[jrohland]

Post removed.

[amazinglygraceless]

I'm not following you. The adult is not the one in possession or control of the teens
phone so what exactly would be they basis for charging him with possession of
child pornography?

[JasW]

Interesting results from teen sexting survey. Got me thinking about privacy again and why the security of a mobile phone seriously matters. When I think of an adult riding in a car with a teenager and what could happen if the police stopped them. Since police can search your phone anytime they want. Imagine the cop grabs the teen's phone, scans it and finds a naked picture of a minor. The adult could, and I have no doubt would be charged with possession of child pornography. Really wants me to insist everyone in the car have a locked BlackBerry.

Go ahead tell me a politically ambitious prosecutor would not bring such a case. Tell me you have nothing to hide on your iPhone or Android so it doesn't matter if the cops take an image of it. Privacy, everyone's privacy, matters to all of us.

I'm familiar with the Seventh's Circuit opinion here. First of all, the police would have to have probable cause to stop you to begin with. Second, the Seventh Circuit's opinion is factually limited by the court to the police "searching" the cell phone only to obtain its number (so they could use it to check cell phone records for evidence). The opinion did not give police carte blanche to search anything and everything on a cell phone. Indeed, the opinion says that while searching a phone to obtain its number or names from the phone's address book is permissible, analogous precedent that forbids reading love letters stuck between the pages of an address book precludes reading love letters stored on the cell phone.

(The Seventh Circuit opinion is a good read because it discusses various kinds of technological porn like remote wiping and using the phone to remotely turn on one's webcam at home.)

In any event, you are confusing the facts you laid out with case law that allows someone in a car to found guilty of constructive possession of controlled substances if they know of the presence of the substances, are able to exercise dominion and control over them, and know of their illicit nature. So it wouldn't even be applicable here.

[kbz1960]

Maybe because the phone is in the adults name and in the adults car. I know someone who arrested for illegal drugs because a passenger had some and stashed them under a seat. When the cop found it he started arresting the driver, when the person who owned them spoke up and said it was his the cop said in his car therefore in his possession.

[kbz1960]

BTW the only thing needed to pull you over is suspicion. That could be anything.

[amazinglygraceless]

BTW the only thing needed to pull you over is suspicion. That could be anything.

I am admittedly not an Attorney but if I am not mistaken the standard is
"Reasonable Suspicion"." That rises above the level of "just anything"

[kbz1960]

I am admittedly not an Attorney but if I am not mistaken the standard is
"Reasonable Suspicion"." That rises above the level of "just anything"

And what is reasonable? You look funny? I thought I saw you?

[amazinglygraceless]

If the police stopped you for a traffic violation and had an idea you were TXTting, and therefore not paying attention, they could search the phone's TXTs to see if you were TXTting at the time of the violation.

The whole situation can be avoided if they can't access your phone. That is an excellent reason to have a phone the phone image reading devices can't access.

If this information is really required by law enforcement and they can't get it from
the device itself, they can easily get it from the carrier.

[JasW]

Maybe because the phone is in the adults name and in the adults car. I know someone who arrested for illegal drugs because a passenger had some and stashed them under a seat. When the cop found it he started arresting the driver, when the person who owned them spoke up and said it was his the cop said in his car therefore in his possession.

BTW the only thing needed to pull you over is suspicion. That could be anything.

The police need probable cause, if that's what you mean by "suspicion." And mere proximity to drugs -- simply being a passenger in the same car -- is not enough for someone to be found guilty of possession. The prosecution has to be able to prove the three elements I set out above, knowledge of the presence of drugs in the car, knowledge of their illegality, and -- most critically -- the ability to exercise "dominion and control" over the drugs. So a driver could be found guilty because he or she exercises control over the car.

Even if the adult in the car were the driver, the cellphone in the teen's pocket is another thing altogether. Cops aren't going to (and can't) go looking through the entire cellphone for sexting pics. The prosecution would still have to prove the adult knew there were pictures of child porn in the car, knew the pictures were illegal, and exercised dominion and control over the pictures. The knowledge element is unlikely -- "Hey, Dad, look at this picture of my johnson I sent to Mary Lou!" -- and the control element is questionable unless the prosecution could prove the adult had access to the phone (presumably with the porn on it).

