Quote:
Originally Posted by excelblue
No, that guy should have refused to interview the police. "6 4 80" could be anything -- it could just as easily been a password, keycode, or birthday as previously mentioned.
The reason why police interviewed him is because the text message itself wasn't evidence of anything. However, the minute that guy spoke up and admitted to it, that's a verbal confession -- solid evidence. Whether or no the text message was obtained legally, that guy's headed to jail. He just waived his 5th in the worst way possible.
In any case, this ruling still bothers me a lot. I hope it goes to the Supreme Court. Until then, I guess it's time for me to lock my phone.
|
I'm completely Law and Ordering this because the only law I've "studied" is business law, but couldn't his lawyer argue that the illegal search of his phone led to the confession, so it should be thrown out since he would not have incriminated himself otherwise?
Threaded Mode
