholstered, then you definitely don't understand the justice system here. That's probably the single easiest win for a defense attorney in court.
Are you talking only about evidence literally gathered with a gun pointed to your head? If, so, well, my comment wasn't that literal. As a rule, if you have any chance of becoming a suspect, the police here will refuse to interrogate you without your lawyer around, because listening to you can jeopardize their work.