Slashdot Mirror
What To Do If Police Try To Search Your Phone Without a Warrant
blottsie writes: The Supreme Court ruled this week that it is illegal for police to search your phone without a warrant. But just because that's the new rule doesn't mean all 7.5 million law enforcement officers in the U.S. will abide by it. This guide, put together with the help of the EFF and ACLU, explains what to do if a police officer tries to search your phone without a warrant. Of course, that doesn't mean they don't have other ways of getting your data.
If they feel you may be about to wipe your phone for some reason the police an search it under exigent circumstances.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Let them take it, then sue the crap out of them. If you argue or fight against it, they'll slap you with "Resisting" something or the other, and you'll be screwed anyways.
Tell them repeatedly and ad nauseum that you do not consent to the search; object loudly and often, and make sure your attorney hears about it. Anything they uncover will be inadmissible. If you're extremely lucky, your cell phone will contain the only incriminating evidence, and you can walk away on a technicality.
Then tell them they'll need a subpoena for the password.
Don't piss them off. Just say "I do not consent to this search. Repeatedly.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Since the summary links you to a stupid news article and not the guides themselves, here is the ACLU Guide and EFF Guides here.
Have phone encrypted, and wipe phone from the bootloader?
Treat it as any other home invasion.
--- and be carried out in a body bag.
If you are already under arrest or otherwise detained when they decide to illegally search your phone... I don't think the castle doctrine or even very wide interpretation of stand your ground will help you... doubly so as they would have already checked you for dangerous objects on your person.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
How about, "don't have evidence of crimes on your phone," because "you aren't a criminal." /. groupthink is, as usual, that all cops are dishonest and looking to railroad everyone, because there was a bad cop once, and since he wasn't instantly outed by co-workers, that all cops are part of his nefarious plan to subvert your rights at all junctions.
Want to have a bad time at a traffic stop? Start your traffic stop by doing the crack-the-window and repeating the "am I free to go" mantra. I don't like driving to San Diego from Phoenix and having to get inspected along I-8. It angers me. ...but the solution isn't to be a dick to the guy out there in the papers-please guard hut. Keep voting against the idiots who make these things possible.
In the meantime, just keep your phone locked.
The US police are infamously variable. In some towns they are a model of how the police should be, respectful of the law and all citizens until proven guilty. The next town over they are little more than a legal mafia, happily resorting to intimidation and extortion to extract fines and reacting to any challenge to their authority with a campaign of persecution.
If you're in the latter, you're basically screwed. If you don't hand over the password, the officer will decide he smells a hint of pot in your car and tear the interior apart in a search in an effort to provoke you into touching him - and then it's one charge of 'resisting arrest' and a face full of pepper spray. You can fight in court, but they'll layer the charges on so thick and delay so long you'd exaust your life savings trying to secure any form of victory.
right up his arse
Simply say, “You will have to rip this cell phone out of my cold, dead hands if you want to do a search.” Most will comply..
What if the cops ask permission to look at your phone and like 90 percent of defendants, you say "okay" like a dumbass?
This is the most likely scenario and it's going to happen all the time.
Just ask to see the law in writing, they have to show you to enforce it.
That's what the saying "freedom isn't free" really means, you know.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Sad but true, if police want to do something illegal, and you argue with them, they *will* do it anyway, and you *will* be in further trouble for attempting to resist.
On the plus side, it seems like that could actually *help* you, seeing as how it would be inadmissible in court, so if you were on trial and their evidence was found that way, great for you! (I am not a lawyer. All my knowledge of law comes from watching fictional tv and reading fictional books. Ask a real lawyer if what I said is actually true. But it certainly definitely seems like it should be? But the "don't resist arrest" part definitely, that comes from the news.)
Google: police cell phone extraction device
There were a bunch of stories about gadgets that could scoop up everything from your cell in about 2 seconds.
So I wonder if those devices will still be used - at the side of the road.
Because I'm an enthusiast when it comes to motorcycles and cars, I tend to keep a lot of action cameras hooked up when out at meets or when going to the track. I've been pulled over before and the police officer took the camera from my helmet and started flipping through the log. Knowing he wouldn't find anything incriminating because I had not been recording, I consented to the search...
Is this scenario protected under the precedent set by the Riley v. United States ruling?
Be polite, comply with and instructions while saying nothing and then let your Lawyer do the talking. if they are searching your phone you NEED a Lawyer so get one. Let HIM (or her!!!) do the talking and of course anything they find will now be inadmissible in court.
The article has some good advice, and what I would consider some bad advice:
"Lock your phone"
- GOOD ADVICE! A simple passcode is your first line of defense against any physical intrusion, just like the lock on your front door.
"Repeat 'I do not consent to this search'"
- GOOD ADVICE! Not only does it establish that you deny consent, it shows the cop that you know (at least some of) your rights, which will get most of them to think twice before doing anything that might violate your rights (especially if you're taping the encounter).