[hootyhoo]

The way that I understand it, the cops use cellebrite to use your phone's emid to ping the cellphone tower to see if you were texting or making a phone call while you were driving. That's all. It was explained in another thread here, and I've done extensive searches on the internet for information as to what cops are looking for if they ask for your phone, and from what I can gather, whether your phone is locked or encrypted does not matter as they only ping the tower to see if you were texting. They are not looking at your pictures.

[Tre Lawrence]

So, if one wants to dabble in illicit imagery and driving practices, the platform of choice is almost clear.

[kbz1960]

So, if one wants to dabble in illicit imagery and driving practices, the platform of choice is almost clear.

LOL. I think some people have never come across the cops like the ones around here. Do you really think all cops are as pure as driven snow and would never do anything to entrap someone. That's all I'll say.

[Tre Lawrence]

LOL. I think some people have never come across the cops like the ones around here. Do you really think all cops are as pure as driven snow and would never do anything to entrap someone. That's all I'll say.

All I'll say is that if one is doing stuff that goes against local laws, having a Blackberry really won't save him/her.

If someone can show me a case of law enforcement illegally procuring data from a law-abiding citizen's phone, I am all ears.

My point is that advertising BBs as the "official device for teen sexting privacy" is a flawed premise.

[kbz1960]

All I'll say is that if one is doing stuff that goes against local laws, having a Blackberry really won't save him/her.

If someone can show me a case of law enforcement illegally procuring data from a law-abiding citizen's phone, I am all ears.

My point is that advertising BBs as the "official device for teen sexting privacy" is a flawed premise.

Agreed. My bad for thinking beyond what the OP said.

[pcguy514]

Are any of these delusional people talking about probable cause from any racial minority. What is that luxury you speak of?

[Roo Zilla]

...Really wants me to insist everyone in the car have a locked BlackBerry.

Go ahead tell me a politically ambitious prosecutor would not bring such a case. Tell me you have nothing to hide on your iPhone or Android so it doesn't matter if the cops take an image of it. Privacy, everyone's privacy, matters to all of us.

This whole scenario is absurd. It's predicating the benefit of a Blackberry because you can lock it? Hate to break it to you, but iPhones and Androids are also lockable.

[Laura Knotek]

The cell phone imaging equipment the police have can grab the image of iPhone and Android even if they are locked. That is not true with BlackBerry. A locked BlackBerry is almost impossible to image or access.

The point is, you could be the victim of a prosecution even if you are totally innocent simply because someone near you has a phone with weak security. If you think the US Constitution will protect you, I'm afraid you are living in an America that no longer exists. Yes, maybe the Supreme Court of the US will overturn your conviction about 10 years after you are convicted. In the meantime you are bankrupt and your life is ruined. Go on with your insecure phones. You have nothing to worry about.

While there have been many reports in the media of teens being arrested and prosecuted for this behavior there have not been reports of parents incurring punishment.

Can parents be prosecuted for sexting by their teens?

[hootyhoo]

The cell phone imaging equipment the police have can grab the image of iPhone and Android even if they are locked. That is not true with BlackBerry. A locked BlackBerry is almost impossible to image or access.

The point is, you could be the victim of a prosecution even if you are totally innocent simply because someone near you has a phone with weak security. If you think the US Constitution will protect you, I'm afraid you are living in an America that no longer exists. Yes, maybe the Supreme Court of the US will overturn your conviction about 10 years after you are convicted. In the meantime you are bankrupt and your life is ruined. Go on with your insecure phones. You have nothing to worry about.

This has been discussed before. With a properly encrypted and locked phone (androids and iPhones can be encrypted too), a very difficult process involving highly trained and skilled forensic investigators is required to break into an encrypted phone.

You can find more details here:
http://copgeek018.wordpress.com/

A cop pulling you over for a traffic stop is mostly interested in whether or not you were texting while driving, and regardless of the phone you have (including BBs) they can use a cellebrite to ping the tower.

Edit:
Crud. They've added a password requirement to access the information in my link. I'll try to find a new one.

[amazinglygraceless]

The cell phone imaging equipment the police have can grab the image of iPhone and Android even if they are locked. That is not true with BlackBerry. A locked BlackBerry is almost impossible to image or access.

