SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
In a filing, prosecutors have said that they are currently extracting data from locked phones seized from over 100 alleged rioters:
In new filings, prosecutors told a court in Washington, DC that within the coming weeks, they expect to extract all data from the seized cellphones of more than 100 allegedly violent protesters arrested during the inauguration of President Donald Trump. Prosecutors also said that this search is validated by recently issued warrants. [...] "All of the Rioter Cell Phones were locked, which requires more time-sensitive efforts to try to obtain the data," Jennifer Kerkhoff, an assistant United States attorney, wrote.
Also at BuzzFeed, CNET, and The Verge.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Data From the Phones of Over 100 Alleged Inauguration Rioters to be Extracted
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 44 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 27 2017, @02:54AM (2 children)
H guilty of what, exactly? Doing her job as SofS without following IT security procedures? As Secretary, it is bloody well at her discretion if she should follow procedure, or just rewrite them to except herself. There are enough laws in any country over 100 years old that _everybody_ breaks laws on a regular basis, even some with big penalties, and when you move in matters of state, the definition of Treason is not black and white at all. Is taking illegal campaign financing from an adversarial foreign state a serious crime? Depends on who you ask.
Your example of the doctors and the flip-flopping trial is both sad, and believable. However, returning to the question of: what does it matter what's on the phones? If the system is to have any credibility, there are a network of diverse individuals who each have knowledge of what is found in evidence searches, electronic and otherwise, otherwise the very problem you imply is all too possible. The arresting officer on the scene perhaps has the most latitude to "plant" evidence, especially if his partner is away - or complicit. After that, the web of evidence handlers is _supposed_ to spread, if it doesn't, the system is in jeopardy of becoming a farce, well, a bigger farce than it currently is perceived to be.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by BK on Monday March 27 2017, @03:55AM (1 child)
Woosh!
You missed his point and then made it. Well done.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 27 2017, @01:00PM
Perhaps, perhaps not... some readers would take the "oh so absolutely guilty" at face value.
🌻🌻 [google.com]