Don't get physical/let them do as they please, then lawyer up."
I consider that bad advice, because it discourages people from exercising their right to defend themselves against unlawful arrest, a right that has been repeatedly verified and upheld in court.
Of course, as with any exercising any right, you do so at your own peril.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Most people involved in a pre-textual motor vehicle stop and issued a warning for a trivial non-offense won't know to say the magic words that begin their legal defense: "Am I free to go? Why am I being detained?" and when the polite officer says, "Well, I'm sure you've got nothing to hide, let me search your vehicle, and no matter what I'll make sure you're on your way quickly," many quickly hope compliance is their best option in the short-term.
So they say, "Yeah, go ahead," instead of the alternative, "I do not consent to search and invoke all protections afforded me by the Constitution; while I am cooperating within those constraints, please advise me promptly when I am free to go."
You'll get searched anyway, whether it's your phone or your car. You might get arrested anyway. But having invoked your rights instead of freely waiving your rights gives the defendant ample opportunity to assert their innocence in court without having already accidentally proven their guilt without the benefit of counsel.
I expect most people, despite the Supreme Court ruling, will find their phones searched anyway; consider stop-and-frisk in New York City. Please set a passcode on your device, preferably alphanumeric instead of a simple PIN, and avoid interacting with law enforcement, they have better things to do than read a neckbeard hacker's text messages to his mom about picking up more Mountain Dew at the store.
(Nevermind Border Patrol checkpoints in the US or Customs/Immigration interviews...)
(IANAL.)
I consider it a violation if I turn the corner and I find my wife snooping through my phone. What if you came back from the bathroom and your co-worker was going through your phone? This is personal property. It's absolutely insane to think that a cop could have the right to search through it without some court order of a serious magnitude. The fact is though, they'll do it anyway - they find a way. It's like searching your car. If they want to, they do it - they simply have a way around everything. They'll ask, "Do I have your consent to search your car?" If you say "No", they will say, "Ok, then we're going to have to wait a few hours for the canine cop to show up with the police dog". The thought of sitting there for hours would make me less likely to want to stand up for my rights.
Openly film the cops with one camera. Have the other one set up in an inconspicuous location, where it can see them them beating the crap out of you and smashing the first camera. Do not inform anyone about the second camera until its footage is safely on YouTube.
This has worked very well for me in the past:
"My lawyer has advised me that rights are like muscles. If they are not exercised, they become weak. Therefor I do not and cannot consent to this search."
It conveys, very directly:
your refusal of the search request
you are a constitution, and rights advocate... meaning you will a big headache for the cop if he continues
you have a lawyer that's also into that sort of thing and would love to sue the department
You should refuse EVERY search. EVERY time. With absolutely no exceptions.
The majority of arrests start with a consensual search by police of someone that legitimately thought they had nothing to hide. Everything is illegal. If a cop searches your home and he wants you to go to jail, you're going to jail. It's as simple as that.
People get into these situations where someone backs into their car in a parking lot and the cop that arrives casually asks "Mind if I check your car for open alcohol?" and they think "LOL that's funny! Of course I don't have that." But the cop isn't just looking for alcohol is he? He starts lifting your floor mats... does he think there's a beer bottle under there? In once instance a man bought a car from the local police impound. A few days later he got pulled over, consented to a search and low and behold the car had a secret compartment for smuggling drugs. They arrested him and he spent a month in jail before they finally realized it had the drugs when it went into impound. ALWAYS refuse search requests. ALWAYS.
The case was about those that were(already) arrested. They have your phone then, there is no way you can wipe it, because it is in their possession along with the rest of your property.
The first thing you should do is avoid eye contact, slowly back away, making calm reassuring noises. You should also keep your arms wide; it makes you look bigger and less like prey. Finally, you should lie on the ground, and play dead. They will quickly lose interest and move on. Do not run, as it will trigger their hunter/prey instincts.
If however they start to eat you, you should start to fight back vigorously.
Or if you are really worried about it, encrypt your phone and lock it...
If you're really worried about storing incriminating evidence on a device, stenography might be a good way to hide it. It's been around a long, long time and exists in many forms. Information encrypted through a key looks like random data. Information existing in the low bits of color values in a video looks like a video (with a little noise). I'd be surprised if there weren't stenographic apps already out there for smart phones (I'll let y'all look). Policeman are graduates of the police academy: very few of them have a software engineering degree!
I prefer to let some other guy die for our freedom, and then celebrate his memory.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
I didn't RTFA, but wouldn't the tricky/slimy answer be "let them search it, so then all of the evidence gets thrown out"?
