You know, the same thing happens to me every time the FBI takes my phones.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    882 months ago

    I really hate to defend this guy because he clearly sucks. But honestly: smart move. Your phone password and much of the contents of your phone should be considered speech and you shouldn’t be compelled to testify against yourself. That said, if this phone was government property then he shouldn’t have been the only one capable of unlocking it, which is a policy failure.

    • growsomethinggood ()
      link
      fedilink
      482 months ago

      He’s a cop, of course he knows how law enforcement will go through and find something incriminating

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      212 months ago

      Recorded speech about engaging in crimes is often acceptable evidence. It’s probably the same with written messages.

      I guess it’s up to the accused to prevent law enforcement from acquiring what they said, whether it be preventing recording, preventing police from sifting through mail or unsecure communications, or preventing police from acquiring the accused’s copy of potentially illegal communications. Which he is currently attempting.

      I don’t blame him for trying, and would agree on a lesser extent that he is right to prevent self incriminating now. But copied communication as acceptable evidence is pretty settled in law by now.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      62 months ago

      I work in IT. Five bucks says their government-issued phones can be unlocked by an MDM (Mobile Device Management) profile.