3 ms·
> Maybe the phone holds the clue to finding more terrorists. Maybe it doesn’t. Interesting admission that they don't really have "probable cause" here, rather
by zmmmmm 11y ago
> Maybe the phone holds the clue to finding more terrorists. Maybe it doesn’t.
Interesting admission that they don't really have "probable cause" here, rather they apparently want to go on a fishing expedition. I guess if the owner of the phone is already established as a terrorist then that is cause enough, but I still would have expected them to be arguing they have specific reason to believe the phone is necessary for their investigation.
- gregd 11y agoThe owner of the phone is San Bernadino County, which gave the FBI permission to search the phone. Pretty sure probable cause is a moot point when the owner of the phone grants you permission to search it.
- zmmmmm 11y agoAbsolutely. I just think it significantly weakens their argument to admit they don't even know if they phone data will be useful. I would have thought when they are going to court to compel a company to do something they would be asserting something more than "who knows, it might be useful?" in support of their case.