XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone, comp.mobile.android   
   From: jollyroger@pobox.com   
      
   Savageduck  wrote:   
   > On Jan 4, 2016, PAS wrote   
   > (in article ):   
   >>   
   >> It's not safe to assume that the cops will obey the law.   
   >   
   > Regardless of the integrity of this “cop”, all this new California Law   
   > does ultimately is address admissibility. If the cop/investigator (this also   
   > applies to DA investigators) gains access to the phone with a valid court   
   > order/warrant, any found incriminating data/evidence is then admissible for   
   > prosecution purposes. If the cop/investigator violates the law and accesses   
   > the phone without that Court order/warrant, all data found from the illegal   
   > search is now inadmissible. This can lead to a failed prosecution, and   
   > confirmation there was a dumb cop/investigator on the job.   
      
   And that's a good thing, since their superiors will frown upon their   
   stupidity, which puts pressure on them to avoid stepping on the privacy   
   rights of the citizens they are supposedly sworn to protect and serve. So   
   it's still unclear to me why a citizen would view this law as unfavorable   
   or unwanted, since it dies more to protect them.   
      
   --   
   E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.   
   I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.   
      
   JR   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)