this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
312 points (99.1% liked)
Privacy
4969 readers
242 users here now
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean I think privacy advocates are looking to set a precedent. This case is perfect for us.
The officer was the one that wiped the data, so hopefully he'll loose his job. And they should be sued to pay compensation to the victim for the damages caused by lost data
There's already strong precedence that destroying data after learning of an investigation is a crime. Doesn't matter to the courts that is via a clever trigger. If he knowingly provided a pin to an official that destroys the data then he's hosed. His only hope is if they guessed on their own.
Sounds like he misremembered under duress to me
¯_(ツ)_/¯
He broke no laws, was read no rights and was repeatedly denied an attorney.
What was the investigation?
That's the fun part... There wasn't one, he just happened to oppose a very unpopular thing happening in his city.
Example?
There’s also precedent that “officers” may use biometric means to unlock a device, but innocent-until-proven-guilty people may not be compelled to disclose their pin.
your argument would be shredded in court.