Live data from Hacker News

Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

nytimes.com

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#41
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowingly providing a PIN that would erase evidence is going to get tough in court. But the man was also hated by the cops because of his activism. They were going to catch him for something, some day. This incident just provided the necessary excuse to lock him up.

How can they prove that? What if it was a glitch?

That shouldn't be too hard. Get someone from Google or someone with any tech knowledge to explain to the judge how phones normally work, what encryption keys are, the implications of wiping an encryption key, and then get someone to show the difference between entering a normal PIN wrong several times and entering the duress PIN. You just need to convince the jury (or judge, if there is no jury for whatever reason).

People have gone to jail or have been executed for less than a glitch. Theoretically a highly charged particle from space could've messed with exactly the right transistors exactly when entering the correct PIN and trigger the wipe process. There is no way to prove that didn't happen. But you don't need that kind of proof.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#42
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowingly providing a PIN that would erase evidence is going to get tough in court. But the man was also hated by the cops because of his activism. They were going to catch him for something, some day. This incident just provided the necessary excuse to lock him up.

> They were going to catch him for something, some day. This incident just provided the necessary excuse to lock him up funny reading this (don't disagree) and then also reading on HN how China is "bad" this is some gestapo shit but not surprising that it is getting normalised ...

China is indeed "bad" for the gestapo shit. The difference is that China's gestapo shit comes with benefits for the common man too, whereas in the US the gestapo shit only serves the inner circle at the top of the regime with zero benefits to 99% of the populace.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#43
Seems like it would be better to have a truecrypt type of situation, where if you put in a certain pin, then it just logs you into a separate OS with nothing you want to hide.

Obviously have the duress pin if what’s in your phone is worse than the obstruction charges too.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#44
post #30
post #21

Amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Amendment 5: "..nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witn…

>Amendment 4: He was charged for destroying evidence, not refusing a search >Amendment 5: Destroying evidence isn't testimony. Moreover he would have been in the clear if he just kept his mouth shut.

"Evidence" of what, exactly? What specific crime did they expect to find evidence of on his phone?

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#46
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between exploding a bomb and deleting your data. One is a crime.

>There is a difference between exploding a bomb Mines (in wars, as implied by "solider") aren't illegal. Also even for the first example there are certainly improvised explosives you can set up that isn't criminal to create or set off, fireworks for instance. Same with a barrel of gasoline. It's certainly a crime to use it to kill someone, but that's my point. By OP's logic it's not the person who set it up's fault,…

If you set up a device to explode once someone enters a room, it doesn't matter who set it off by entering the room if they had no idea the room would blow up.

I don't think it'll be very easy to get out of liability in this case. The duress PIN is a feature explicitly designed to delete all data when it is entered, especially in cases of coercion like this. There would be more plausible deniability if officers had simply discovered it somewhere and tried it on their own, but in this case it was knowingly provided directly in place of the real PIN.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#47
post #21

Amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Amendment 5: "..nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witn…

But the bar for hauling someone to court and defacto punishing them financially and smearing them in the eyes of the public is so low. And the path to getting compensation for wrongful prosecution so fraught. What an easy tool the justice system is to punish uppity citizens thinking they don't have a king.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#48
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between exploding a bomb and deleting your data. One is a crime.

Intentional destruction of evidence is also a crime. Now, whether this applies to this scenario I suppose will have to be determined by the courts. Destroying potential evidence before suspicion is not a crime. Destroying it once under suspicion is a crime. So anyone can destroy their data at their hotel room even just before entry even if the data contains evidence of crimes. Of course the courts could take that int…

Great comment. Wish it was the top one so I didn't have to read through the others to get here.

Do you have thoughts as to how the courts would debate the deletion that you could present on a similar intellectual plane?

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#49
post #30
post #21

Amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Amendment 5: "..nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witn…

>Amendment 4: He was charged for destroying evidence, not refusing a search >Amendment 5: Destroying evidence isn't testimony. Moreover he would have been in the clear if he just kept his mouth shut.

Evidence of what? Destroying evidence assumes he is guilty of a crime which there be evidence of. Our system is predicated on an assumption of innocence. The normal threshold to accuse is a "reasonable, articulable suspicion." This does not meet that criteria.

Re: Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

#50
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Amendment 4: He was charged for destroying evidence, not refusing a search >Amendment 5: Destroying evidence isn't testimony. Moreover he would have been in the clear if he just kept his mouth shut.

[flagged]

Please try again with an actual argument rather than attacking people based on which "side" I'm on.
Post reply on HN