The point is, you could be the victim of a prosecution even if you are totally innocent simply because someone near you has a phone with weak security. If you think the US Constitution will protect you, I'm afraid you are living in an America that no longer exists. Yes, maybe the Supreme Court of the US will overturn your conviction about 10 years after you are convicted. In the meantime you are bankrupt and your life is ruined. Go on with your insecure phones. You have nothing to worry about.

The quote below and the entirety of Post #3 should have ended this already.

The police need probable cause, if that's what you mean by "suspicion." And mere proximity to drugs -- simply being a passenger in the same car -- is not enough for someone to be found guilty of possession. The prosecution has to be able to prove the three elements I set out above, knowledge of the presence of drugs in the car, knowledge of their illegality, and -- most critically -- the ability to exercise "dominion and control" over the drugs. So a driver could be found guilty because he or she exercises control over the car.

Even if the adult in the car were the driver, the cellphone in the teen's pocket is another thing altogether. Cops aren't going to (and can't) go looking through the entire cellphone for sexting pics. The prosecution would still have to prove the adult knew there were pictures of child porn in the car, knew the pictures were illegal, and exercised dominion and control over the pictures. The knowledge element is unlikely -- "Hey, Dad, look at this picture of my johnson I sent to Mary Lou!" -- and the control element is questionable unless the prosecution could prove the adult had access to the phone (presumably with the porn on it).

[Tre Lawrence]

BlackBerry: the only device that protects your constitutional freedoms (until LE subpoenas your carrier records).

[Roo Zilla]

The cell phone imaging equipment the police have can grab the image of iPhone and Android even if they are locked.

I have never heard of this type of equipment, let alone LE having it as standard issue in patrol cars. How does it even work?

Are you sure you're not making this up? If anyone else has heard of such equipment, I would like to hear about it. Some links to where such equipment might be obtained would also be appreciated.

[jwn66]

While the cop has a phone back in his car, just grab the playbook, tether, sign into BBprotect and put message on screen after locking "problem occifer?" and then go wipe device, lulz

[hootyhoo]

I have never heard of this type of equipment, let alone LE having it as standard issue in patrol cars. How does it even work?

Are you sure you're not making this up? If anyone else has heard of such equipment, I would like to hear about it. Some links to where such equipment might be obtained would also be appreciated.

Cellebrite - Mobile Forensics

Cellebrite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Roo Zilla]

Cellebrite - Mobile Forensics

Cellebrite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I heard about this thing, but the OP makes it sound like it's some kind of scanner that every cop carries around and waves it over your phone and can see whatever's on your phone, unless it's a Blackberry. Like if one passenger has an iPhone and another has a Blackberry, the cop can use his scanner to see what's on the iPhone, but he can't see what's on the Blackberry. And why only images? Why not other things like texts and phone records? He makes it sound like a very specific device.

The Cellebrite tool is for data extraction, basically, a memory extractor. For the cops to use this method, they would have to have physical access to your phone, which in most cases, would require at the bare minimum probably cause that a crime was committed with your phone.

And AFAIK, the Cellebrite can also extract data from Blackberries, and just about anything else since it's basically a memory extractor.

[hornlovah]

...And AFAIK, the Cellebrite can also extract data from Blackberries, and just about anything else since it's basically a memory extractor.

Once again, here's the capabilities of mobile forensics tools at present: If ANY device is unlocked, expect full retrieval of all the data on the phone, including any deleted data that has not been overwritten. Investigators would have to root a locked iPhone 4S and crack the passcode before obtaining much useful data from the phone itself. It takes about 20 minutes to brute force a 4 digit pin on an iPhone 4S, but cracking a complex password is slow and painful. You cannot perform an offline password attack against an iPhone 4S, and attacks are limited to just a few 'guesses' per second.

A good forensic tool will bypass the passcode and extract all user data from most popular Android devices. The newer portable Cellebrite UFED units now bypass the passcode on 59 different Android phones.

No tool or software will bypass the password on a locked BlackBerry, and researchers have still not figured out a way to attack its passcode. Skilled investigators can obtain a raw memory dump with specialized equipment however, so encrypt your data if you wish it to remain confidential.