6 ms·

I use Signal by default for every piece of communication that I can. Am I somehow held to a different standard just because I was paranoid about surveillance fr

I use Signal by default for every piece of communication that I can. Am I somehow held to a different standard just because I was paranoid about surveillance from the start? That seems wrong.

ikiris 2y ago
If you're telling a judge "I specifically hide all written communication that I'm legally required to hold and produce so that you can't see it" you're gonna have a bad time.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
zarzavat 2y ago
> Am I somehow held to a different standard just because I was paranoid about surveillance from the start? Yes, how else could it work? For example if you have a policy to destroy CCTV footage at the end of the day then it’s not illegal to do that. If you have a policy to keep CCTV footage but when the police come and ask you some questions you delete it because you know that it contains evidence of a crime, that’s destruction of evidence. It’s not illegal to delete things, otherwise the world would run out of storage, it’s illegal to delete things to knowingly impede an investigation.
- cornel_io 2y ago
  Fair enough. I'm never talking to anyone over insecure channels again.
  - yau8edq12i 2y ago
    How is technical nature of your communication with others at all relevant? The court can order you to hand over the encryption keys, and if you destroy them, then it's the same thing as destroying the communication.
  - ikiris 2y ago
    It's always weird when some tech nerds think they have some magic wand which avoids legal controls. A judge would just smack you down hard if this ever came to court, and your argument of well I special exception here due to technical barriers will just end up with you getting an adverse judgement or contempt charge depending on how flagrant it and if you had prior legal orders to the contrary.
  - smt88 2y ago
    > I'm never talking to anyone over insecure channels again. You can and should do this. No one will punish you for it in court unless you refuse to give them evidence that they have legally obtained. I'm not sure why this is so complicated for you. Let's say you murder someone with a knife, and you keep that bloody knife in a safe labeled, "Potential Evidence of Murder". A judge orders you to open the safe, and instead you incinerate it and everything inside it. You wouldn't be punished for keeping your jewels in other safes. You'd be punished for committing a crime and then preventing a court from getting the evidence.

I use Signal by default for every piece of communication that I can. Am I somehow held to a different standard just because I was paranoid about surveillance from the start? That seems wrong.

ikiris 2y ago

If you're telling a judge "I specifically hide all written communication that I'm legally required to hold and produce so that you can't see it" you're gonna have a bad time.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

zarzavat 2y ago

> Am I somehow held to a different standard just because I was paranoid about surveillance from the start? Yes, how else could it work? For example if you have a policy to destroy CCTV footage at the end of the day then it’s not illegal to do that. If you have a policy to keep CCTV footage but when the police come and ask you some questions you delete it because you know that it contains evidence of a crime, that’s destruction of evidence. It’s not illegal to delete things, otherwise the world would run out of storage, it’s illegal to delete things to knowingly impede an investigation.

cornel_io 2y ago
Fair enough. I'm never talking to anyone over insecure channels again.
- yau8edq12i 2y ago
  How is technical nature of your communication with others at all relevant? The court can order you to hand over the encryption keys, and if you destroy them, then it's the same thing as destroying the communication.
- ikiris 2y ago
  It's always weird when some tech nerds think they have some magic wand which avoids legal controls. A judge would just smack you down hard if this ever came to court, and your argument of well I special exception here due to technical barriers will just end up with you getting an adverse judgement or contempt charge depending on how flagrant it and if you had prior legal orders to the contrary.
- smt88 2y ago
  > I'm never talking to anyone over insecure channels again. You can and should do this. No one will punish you for it in court unless you refuse to give them evidence that they have legally obtained. I'm not sure why this is so complicated for you. Let's say you murder someone with a knife, and you keep that bloody knife in a safe labeled, "Potential Evidence of Murder". A judge orders you to open the safe, and instead you incinerate it and everything inside it. You wouldn't be punished for keeping your jewels in other safes. You'd be punished for committing a crime and then preventing a court from getting the evidence.