5 ms·

It's also just very basic police work. We're investigating this company, we think they've committed a crime. Ok, why do you think that. Well they've very public

It's also just very basic police work. We're investigating this company, we think they've committed a crime. Ok, why do you think that. Well they've very publicly and obviously committed a crime. Ok, are you going to prosecute them? Probably. Have you gone to their offices and gathered evidence? No thanks. Of course they're going to raid their offices! They're investigating a crime! It would be quite literally insane if they tried to prosecute them for a crime and how up to court having not even attempted basic steps to gather evidence!

NooneAtAll3 8mo ago
that's kinda the normalization argument, not the reason behind it "it is done because it's always done so"
- DetroitThrow 8mo ago
  Isn't it both necessary and normal if they need more information about why they were generating CSAM? I don't know why the rule of law shouldn't apply to child pornography or why it would be incorrect to normalize the prosecution of CSAM creators.
- monsieurbanana 8mo ago
  I'm not sure what you're getting at, physical investigation is the common procedure. You need a reason _not_ to do it, and since "it's all digital" is not a good reason we go back to doing the usual thing.
  - mothballed 8mo ago
    It's a show of force. "Look we have big strong men with le guns and the neat jack boots, we can send 12 of them in for every one of you." Whether it is actually needed for evidence is immaterial to that.
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - swiftcoder 8mo ago
      It can be both things at once. It obviously sends a message, but hey, maybe you get lucky, and someone left a memo in the bin by the printer that blows the case wide open.
      - otherme123 8mo ago
        Or maybe they are storing documents with secrets in a room or even in the bathroom.
    - Teever 8mo ago
      If law enforcement credibily believes that criminals are conspiring to commit a crime and are actively doing so in a particular location what is wrong with sending armed people to stop those criminal acivities as well as apprehend the criminals and what ever evidence of their crimes may exist? If this isn't the entire purpose of law enforcement then what is exactly?
      - mothballed 8mo ago
        No, a search warrant isn't intended to [directly] apprehend criminals, though an arrest warrant may come later to do that.
        Teever 8mo ago
        But one could reasonably assume that a location that is known to be used for criminal activity and that likely has evidence of such criminal activity likely also has people commiting crimes. When police raid a grow-op they often may only have a search warrant but they end up making several arrests because they find people actively commiting crimes when they execute the warrant.
- pjc50 8mo ago
  Well, yes, it is actually pretty normal for suspected criminal businesses. What's unusual is that this one has their own publicity engine. Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes. More normally it looks like e.g. this in the UK: https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesses-in-money-laundering-crackdown-13346534 https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesse... CyberGEND more often seem to do smalltime copyright infringement enforcement, but there are a number of authorities with the right to conduct raids.
  - learingsci 8mo ago
    “Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes.” I’m sorry but that’s absurd even amidst the cacophony of absurdity that comprises public discourse these days.
    - Rygian 8mo ago
      I'll bite. How was TikTok held liable for the crimes it was accused of?
      - deleted 8mo ago
        [deleted]
      - throwpoaster 8mo ago
        It was force-sold to Oracle.
        watwut 8mo ago
        That had more to do with wish to control it and steal it then crimes.
        freejazz 8mo ago
        That wasn't a punishment, that was a reward.
      - 8mo ago
throwaway290 8mo ago
EU wants to circumvent e2e to fight CSA: "nooo think about my privacy, what happened to just normal police work?" Police raids offices literally investigating CSA: "nooo police should not physically invade, what happened to good old electronic surveillance?"
londons_explore 8mo ago
A company I worked for had a 'when the police raid the office' policy, which was to require they smash down the first door, but then open all other doors for them. That was so that later in court it could be demonstrated the data hadn't been handed over voluntarily. They also disconnected and blocked all overseas VPN's in the process, so local law enforcement only would get access to local data.

NooneAtAll3 8mo ago

that's kinda the normalization argument, not the reason behind it "it is done because it's always done so"

DetroitThrow 8mo ago
Isn't it both necessary and normal if they need more information about why they were generating CSAM? I don't know why the rule of law shouldn't apply to child pornography or why it would be incorrect to normalize the prosecution of CSAM creators.
monsieurbanana 8mo ago
I'm not sure what you're getting at, physical investigation is the common procedure. You need a reason _not_ to do it, and since "it's all digital" is not a good reason we go back to doing the usual thing.
- mothballed 8mo ago
  It's a show of force. "Look we have big strong men with le guns and the neat jack boots, we can send 12 of them in for every one of you." Whether it is actually needed for evidence is immaterial to that.
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
  - swiftcoder 8mo ago
    It can be both things at once. It obviously sends a message, but hey, maybe you get lucky, and someone left a memo in the bin by the printer that blows the case wide open.
    - otherme123 8mo ago
      Or maybe they are storing documents with secrets in a room or even in the bathroom.
  - Teever 8mo ago
    If law enforcement credibily believes that criminals are conspiring to commit a crime and are actively doing so in a particular location what is wrong with sending armed people to stop those criminal acivities as well as apprehend the criminals and what ever evidence of their crimes may exist? If this isn't the entire purpose of law enforcement then what is exactly?
    - mothballed 8mo ago
      No, a search warrant isn't intended to [directly] apprehend criminals, though an arrest warrant may come later to do that.
      - Teever 8mo ago
        But one could reasonably assume that a location that is known to be used for criminal activity and that likely has evidence of such criminal activity likely also has people commiting crimes. When police raid a grow-op they often may only have a search warrant but they end up making several arrests because they find people actively commiting crimes when they execute the warrant.
pjc50 8mo ago
Well, yes, it is actually pretty normal for suspected criminal businesses. What's unusual is that this one has their own publicity engine. Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes. More normally it looks like e.g. this in the UK: https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesses-in-money-laundering-crackdown-13346534 https://news.sky.com/video/police-raid-hundreds-of-businesse... CyberGEND more often seem to do smalltime copyright infringement enforcement, but there are a number of authorities with the right to conduct raids.
- learingsci 8mo ago
  “Americans are just having trouble coping with the idea of a corporation being held liable for crimes.” I’m sorry but that’s absurd even amidst the cacophony of absurdity that comprises public discourse these days.
  - Rygian 8mo ago
    I'll bite. How was TikTok held liable for the crimes it was accused of?
    - deleted 8mo ago
      [deleted]
    - throwpoaster 8mo ago
      It was force-sold to Oracle.
      - watwut 8mo ago
        That had more to do with wish to control it and steal it then crimes.
      - freejazz 8mo ago
        That wasn't a punishment, that was a reward.
    - 8mo ago

throwaway290 8mo ago

EU wants to circumvent e2e to fight CSA: "nooo think about my privacy, what happened to just normal police work?" Police raids offices literally investigating CSA: "nooo police should not physically invade, what happened to good old electronic surveillance?"

londons_explore 8mo ago

A company I worked for had a 'when the police raid the office' policy, which was to require they smash down the first door, but then open all other doors for them. That was so that later in court it could be demonstrated the data hadn't been handed over voluntarily. They also disconnected and blocked all overseas VPN's in the process, so local law enforcement only would get access to local data.