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

311–320 of 615 posts

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

#311

Post by Dudeman112 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #255
Ansil849 wrote: post #233

Here's the thing: you can have all sorts of detached, academic discussions on a forum like HN or on a blogpost about what the best thing to do is, or the most pragmatic thing, or the worst thing when dealing with a police encounter. But if you ever find yourself in a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, none of this discussion matters. I've had that happen to me (when an AirBNB owner failed to m…

> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose .

No we don't.

But then I live in a place where gun control is a thing and has 6 times less homicides than the USA after adjusting for population, so there's that.

The popo are mostly unarmed and I'd rather things kept that way.

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

#312

Post by Kranar »

aksss wrote: post #309
ashtonkem wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then there’s the absurd case where a defendant was found to have not invoked his 5th amendment rights by saying “I want a lawyer dawg”. The court, with laughably straight faces, decided that he might have been asking for a dog lawyer. Courts can be shockingly corrupt.

What case is that, and what court?

Louisiana Supreme Court:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/10/suspect-asks-for...

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

#313

Post by markjenkinswpg »

ashtonkem wrote: post #300
dahart wrote: post #128

> this case turns on one of the most fundamental protections in our constitutional system: an accused person’s ability to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights without having his silence used against him. A very interesting tidbit I learned here on HN a couple years back — the Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that you have to declare out loud an intent to invoke your Fifth Amendment rights, if you haven’t been formally arre…

Then there’s the absurd case where a defendant was found to have not invoked his 5th amendment rights by saying “I want a lawyer dawg”. The court, with laughably straight faces, decided that he might have been asking for a dog lawyer. Courts can be shockingly corrupt.

Tell me an appeals court was unimpressed, dawg.

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

#314

Post by stackbutterflow »

Ansil849 wrote: post #263
rootusrootus wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose .

This whole 250 comment thread is basically people discussing what they'd do or what you should do when finding yourself in a police encounter. My counterpoint is that none of that discussion actually applies. As for most people wanting it that way, I think it is because most people have not actually encountered it. They want it in the abstract, likely not so much when it happens to them. Kind of the classic...the peo…

This is a very USian take. There are many countries in the world where people aren't scared to death when police come knock on their door. There are many countries where police officers are actually scared of using their weapon. In these countries it helps to know the law and how to deal with these situations.

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

#315

Post by [deleted] »

jaytaylor wrote: post #308
ashtonkem wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then there’s the absurd case where a defendant was found to have not invoked his 5th amendment rights by saying “I want a lawyer dawg”. The court, with laughably straight faces, decided that he might have been asking for a dog lawyer. Courts can be shockingly corrupt.

I was skeptical, but a quick web search verified that this 100% happened - recently even, in 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/11/02... > The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the suspect was, in fact, asking for a “lawyer dog,” .. That's bad, dawg.

[deleted]

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

#316

Post by banannaise »

rootusrootus wrote: post #255
Ansil849 wrote: post #233

Here's the thing: you can have all sorts of detached, academic discussions on a forum like HN or on a blogpost about what the best thing to do is, or the most pragmatic thing, or the worst thing when dealing with a police encounter. But if you ever find yourself in a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, none of this discussion matters. I've had that happen to me (when an AirBNB owner failed to m…

> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose .

If you define "most people" as the people with the most economic power, then yes, because the police are their enforcers. Then you have middle-class types who have been inundated with pro-police information for their entire lives, and who usually aren't on the business end of the gun. Most of them are on board too, obviously. But you're still missing some very large demographics there.

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

#317

Post by [deleted] »

jaytaylor wrote: post #308
ashtonkem wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then there’s the absurd case where a defendant was found to have not invoked his 5th amendment rights by saying “I want a lawyer dawg”. The court, with laughably straight faces, decided that he might have been asking for a dog lawyer. Courts can be shockingly corrupt.

I was skeptical, but a quick web search verified that this 100% happened - recently even, in 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/11/02... > The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled that the suspect was, in fact, asking for a “lawyer dog,” .. That's bad, dawg.

[deleted]

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

#318

Post by SavantIdiot »

Ansil849 wrote: post #233

Here's the thing: you can have all sorts of detached, academic discussions on a forum like HN or on a blogpost about what the best thing to do is, or the most pragmatic thing, or the worst thing when dealing with a police encounter. But if you ever find yourself in a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, none of this discussion matters. I've had that happen to me (when an AirBNB owner failed to m…

You're right. A corrupt cop is unstoppable, especially one with a corrupt municipality supporting their behavior.

However, like netsec, it is a matter of lots of small steps. Asserting "I do not consent to this search" aloud may not stop the search, but it can be used it court, where it may not matter, or it might. The point is, you have to protect yourself. Maybe someone caught recording of you saying that which shows up later, and changes the outcome in a retrial.

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

#319

Post by rootusrootus »

pdimitar wrote: post #287
rootusrootus wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah. USA has a really strong propaganda system and it's a shame that even on HN, where people should be more critical thinkers, this is not widely recognized. OTOH, I recommend strongly you consider how strong the anti-US propaganda is online, including on places like Reddit and HN. It's an entire art form now, how to be critical of the US in every possible way. Whether it's cops, health care, or imperial measurem…

> The reality in the US is much different than portrayed on here, and you ought to be aware of that. I agree and I admit I've never even been there. But even when chatting with Americans -- here included -- the culture and thinking differences are immediately apparent. I don't actively seek out any anti-anything propaganda, and started disengaging myself from political discussions lately (this thread is the shameful…

It is entirely possible that as an American I am just getting oversensitive to this. But all I ever seem to hear on HN (and Reddit) is everything bad about the US. To someone who has never lived here, I suppose it must seem pretty dystopian.

I do think you should visit :). Every time I visit a new country I am struck by just how different it is in real life compared to everything I've ever heard about it. It's the primary reason I like to travel at all. I'm not really into the tourist stuff, I love to get off the beaten path and see how people actually live.

At least go visit Canada. Might be surprising, or not, but it shares a lot of cultural similarities with the US.

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

#320

Post by marcosdumay »

Dudeman112 wrote: post #311
rootusrootus wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should you encounter, at some point in your life, a situation where a police officer is pointing a gun at you, you will do whatever the fuck they are telling you to do. That's the grim reality. I'm not sure if that's grim, though; don't most people want it to be exactly that way? We grant the police extraordinary power and some amount of immunity on purpose .

No we don't. But then I live in a place where gun control is a thing and has 6 times less homicides than the USA after adjusting for population, so there's that. The popo are mostly unarmed and I'd rather things kept that way.

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 system works the way it does.

Post reply on HN