- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Man charged for wiping his phone with "duress password" during airport search
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:00 pm to JohnnyKilroy
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:00 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn’t have a problem with the government accessing your phone upon demand
0
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:02 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn’t have a problem with the government accessing your phone upon demand.
Sarcasm?
I fricking hope so
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:03 pm to Epic Cajun
It's an interesting wrinkle and I'd have to read the law. This is also a novel argument.
Don't get your hopes up. With our police state we now have and the erosion of our rights the past 60 years, he's likely going to get convicted.
Don't get your hopes up. With our police state we now have and the erosion of our rights the past 60 years, he's likely going to get convicted.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The reason the rules are different is a bullshite,
Agreed. It seems you are subject to American laws, without also having their protections.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:07 pm to Epic Cajun
quote:
How can they prove intent in this scenario? They are the ones that entered the password right?
There is the correct passcode, which he knew, and the duress password. He intentionally gave CBP the duress password.
I've never once been asked for my phone upon returning to the US, or in any other airport, including TLV. They'd been tracking this dude with CSAM for probably quite a while, it doesn't happen to random citizens. And no, I don't care that we ask for non citizen's X or IG accounts to examine them.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:10 pm to Ingeniero
So they want to charge him under US law for something he did when he was not in the US? I think they can kick rocks for that.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:13 pm to Scruffy
quote:
How is this different than, say, a general search of imports for contraband?
Because they compelled him to divulge a passcode in violation of his 5th amendment rights.
If it was breaking into luggage they could do it.
If the phone was locked with biometrics they could do it.
But the courts have long held that you can’t expect the person to give up information that exists only in your head (I.e. a passcode) to an enforcement agency seeking evidence.
ICE’s case is being based on the 4th Amendment and 5th Amendment just magically not applying.
This post was edited on 7/26/26 at 8:16 pm
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:16 pm to chryso
Where do you have any evidence that it wasn't done in the US? That is nowhere in either article.
quote:
The defendant, Sam Tunick, was stopped for interrogation at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport on 24 January last year, after vacationing in the Dominican Republic. Unbeknown to him, federal authorities had put him on a terrorism watchlist because of his alleged association with the movement against Cop City.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:18 pm to Ingeniero
So there is the 4th Amendment that protects peoples' person, house, papers, etc. There is the 5th Amendment that protects people from being forced to incriminate themselves.
But the US can force a citizen to allow unfettered access to their papers (and potentially incriminate themselves) just because they've traveled internationally?
How does that really square? Do we have civil rights or not? It's a hell of a question that might have wide-ranging implications.
But the US can force a citizen to allow unfettered access to their papers (and potentially incriminate themselves) just because they've traveled internationally?
How does that really square? Do we have civil rights or not? It's a hell of a question that might have wide-ranging implications.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:21 pm to Ingeniero
Someone that has that on their phone has some deep dark shite they are trying to hide.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:23 pm to chryso
quote:
So they want to charge him under US law for something he did when he was not in the US?
There is a federal law for this
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
With our police state we now have and the erosion of our rights the past 60 years, he's likely going to get convicted.
It's also the expansion of federal laws. He did technically/arguably break the law. Is the law constitutional? That's a toss-up.
Remember, it's said that most people break 3 federal laws every day because there are so many laws. It's like how you can be arrested for spitting in public on a Sunday in some cities. There are nonsense laws all over the place.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:24 pm to jnethe1
quote:
Someone that has that on their phone has some deep dark shite they are trying to hide.
This "logic" is how the Police State has been allowed to grow so much
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:25 pm to Ingeniero
Because frickem.
That's why.
That's why.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:34 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
Tunick’s attorneys filed a motion to suppress the evidence, claiming that the detention and the seizure were unlawful. The motion said U.S. border authorities took Tunick into a secondary inspection at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airport as he returned from overseas on January 24, 2025, but that he was repeatedly denied access to an attorney and was not informed of his legal rights.
Im confused. If he had landed at the Atlanta airport, he's inside the US and on US soil. Why aren't BP agents required to have a search warrant to search his phone?
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:37 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
border agents claimed they did not need a warrant to search Tunick’s phone because he had not yet crossed the U.S. border.
If That is the case, how are they able to charge him for a "crime" that he supposedly committed outside of US jurisdiction? So if I am standing in Toronto and a US federal agent asks me a question, can I be charged in the US for lying to him? I figure jurisdiction plays a huge factor in this.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:42 pm to Ingeniero
Seems like it was the agents who destroyed the evidence -- not him.
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:45 pm to Scruffy
quote:Evidence of what?
Well, wouldn’t it be similar to a destruction of evidence charge?
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:48 pm to America250
quote:
Im confused. If he had landed at the Atlanta airport, he's inside the US and on US soil. Why aren't BP agents required to have a search warrant to search his phone?
I think prior to passing through customs is a gray area?
Posted on 7/26/26 at 8:49 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
Tunick has pleaded not guilty.
I hope he wins. Get a warrant.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News