That should have been "steganography". Sorry about that...
from the article:
These miscarriages are avoidable. Under the English common law we inherited, a crime requires intent. This protection is disappearing in the U.S. As Mr. Silverglate writes, "Since the New Deal era, Congress has delegated to various administrative agencies the task of writing the regulations," even as "Congress has demonstrated a growing dysfunction in crafting legislation that can in fact be understood." Prosecutors identify defendants to go after instead of finding a law that was broken and figuring out who did it. Expect more such prosecutions as Washington adds regulations.
mfwright@batnet.com
My phone is always listening for voice commands, which is great for things like making calls, sending messages, starting navigation etc., but I want a new command specifically for situations like this: "OK Google Now: Lock and Record". It should lock my phone and start a continuous video and audio recording which is streamed to a server somewhere. Even better if it's a separate hotword so I don't have to say "OK Google Now" first to warn the officer I'm about to screw with his plans to screw with me.
If I can activate it by voice, it won't matter whether the phone is locked when it's taken from my pocket. And with the recording, I'll have proof that I did not consent to the search. Streaming will ensure that proof can't be accidentally destroyed by, say, dropping my phone just before a cruiser happens to roll past.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
nothing stops regime security forces to search for anything they want.
Let's not forget this country has largest part of its population in jails and the rest are being enslaved by mortgages or student loans.
This is "American Nightmare" we all hear about.
Get them at each other's throats so they pay less attention to fighting you... ; - ] ]
Your Honor, I knew that the defendant could, with as few as six taps on his phone, completely and irrevocably erase all evidence contained. Therefore, due to exigent circumstances, I felt justified in searching the phone without a warrant.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
You don't know what the police know.
In other words, the police might have perfectly justifiable reasons to take your phone--and you don't know those reasons.
ALWAYS take that into account when making your decisions.
Silent Circle Mobile or some similar service. Not sure if the Blackphone handset can thwart GPS tracking but this way hopefully all they can glean is your approximate location via cell tower records from the carrier. Of course, I'd still explicitly withhold consent of the search.
In fairness, if you write stuff in steno shorthand, nobody'll be able to read that either....
Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
Tell them repeatedly and ad nauseum that you do not consent to the search; object loudly and often, and make sure your attorney hears about it. Anything they uncover will be inadmissible. If you're extremely lucky, your cell phone will contain the only incriminating evidence, and you can walk away on a technicality.
The illegal phone search could support the original "hidden" search, while another team/person on the LEO side is building a "plausible, legal reasoning" that you or someone connected to you is guilty of some crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
There are 7.5 million law enforcement officers for 300 million Americans? That's like what, one for every forty Americans, including children? Surely that number is a bit off, isn't it?
Ezekiel 23:20
It's not even that *most* cops are dishonest (there are some), it's that even good cops make honest mistakes. What you don't want to do is give them anything to make such a mistake with. An, IMHO, it's human nature - especially for those in authority - to not want to admit to mistakes. So if they screw up and arrest you for something that turns out to be nothing, they often *WILL* want to find *something* in order to make you look like the bad guy, and not them.
Seriously, cops make me nervous. I was once accused of shoplifting from a store in the next city. Apparently somebody called in my plates. The cop said they had me on video. I volunteered to come in so they could see if the dude on video was really me, or I can identify if it was somebody I was with (hey, if buddy is visibly shoplifting on my ride, sorry but I'm not covering for him). The answer: "oh, sorry but I don't have the video on me, it's with officer so-and-so. However this is a serious crime. If you come in and 'fess up you'll likely just get a fine, service, and no record".
I tried to talk to the cop in the next city who supposedly had the "evidence" but he was never available, however I kept getting told to return the item and confess.
Eventually, I talked to the store owner. Nothing was stolen on the day in question. In fact, the store didn't even carry the product that was supposedly taken. The owner managed both stores in the city and nothing was take from (or existed at) either. However, the cops were damn convinced I'd stolen something. So I explained to the owner/manager what was up, and asked if *she* could contact officer X with case file Y. She apologized for the inconvenience and said she'd get it dealt with, even gave me some store credit for the hassle.
After that, the cops just stopped calling me. No apology. No "hey we f**ked up and didn't vet that there was an actual theft and not a false-accusation/prank-call". Weeks of stress and hell, and then nothing because *THEY* screwed up and didn't do their job, then couldn't drop it fast enough when it became apparent.
So yeah. Honestly, for the stress I probably should have just said "am I being charged with a crime. Should I discuss this with a lawyer." and let them either charge me or drop it. Certainly it was a *huge* amount of stress in my life, and I'm sure it was on my "police record" (which records police interactions) though obviously since it was fake there was no "criminal record"
Cops screw up. The problem is they generally won't admit to it. The less opportunity to screw up you give them, the better.
