• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    3 days ago

    Details are weird here. The wiping occurred in Jan 2025. I found the indictment which was filed with the court on Nov 13th 2025 linked here

    We have almost no details of what happened in Jan 2025 except “Customs and Border Patrol Tactical Terrorism Response Team” was doing something with Tunick in January and Tunick “used a code” to wipe the phone. Then suddenly in November 2025 the US Government filed to have him arrested for that event.

    I’m not a legal scholar, but none of these details or timeline makes sense to me. Anyone else have any clue?

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s not complicated, it’s Border Patrol doing their MAGA duty. The only thing we know about this case is what MAGA tells us, so it’s almost all certainly a lie. Of course the details and timeline don’t make sense, they are probably entirely fabricated.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t disagree, but usually they at least try to present a semi-defensible argument. So far the only thing they elude to is “before or during a time when we were going to perform a search he wiped his own phone”. If its “before” a search then what is even the basis for that being illegal for him to wipe is own property?

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          3 days ago

          I imagine they’re trying to charge him with destruction of evidence. I don’t know how that should go if this were actually a legal proceeding but would certainly hope it would require reasonable suspicion of a specific crime and a search warrant.

            • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yes, if a person in your situation would reasonably believe that it could be used as evidence.

              For example, you murder someone with a knife. A reasonable person in your situation would believe that the knife could be used as evidence. So you could be charged for destruction of evidence if they later discover during the investigation that you destroyed the knife. Even if they don’t have enough to pin you with the murder charge, (for example, maybe you have someone willing to help you get an airtight alibi when the murder occurred), they can still hit you with the destruction of evidence charge if they can prove you destroyed the murder weapon.

              • midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                14
                ·
                2 days ago

                But, in that case there’s a crime, there’s a body. I don’t think there’s any underlying assertion of illegality here. If this becomes standard legal practice, that it’s illegal to destroy data in general, all paper shredders would have to be thrown out.

                • AA5B@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  That’s the catch isn’t it? In a lawful society and under normal due process you’d expect to start with a crime, reasonable suspicion, and a search warrant. Then yes, if it’s reasonable for you to expect that you’ve destroyed evidence, I’d expect you to be so charged.

                  But the entire issue with this immigration crackdown is the assertion that constitutional protections no longer apply, laws no longer apply, due process no longer applies. They have claimed for years the right to search smartphones at a border, without a warrant and we didn’t object. Now they’re extending it beyond their jurisdiction purview to search away from a border, away from their intended task, and still with little to no due process or civil rights. Now they’re trying to extend this suspension of law to a protester whose activity they don’t like. This is where the Gestapo analogy comes from.

                  A bit of speculation here but you can configure your phone to wipe itself automatically for exactly this type of oppression. He could very well have done so. But in what seems similar to me, companies can not destroy evidence by deleting email but they can have a policy to automatically delete it after, say 60 days. It’s automatic, a normal process, so it’s ok. How would a normal process to wipe your phone automatically not be the same?

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah, but those tries are half-hearted, at best. The excuses will start falling by the wayside until the response is: “Mind yer own fucking business, but since you’re so curious, who the fuck are YOU? Get over here!”

          • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            who the fuck are YOU? Get over here!”

            “Well, you certainly won’t find out from my phone, because I’ve just wiped it”