More police protecting and serving

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,663
Likes
4,027
Ahh the irony of all these videos.

“Your asking me to do something I can’t because I’m in handcuffs!”
He refused and got arrested. Now that its real he wants to comply and be un-arrested..... got news for him, it doesn't work that way.
 

SERE

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
5,848
Likes
4,410
Location
North of Boston
For the sheriff that got arrested posts. There was a previously executed warrant for the county issued and personal phones. Can they arrest him later for not 'unlocking the phone'? Wouldn't that go against self incrimination?

What a circus, though it does sound like some actual crimes may have been committed.

 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,663
Likes
4,027
Eventually it will end up in front of SCOTUS, and I expect they will just rule that its no different than any other password or lock combination.
Personally I'm not sure where I'm at on this one. It's really no different than any other password. A password is just a series of data points, and facial recognition and finger prints, when used to lock a phone are really nothing more that an alternate way of entering data, it's not running them against some massive database looking for a match. But this is a purely technology viewpoint.

I'd love to hear from others on how it differs from forcing them to open a phone with a passcode. Not just that "it's a 4th/5th violation", but how it differes from forcing a passcode.
 

KBCraig

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
11,008
Likes
6,021
Location
Granite State of Mind
Eventually it will end up in front of SCOTUS, and I expect they will just rule that its no different than any other password or lock combination.
Personally I'm not sure where I'm at on this one. It's really no different than any other password. A password is just a series of data points, and facial recognition and finger prints, when used to lock a phone are really nothing more that an alternate way of entering data, it's not running them against some massive database looking for a match. But this is a purely technology viewpoint.

I'd love to hear from others on how it differs from forcing them to open a phone with a passcode. Not just that "it's a 4th/5th violation", but how it differes from forcing a passcode.
The means of unlocking the phone shouldn't matter. Unlocking via passcode, facial recognition, or print ID, are all analogous to using a physical key.

If someone is arrested in public and police seize their keys, the police can't then use those keys to go gain entrance to the person's office without an additional warrant.

Phones aren't like a physical lockbox. They are a portal to information that is not contained on the phone itself. Not just data in cloud storage, but information about other people whose social media is set to private, friends-only.

Opening someone's phone is like opening their bank accounts, plus their friends' diaries and address books.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,663
Likes
4,027
The means of unlocking the phone shouldn't matter. Unlocking via passcode, facial recognition, or print ID, are all analogous to using a physical key.

If someone is arrested in public and police seize their keys, the police can't then use those keys to go gain entrance to the person's office without an additional warrant.

Phones aren't like a physical lockbox. They are a portal to information that is not contained on the phone itself. Not just data in cloud storage, but information about other people whose social media is set to private, friends-only.

Opening someone's phone is like opening their bank accounts, plus their friends' diaries and address books.
Interesting. The first two lines would lead us to the idea that they just need an additional or specific warrant. But the second two hold the position that because the phone contains other people private information, or a portal to it, a warrant to search the phone would be insufficient.

But I suspect the logical argument to this would be that search warrants are not issued for a general search, they have to be looking for something specific. And I would expect it would be the same for a phone. So just like there may be someone else's property or information in a house, there could also be other people's information on the phone. Since this is permitted with a house, it would also be permissible with a phone as long as they only looked at the information actually on the phone. Text, emails, app data, links, history, even cached web pages are all actually on the phone. So simply not accessing the internet would put them on solid ground from the "portal" perspective.

Please, everyone remember this is a logical argument, not an opinion position.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
18,213
Likes
11,942
The means of unlocking the phone shouldn't matter. Unlocking via passcode, facial recognition, or print ID, are all analogous to using a physical key.

If someone is arrested in public and police seize their keys, the police can't then use those keys to go gain entrance to the person's office without an additional warrant.

Phones aren't like a physical lockbox. They are a portal to information that is not contained on the phone itself. Not just data in cloud storage, but information about other people whose social media is set to private, friends-only.