So yeah, the papers-please guard? Sorry, but if he's insistent on getting your phone without cause, then HE IS THE CRIMINAL. This papers please crap is along the same vein. It's not being a dick to exercise your rights, and it may save you a lot of hassle.
that's why the greatest generation was the greatest generation... oh wait.
The "greatest generation" was a name thought up by someone who believed the lie told by the guy who spent the war hiding every time shots were fired, but who later claimed to have killed krauts and japs by the dozens.
Indeed - and you'd be in handcuffs anyway.
If you want to insure that they don't go pawing through your phone, put a passcode on the stupid thing. Mind you this isn't to keep them out, but to get the case thrown out later on if they decide to go into the thing minus a warrant (of course they can get one later and search it then, but in the meanwhile...)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
What perfectly justifiable reason could they have? Examples please?
Now if you're using "could" as in "I could sprout wings and fly tomorrow right after I win the lottery" then sure, they "could" have justifiable reasons. It's just very, very, very unlikely.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Torn between calling bullshit and requesting a citation. No wait...bullshit.
[UID-HeinzIntel]
Right. Everyone knows it costs $1.05
In the meantime, just keep your phone locked.
This is the part I don't understand, even the article stated:
The absolute best way to protect your phone from police inspection is to keep it locked with a passcode, which will keep an officer from rummaging through your Facebook photos as you stand beside him in handcuffs.
This makes no sense to me why they would imply you can lock out the police with a passcode. I have read many articles on this subject and the police don't "stand beside you rummaging through your Facebook photos", they attach an Israeli espionage device to the phone and siphon out EVERYTHING in a minute. Oh, and this device will bypass any kind of protection (short of military grade encryption).
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/04/michigan-state-police-we-only-grab-your-cellphone-data-with-a-warrant/
I just realized that the cops (or anyone) could point my phone at me to open it. Time to turn off that facial password.
1) get his name + badge number
2) find out where he lives
3) sneak in late at night and put a bullet in him
problem solved
On one hand you sardonically belittle those who value their freedoms, on the other, your signature cites Eisenhower, one of the the last Presidents to truly care about the welfare and freedom of the people over Political and Corporate interests. Make up your fucking mind
My phone is encrypted. They could never access anything in it unless I were to hand over the rather lengthy password.
The best thing to do in any situation where cops are trying to search and/or arrest you is to say "I don't consent to any searches and I want to speak with my attorney", then shut the fuck up and stay quiet. Cops love it when people talk to them, just remember you are under absolutely no obligations to say a single work to a cop. I ignore them all of the time and they fear people who know when to keep quiet and when to walk away (if you are not under arrest and you ask if you are free to leave and get any response other than "no", then you can legally walk away and there is nothing they can do about it).
Police work these days is sexual gratification !
10 years ago the Police dept. had 10 % pedophiles and perverts in ranks.
Today, the figure is 98 %.
Modern times, the work of the Police is to butt fuck citizens in order to demonstrate power of the Alpha Male over the weak !
Welcome to Obama's New World Order !
"Riley v. United States is the name of the court case that triggered this new search warrant rule."
Wrong. The opinion is Riley v. California. See http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-132_8l9c.pdf
...until they've actually been pulled over while doing something stupid. The opening scene of Super Troopers pretty much nails the reality of all you kids who brag about your slick responses to the cops. You go from, "Sheeeet, I was just about to pull out my nine and pop a cap in that pig's ass," to whining, "Sir, he's already pulled over! He can't pull over any farther!" Cops aren't stupid. By the time they pull you over, they already know what's up and all the talking in the world won't stop that. Plain sight and probable cause are enough for a search.
Ha ha..... Quite correct about the police not knowing the ruling about what they can or cannot do. Same applies if a police officer confronts you for taking photos in public, for whatever reason, you are guilt until you prove your innocence - The police can do what ever they want to you.... and do not resist - the police are always right - Learned that from my Police officer father.
And why would they need a warrant for it?
-- 29A the number of the Beast
Why are the police simply not briefed on changes in the law?
I think this might solve the entire issue.
I suspect that Eisenhower was smart enough to know the difference between mindless, chest-thumping patriotism and the real thing.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Probably knew the difference between courage and cowardice, too.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Wrong, you can't just 'stay quiet'..
We now live in a magical world where you need to know the correct magical incantation to keep your rights.
Your rights do not exist until you conjure them from the primordial legal realm and will them into existence with the power of black robes.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/01/us.scotus.miranda/
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/17/supreme-court-rules-fifth-amendment-has
"The Court said Salinas simply remained silent and did not “formally” invoke any constitutional right, so prosecutors could offer commentary to the jury. "
You MUST say that you invoke your constitutional rights, and specifically SAY the 5th amendment.
If you are not versed in law, if you are ignorant, have a low IQ, learning disability, or English is your second language you do not have the right to 'keep quiet'
Not anymore anyway.. Thanks to elderly people that where magical Wizard robes.