this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2026
527 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

87216 readers
3028 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/49853131

Feels to me like GrapheneOS did exactly what it should, passing the US border test with flying colours!

Funny part about this lawsuit: “With a little planning ahead of time, you can always download the data you need once you get to where you’re going,”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Search is not the same thing. Search means they CAN legally search. It absolutely does mean that wiping your phone prevented, obstructed, or obscured a SEARCH. Search all you fucking want, that data is gone. It's not retroactively comparable.

That being said, had there been a judge that said "You can't wipe your phone, because you are being charged with a crime, and we believe there is evidence of this crime on your phone, and here is why..."

Way different, and these laws only exist to prevent law enforcement from being caught in a cyclical legal roundabout in court related to the 4th amendment, and even then, many defense lawyers get "gray area" material data evidence thrown out because of Miranda Rights, or illegal searches by law enforcement of data harvested when the defendent was not properly advised or advocated for their ability to refuse.

Murderers get off for this shit because Cops get overzealous and don't follow the letter of the law or chain of custody in evidentiary collection.

[–] Zen_Shinobi@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

From the article

"The government’s indictment, which contains a typo (“Untied States Code”), accuses Tunick of allegedly providing a passcode to border agents that caused the phone to “delete the digital contents,” prior to the device being seized."

"When Tunick provided his passcode and the authorities entered it, “the screen went blank, flashed several times and the phone appeared to restart.” The authorities seized his phone anyway, before telling him that he was free to go and could enter the United States."

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yes, and only JUDGES are able to make that determination.

There is no stature in Federal or State law that says this is a crime, and no superceded precedent for this.

[–] Zen_Shinobi@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No it can be police that charge.

My state 100% has this law and police charge suspects for this.

ORC 2921.12 Tampering with evidence.

(A) No person, knowing that an official proceeding or investigation is in progress, or is about to be or likely to be instituted, shall do any of the following:

(1) Alter, destroy, conceal, or remove any record, document, or thing, with purpose to impair its value or availability as evidence in such proceeding or investigation;

(2) Make, present, or use any record, document, or thing, knowing it to be false and with purpose to mislead a public official who is or may be engaged in such proceeding or investigation, or with purpose to corrupt the outcome of any such proceeding or investigation.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of tampering with evidence, a felony of the third degree.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In your Section A right there: "official proceeding"

There was no crime in progress, suspicious activity, or active charges brought against this person.

Maybe reread the article.

Also, Police do not bring charges, Prosecuting Attorneys do. Police are only responsible for investigations and arresting. Everything else is cleared by the legal system first.

[–] Zen_Shinobi@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago

You didn't even read past that. It then says "or investigation"

I'm kinda done talking as you're not even reading what I post.

Good day!