That privacy was already long gone by the time of this case.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2232
(a)Destruction or Removal of Property To Prevent Seizure.— Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.If he hadn’t used duress and had just refused, he’d have been fine. Graphine is secure and would have had his back
If he hadn’t given them the code and instead left it in his wallet, and they did it themselves, he’d have been fine.
All he had to do was plead the 5th.
He’s going to get hit with a felony for destroying data to prevent a search. There are tons of precedents in the 11th Circuit for searching without a warrant.
A duress password is only useful if what you’d be facing is worse than 18 U.S. Code § 2232a, and then only if they don’t have enough to convict you already.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2rokxux5cU`___`
Dude is just protesting the construction of a large cop training facility near him. I don’t know what the fuck he did to get on the FBI radar, but I wish him good luck; he’s gonna need it.
I don’t think ordinary citizens should be required to know the law in lawyer-like detail when they travel.
I think in the broad strokes, you’re probably right about his legal situation, but it suuuuuucks and it’s not what I think of when I hear the word “freedom,” for sure.
The issue I’m seeing with the whole case is they siezed his phone, they kept his phone, the seizure of his property happened successfully. A person later entered something they believed would open it but instead it wiped it. The end user didn’t wipe it, and didn’t lie to the agents of the state because a duress PIN is still a PIN, I’m willing to wager they didn’t specify that they wanted his ‘unlock PIN’ and instead just asked him for a PIN (personal identification number), which he gave.
If they found a duress password in his wallet, and used it, they would 100% prosecute for that.
They would, but he’d have a significantly better chance at winning. Having a duress setup/password isn’t illegal. if you plead the 5th on what that pin code is, i don’t think they’d have a leg to stand on.
I don’t know if it would win or not. But the cops could argue that you put that piece of paper as a premeditated trap designed to wipe evidence and interfere with their investigation, if they caught you. Especially if you wrote any of that down and they found it. Honestly I’m not sure what the jury would agree with in this country.
So what? Yes, that’s what the paper note is for. If someone wants to get unauthorized access, they will likely try it and wipe the phone. You have zero obligation to warn them not to do that. You didn’t authorize access.
I think you’re on the right track. You could say the note was for cell phone thieves or something and you didn’t expect the police to use it. Plausible deniability.
Even if you did expect the police to use it, you aren’t obligated to front that information to them. Anything you say or do may be used in against you in the court of law. So, the safe option is to say and do nothing at all, let them dig their own grave.
