The exact circumstances around the search are not known. But activist Samuel Tunick is charged with deleting data from a Google Pixel before CBP’s Tactical Terrorism Response Team could search it.
I imagine they’re trying to charge him with destruction of evidence. I don’t know how that should go if this were actually a legal proceeding but would certainly hope it would require reasonable suspicion of a specific crime and a search warrant.
Yes, if a person in your situation would reasonably believe that it could be used as evidence.
For example, you murder someone with a knife. A reasonable person in your situation would believe that the knife could be used as evidence. So you could be charged for destruction of evidence if they later discover during the investigation that you destroyed the knife. Even if they don’t have enough to pin you with the murder charge, (for example, maybe you have someone willing to help you get an airtight alibi when the murder occurred), they can still hit you with the destruction of evidence charge if they can prove you destroyed the murder weapon.
But, in that case there’s a crime, there’s a body. I don’t think there’s any underlying assertion of illegality here. If this becomes standard legal practice, that it’s illegal to destroy data in general, all paper shredders would have to be thrown out.
That’s the catch isn’t it? In a lawful society and under normal due process you’d expect to start with a crime, reasonable suspicion, and a search warrant. Then yes, if it’s reasonable for you to expect that you’ve destroyed evidence, I’d expect you to be so charged.
But the entire issue with this immigration crackdown is the assertion that constitutional protections no longer apply, laws no longer apply, due process no longer applies. They have claimed for years the right to search smartphones at a border, without a warrant and we didn’t object. Now they’re extending it beyond their jurisdiction purview to search away from a border, away from their intended task, and still with little to no due process or civil rights. Now they’re trying to extend this suspension of law to a protester whose activity they don’t like. This is where the Gestapo analogy comes from.
A bit of speculation here but you can configure your phone to wipe itself automatically for exactly this type of oppression. He could very well have done so. But in what seems similar to me, companies can not destroy evidence by deleting email but they can have a policy to automatically delete it after, say 60 days. It’s automatic, a normal process, so it’s ok. How would a normal process to wipe your phone automatically not be the same?
I imagine they’re trying to charge him with destruction of evidence. I don’t know how that should go if this were actually a legal proceeding but would certainly hope it would require reasonable suspicion of a specific crime and a search warrant.
Can you be charged with destruction of evidence before you’ve even been charged with a crime?
“What if the crime you’re being charged with is destruction of evidence? Checkmate!”
It sounds like a bad joke but they already do this with resisting arrest.
Yes, if a person in your situation would reasonably believe that it could be used as evidence.
For example, you murder someone with a knife. A reasonable person in your situation would believe that the knife could be used as evidence. So you could be charged for destruction of evidence if they later discover during the investigation that you destroyed the knife. Even if they don’t have enough to pin you with the murder charge, (for example, maybe you have someone willing to help you get an airtight alibi when the murder occurred), they can still hit you with the destruction of evidence charge if they can prove you destroyed the murder weapon.
But, in that case there’s a crime, there’s a body. I don’t think there’s any underlying assertion of illegality here. If this becomes standard legal practice, that it’s illegal to destroy data in general, all paper shredders would have to be thrown out.
That’s the catch isn’t it? In a lawful society and under normal due process you’d expect to start with a crime, reasonable suspicion, and a search warrant. Then yes, if it’s reasonable for you to expect that you’ve destroyed evidence, I’d expect you to be so charged.
But the entire issue with this immigration crackdown is the assertion that constitutional protections no longer apply, laws no longer apply, due process no longer applies. They have claimed for years the right to search smartphones at a border, without a warrant and we didn’t object. Now they’re extending it beyond their jurisdiction purview to search away from a border, away from their intended task, and still with little to no due process or civil rights. Now they’re trying to extend this suspension of law to a protester whose activity they don’t like. This is where the Gestapo analogy comes from.
A bit of speculation here but you can configure your phone to wipe itself automatically for exactly this type of oppression. He could very well have done so. But in what seems similar to me, companies can not destroy evidence by deleting email but they can have a policy to automatically delete it after, say 60 days. It’s automatic, a normal process, so it’s ok. How would a normal process to wipe your phone automatically not be the same?