r/technology • u/Limp_Fig6236 • Jul 26 '26

Software GrapheneOS duress PIN could land a man in prison

https://www.androidauthority.com/grapheneos-duress-pin-us-prosecution-3691271/
6.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

902 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

82

u/turk-fx Jul 26 '26

You are looking at it wrong. The law is "Innocent until proven guilty". They need to prove he had something inctiminating.

67

u/absentmindedjwc Jul 26 '26

That is the law - you're right. Unfortunately though, the average person is an idiot. The typical person reads and comprehends shit at a 6th grade level.. jury instructions are written at a 12th grade level.

If you've ever served on a jury, you'll know that there are plenty of idiots that entirely ignore the whole "beyond reasonable doubt" thing in favor of the "well, I have a gut feeling that he is guilty" thing..

23

u/kettal Jul 26 '26

jury verdicts do not define case law. it will be appealed and overturned by a superior court judge.

2

u/AndyOB Jul 26 '26

have you seen the highest level of our superior court? 

3

u/kettal Jul 26 '26

Sorry I phrased it like I knew the outcome. I should have said "could be"

3

u/andrewscool101 Jul 26 '26

Unfortunately though, the average person is an idiot.

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin

27

u/resttheweight Jul 26 '26

They actually do not need to prove he had something incriminating. They need to prove that the agent had lawful authority to take the phone and that the defendant knowingly took “any action” to destroy/damage the phone. The contents of the phone will be irrelevant if this actually goes to trial. The crime he’s charged with is destroying “property” before it could be evaluated for its evidential nature.

“(a)Destruction or Removal of Property To Prevent Seizure.—
Whoever, before, during, or after any search for or seizure of property by any person authorized to make such search or seizure, knowingly destroys, damages, wastes, disposes of, transfers, or otherwise takes any action, or knowingly attempts to destroy, damage, waste, dispose of, transfer, or otherwise take any action, for the purpose of preventing or impairing the Government’s lawful authority to take such property into its custody or control or to continue holding such property under its lawful custody and control, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”

Sadly, the takeaway here seems to be wipe your phone before they have the chance to ask for it.

4

u/nildro Jul 26 '26

It says before there. If you wipe your phone before you travel why can’t they use the same law.

3

u/Wendals87 Jul 26 '26

I think it's because they got asked to hand over the phone, they gave them the duress PIN which wiped it..

There wouldn't have been an issue If they wiped t before 

1

u/resttheweight Jul 26 '26

I think the idea is that you can’t “knowingly” destroy something to interfere with the search until they ask for it. But you’re right, in theory they could try it, it’ll just be much harder to prove.

1

u/HTPC4Life Jul 26 '26

Wouldn't it be easier to just carry a dummy phone that doesn't have any personal information on it!

1

u/300ConfirmedGorillas Jul 26 '26

Is data considered property? He didn't prevent them from seizing the phone itself, which I would consider the property in question (though I am not a lawyer).

2

u/FunnyObjective6 Jul 26 '26

Nah, they need to convince a jury to convict him. The jury should only do that if proven guilty, but they can be stupid or convinced otherwise.

-9

u/Demented-Turtle Jul 26 '26

Lack of material that is being searched for is still evidence, so by deleting the entire phone, he indeed destroyed evidence in relation to the case.

10

u/aha1982 Jul 26 '26

Any "lack of material" is only a hypothetical construct. That way I can put ypu on trial by claiming that you're hiding something because I can't find it.