Opening someone's phone is like opening their bank accounts, plus their friends' diaries and address books.
"Shouldnt Matter"

But it does according to the courts because they partially have not caught up with technology and partially a phone differs in some ways from other private property

A cell phone has the added complication of being attached to a service provider that the person has contracted with to provide a service....call other people

A cell phone also attempts to connect to that service providers cell towers......these connection attempts can be tracked with specialized hardware/software and the unique identifiers of individual phones can be collected/tracked

The act of your cell phone attempting to connect to cell towers is analogous to you vocalizing something in a public place and having some irrational expectation that it was protected from being taped/recorded by others......its not

Same with comms to/from your phone.....if they are plain text/not encrypted then why would anyone have an expectation of privacy?.....no different than email or other protocols each of us use all the time

Encrypted comms is a different story.....

As far as data that resides on your phone thats another story.......

Its too easy to compel (legally/illegally/forcefully) the use of a biometric value to access a phone.......anyone using biometrics and expecting that they're secure is fooling themselves

A passcode/pattern/other that only exists in YOUR head is far more difficult to compel from a person

Personally. I'm waiting for MFA options on phones......and my next phone will not be from apple/android buckets......

Apple is now including rona tracking bits in its newest update.......I expect android platforms are right behind them.....both Apple and Google have a horrible track record of tracking people despite being told not to by the owner

One of the next rabbit holes we go down will be cars and the info/data gathered about you by your car......everything from GPS/movement info to things you say while in your car now that most new cars have some sort of microphone for hands free BS

Along those lines....this is one of the most dangerous and inspirational bills in the NH House this year IMHO

 
Last edited:

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,663
Likes
4,027
And so ends a reasonable and logical discussion... I'm truly disappointed.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
18,213
Likes
11,942
Anyone still believe that the majority of officers will not carry out unconstitutional orders or believe they will come down on the right side of the constitution if push comes to shove?

 

jpk

Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
18,213
Likes
11,942
I watched the video... unbelievable to me that the thug with his knee on his neck didn't even budge the entire time. Completely cold and heartless.

Great they got fired... when are the arrests and the trial dates?
I'd bet $50 that they have the cop that suffocated him hidden away in some sort of safe house by now along with his family if he has any.....the irony that SCOTUS hasnt taken up a qualified immunity cases should not be lost on folks
 
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,956
Likes
53
Location
SShore
Seeing the first page as "Medford" Ma. Cop's theres a book about them thats a great true story.
Called "Good Cops, Bad Cops" by Clemente. They robbed the Bank a door or two down from the station about 3 Decades back, one of those break in on the 3 day Memorial Day holiday weekend adventures.

Good Cops, Bad Cops (TV Movie 1990) - IMDb The Movie.....

I filed a "Grand larceny" report with them not 2 yrs back.
They gave me good advice,"You should probably get your own atty. after this family member.";)I'm not kidding.
 
Last edited:

Woodsy

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
5,105
Likes
2,168
Location
In the north woods likely hunting or trapping
So they fired all 4, I’d be nervous if I was the kneeler chances are the FBI will need a fall guy in this and he will be it. The others maybe charged with minor crimes but no jail time. Maybe manslaughter for the kneeler but his lawyers will fight to present the victim had been fighting them, possibly under the influence of drugs and get it down to improper use of force. In the end the guy should not have lost his life.
 

Queen Bee

NES Member
Rating - 70%
14   6   0
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
3,154
Likes
1,310
Location
Hogwarts

free

NES Member
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
1,725
Likes
601
So they fired all 4, I’d be nervous if I was the kneeler chances are the FBI will need a fall guy in this and he will be it. The others maybe charged with minor crimes but no jail time. Maybe manslaughter for the kneeler but his lawyers will fight to present the victim had been fighting them, possibly under the influence of drugs and get it down to improper use of force. In the end the guy should not have lost his life.
You have it all figured out now, don't you.
 
Top Bottom