5 ms·

If the police are aware of this “feature”, that’s an easy contempt and destruction of evidence charge among others. I’d recommend just not doing it.

aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago
Plausible deniability.
- kryogen1c 5y ago
  Are you joking? This is the exact opposite of plausible deniability. This feature requires premeditated user action to hide evidence in an attempt to mislead law enforcement. It is illegal.
  - aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago
    No. I meant that “plausible deniability” is a thing, that if implemented properly will protect against these charges.
    - MichaelZuo 5y ago
      What happens when it becomes popular and police departments catch on? “plausible deniability” escalation is a two way street as others in this thread attest.
      - hanniabu 5y ago
        Then anybody trying to stop them from continuing this will be demonized for "trying to take away law enforcements tools needed to do their job properly" and say that this person supports terrorism and all the usual tricks to manipulate public perception.
- joconde 5y ago
  ...until the cops learn about that and add a countermeasure, then send you to jail for using it.
LinuxBender 5y ago
Agreed. That's why I believe it might be super handy if every or at least many phones had this in place so that you don't really stand out. At least every phone using an alternate OS. If all the mainstream operating systems had this I would expect an arms race between the OS devs and the forensics device devs. As a side note, this would not necessarily be only used for law enforcement authorities. It could be that an armed phone thief requires you to unlock your phone. Sending a duress message, maybe even camera footage, GPS coordinates could be quite useful in the event you vanish. Teaching your kids to use this feature on their phones could also be very beneficial.
- judge2020 5y ago
  You might not stand out but it would still be contempt of court. Not turning over evidence with a constitutional defense is easier to defend in court than malicious fake-compliance.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    Possibly true in court at least, but I think the end user should have the option to make this decision. Maybe give them a disclaimer that says In bold red text .. "Depending on your jurisdiction you may have legal problems using this feature! Research this and consult an attorney before enabling. You have been warned". In the US this would only apply in courts. AFAIK this would not be the case when interacting with the executive branch such as law enforcement but I am no lawyer. If courts want this data, they can issue a subpoena and follow due process. Law enforcement can pound sand all day long if they are trying to circumvent due process. Using this feature with armed phone thieves would not be a legal risk unless you are filming them in their home. Even then I would be happy to accept any legal risk when interacting with outlaws.
    - colejohnson66 5y ago
      Even if the feature warned users, Apple and Google would not be off the hook. It’s entirely possible a prosecutor will go after them for implementing a feature designed to evade police and destroy evidence. Us programmers tend to thing the law is black and white and a legal disclaimer solves all issues, but it’s not. The law can be (and is) a gray area determined by the courts on an individual basis. Judges don’t look fondly on technicalities for skirting the law. After all, they are humans, too. Not computers.
kingcharles 5y ago
Unlikely, in my courtroom experience. I would highly recommend making sure the police can't get to your data. It is unlikely you will be charged with anything. And what you get charged with if they get to your data might be 1000X worse than any minor obstruction of justice charge, depending on what sort of crime you are committing.
- ChrisKnott 5y ago
  What crime were you charged with?
  - selectodude 5y ago
    Per his other comments, he spent 8+ years in Cook County so it would almost certainly have to be first degree murder.
    - ChrisKnott 5y ago
      I can't reconcile the amount of time in jail with apparently being offered a plea deal with no custody
      - selectodude 5y ago
        The criminal justice system in Chicago is a total mess. None of it makes sense on any real level. Total speculation, since obviously I don't know the details of this specific case, but I would guess pled down to 2nd degree murder and received a sentence of time served.
        ChrisKnott 5y ago
        It seems like it's this guy[0][1]. He was caught in a To Catch A Predator style sting and then they also found CP on his devices. Having read this article I'm interested in his claims of innocence, I'm not seeing a defence here. [0] edit: decided this was doxing [1] edit: decided this was doxing

aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago

Plausible deniability.

kryogen1c 5y ago
Are you joking? This is the exact opposite of plausible deniability. This feature requires premeditated user action to hide evidence in an attempt to mislead law enforcement. It is illegal.
- aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago
  No. I meant that “plausible deniability” is a thing, that if implemented properly will protect against these charges.
  - MichaelZuo 5y ago
    What happens when it becomes popular and police departments catch on? “plausible deniability” escalation is a two way street as others in this thread attest.
    - hanniabu 5y ago
      Then anybody trying to stop them from continuing this will be demonized for "trying to take away law enforcements tools needed to do their job properly" and say that this person supports terrorism and all the usual tricks to manipulate public perception.
joconde 5y ago
...until the cops learn about that and add a countermeasure, then send you to jail for using it.

LinuxBender 5y ago

Agreed. That's why I believe it might be super handy if every or at least many phones had this in place so that you don't really stand out. At least every phone using an alternate OS. If all the mainstream operating systems had this I would expect an arms race between the OS devs and the forensics device devs. As a side note, this would not necessarily be only used for law enforcement authorities. It could be that an armed phone thief requires you to unlock your phone. Sending a duress message, maybe even camera footage, GPS coordinates could be quite useful in the event you vanish. Teaching your kids to use this feature on their phones could also be very beneficial.

judge2020 5y ago
You might not stand out but it would still be contempt of court. Not turning over evidence with a constitutional defense is easier to defend in court than malicious fake-compliance.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  Possibly true in court at least, but I think the end user should have the option to make this decision. Maybe give them a disclaimer that says In bold red text .. "Depending on your jurisdiction you may have legal problems using this feature! Research this and consult an attorney before enabling. You have been warned". In the US this would only apply in courts. AFAIK this would not be the case when interacting with the executive branch such as law enforcement but I am no lawyer. If courts want this data, they can issue a subpoena and follow due process. Law enforcement can pound sand all day long if they are trying to circumvent due process. Using this feature with armed phone thieves would not be a legal risk unless you are filming them in their home. Even then I would be happy to accept any legal risk when interacting with outlaws.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Even if the feature warned users, Apple and Google would not be off the hook. It’s entirely possible a prosecutor will go after them for implementing a feature designed to evade police and destroy evidence. Us programmers tend to thing the law is black and white and a legal disclaimer solves all issues, but it’s not. The law can be (and is) a gray area determined by the courts on an individual basis. Judges don’t look fondly on technicalities for skirting the law. After all, they are humans, too. Not computers.

kingcharles 5y ago

Unlikely, in my courtroom experience. I would highly recommend making sure the police can't get to your data. It is unlikely you will be charged with anything. And what you get charged with if they get to your data might be 1000X worse than any minor obstruction of justice charge, depending on what sort of crime you are committing.

ChrisKnott 5y ago
What crime were you charged with?
- selectodude 5y ago
  Per his other comments, he spent 8+ years in Cook County so it would almost certainly have to be first degree murder.
  - ChrisKnott 5y ago
    I can't reconcile the amount of time in jail with apparently being offered a plea deal with no custody
    - selectodude 5y ago
      The criminal justice system in Chicago is a total mess. None of it makes sense on any real level. Total speculation, since obviously I don't know the details of this specific case, but I would guess pled down to 2nd degree murder and received a sentence of time served.
      - ChrisKnott 5y ago
        It seems like it's this guy[0][1]. He was caught in a To Catch A Predator style sting and then they also found CP on his devices. Having read this article I'm interested in his claims of innocence, I'm not seeing a defence here. [0] edit: decided this was doxing [1] edit: decided this was doxing