3 ms·
> If you can just agree with their legal team (and your lawyer) on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if
by cortesoft 3y ago
> If you can just agree with their legal team (and your lawyer) on the stipulations of the search and confirmation, you can't be charged with further crimes if they find anything ("fruit of the poison tree").
This part is completely wrong. “Fruit of the poison tree” only counts if the original search was illegal. If you let them search for something specific, nothing is stopping them from using anything they find, even if it wasn’t what they were searching for (as long as they found it during the normal course of searching for the thing they were supposed to be searching for)
- legitster 3y agoIf you get to define the terms of the search with a lawyer, wouldn't that make the terms of any additional snooping illegal? Again, I get that a warrant is a great bar to them searching your stuff. But if they already know you have what they are looking for, a warrant seems bad!
- chaps 3y agoFriend, I don't know how to say this politely, but I'll try my best: you're really missing something fundamental here and I'm not sure what it is or why you're so persistent on thinking it's okay to allow a government agency full access to your drive through third party contractors. Please, for your own sake, do some independent research. Or talk to a lawyer. Or read articles about prosecutorial abuse. Many of us have told you this is a bad idea and in no uncertain terms: it's a BAD idea to allow unfettered access to your shit. I highly recommend you take an afternoon off and sit in a criminal court room and watch how criminal cases progress through the system. Especially for things like drug crime, and especially when evidence is weak. You will learn so much. Please do that for yourself?
- kingofkyiv 3y ago[dead]