Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime The Courts Cellphones Encryption Government Privacy Security United States

Feds Crack Trump Protesters' Phones To Charge Them With Felony Rioting (thedailybeast.com) 465

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Beast: Officials seized Trump protesters' cell phones, cracked their passwords, and are now attempting to use the contents to convict them of conspiracy to riot at the presidential inauguration. Prosecutors have indicted over 200 people on felony riot charges for protests in Washington, D.C. on January 20 that broke windows and damaged vehicles. Some defendants face up to 75 years in prison, despite little evidence against them. But a new court filing reveals that investigators have been able to crack into at least eight defendants' locked cell phones. Now prosecutors want to use the internet history, communications, and pictures they extracted from the phones as evidence against the defendants in court. [A] July 21 court document shows that investigators were successful in opening the locked phones. The July 21 filing moved to enter evidence from eight seized phones, six of which were "encrypted" and two of which were not encrypted. A Department of Justice representative confirmed that "encrypted" meant additional privacy settings beyond a lock screen. For the six encrypted phones, investigators were able to compile "a short data report which identifies the phone number associated with the cell phone and limited other information about the phone itself," the filing says. But investigators appear to have bypassed the lock on the two remaining phones to access the entirety of their contents.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Feds Crack Trump Protesters' Phones To Charge Them With Felony Rioting

Comments Filter:
  • Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:13PM (#54887639)

    "Prosecutors have indicted over 200 people on felony riot charges for protests in Washington, D.C. on January 20 that broke windows and damaged vehicles."

    "protests ... that broke windows and damaged vehicles."

    So... a riot. Not a protest, a riot.

    • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:17PM (#54887675)

      Maybe they were protesting against windows.

    • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

      by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:01PM (#54887937) Homepage Journal

      So... a riot. Not a protest, a riot.

      Some people being assholes doesn't make the rest rioters.
      Depriving a single peaceful protester of his constitutional right to peacefully assemble and protest is a worse crime than someone else breaking a window.

      Or do you mean to say that all 200 broke windows and damaged vehicles?

      • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

        by msauve ( 701917 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:12PM (#54887995)
        Protip: If you find yourself in a rioting mob, leave.
        • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

          by guises ( 2423402 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @10:58PM (#54888465)
          What if you find yourself in a protest, with a few people misbehaving? Then what do you do?

          This isn't a rhetorical question, every large protest is this way. People are protesting, after all, because they're angry about something, and with any large group of people there are going to be some with anger issues. Saying, "Just leave." isn't any different from saying, "Just give up. Abandon whatever cause has brought you out here today, protests are an unacceptable form of political expression."

          Allow me to anticipate your response: "So, what, you're saying that rioting mobs are just misunderstood people who have gotten a little overly passionate? So all of that is just A-okay?" No, of course I'm not saying that. What I'm really saying is that rioting is unacceptable behavior whether everyone is doing it or only a few people are doing it, but that when you're prosecuting people it's necessary (it should be necessary) to establish guilt on an individual basis and not merely claim that a person was part of a mob and therefore guilty.
          • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Wrath0fb0b ( 302444 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @11:48PM (#54888629)

            Actually, the smart and well organized protest groups have their own security and will warn violent people to behave and, if they cannot be persuaded, forcibly eject them from the group. There are a huge number of benefits:

            (1) By nipping violence early, the (literal) 'mob mentality' doesn't get a chance to catalyze
            (2) By doing it it from within the protesting group itself, there is less reactionary violence against police intervention
            (3) It demonstrates to those watching that the protesters are serious about non-violence and not tacitly condoning vandalism
            (4) It demonstrates to the police that they can keep a safe distance and focus on separating protesters/counter-protesters
            (5) It discourages opportunists that will join any protest as a cover for their pre-existing desire to smash shit (whether for political or just anger issues)
            (6) It encourages people that might not feel safe or welcome in a violent protest to join in. A lot of people won't go out in the streets if people are smashing windows or if they fear being tear gassed by overreacting cops

            So yeah, I don't advocate giving up and prosecuting everyone. Or shutting down the right to protest. But I also don't advocate allowing a very small percentage of the protesters to steal the spotlight and tar the entire thing as violent. Those folks ruin your public image, they ruin your relationship with the city, the police and the mainstream members of the group and they have no right to do so.

            • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Boronx ( 228853 ) <evonreisNO@SPAMmohr-engineering.com> on Thursday July 27, 2017 @12:29AM (#54888745) Homepage Journal

              There are also smart people trying to infiltrate those groups so that they can commit violence in the groups' names and thereby discredit them.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              Actually, the smart and well organized protest groups have their own security and will warn violent people to behave and, if they cannot be persuaded, forcibly eject them from the group. There are a huge number of benefits:

              (1) By nipping violence early, the (literal) 'mob mentality' doesn't get a chance to catalyze (2) By doing it it from within the protesting group itself, there is less reactionary violence against police intervention (3) It demonstrates to those watching that the protesters are serious about non-violence and not tacitly condoning vandalism (4) It demonstrates to the police that they can keep a safe distance and focus on separating protesters/counter-protesters (5) It discourages opportunists that will join any protest as a cover for their pre-existing desire to smash shit (whether for political or just anger issues) (6) It encourages people that might not feel safe or welcome in a violent protest to join in. A lot of people won't go out in the streets if people are smashing windows or if they fear being tear gassed by overreacting cops

              So yeah, I don't advocate giving up and prosecuting everyone. Or shutting down the right to protest. But I also don't advocate allowing a very small percentage of the protesters to steal the spotlight and tar the entire thing as violent. Those folks ruin your public image, they ruin your relationship with the city, the police and the mainstream members of the group and they have no right to do so.

              I guess the anti-Trump protests are neither smart nor well run because all I hear about, even from networks with an obvious agenda like CNN, are antifa causing mayhem.

              • I guess the anti-Trump protests are neither smart nor well run because all I hear about, even from networks with an obvious agenda like CNN, are antifa causing mayhem.

                Correct.

              • Re:Not a protest (Score:4, Insightful)

                by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo&world3,net> on Thursday July 27, 2017 @06:33AM (#54889791) Homepage Journal

                I guess the anti-Trump protests are neither smart nor well run because all I hear about, even from networks with an obvious agenda like CNN, are antifa causing mayhem.

                Because peaceful protests are uninteresting and not newsworthy in their eyes. Crime gets much better ratings.

              • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

                by Jason Levine ( 196982 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @09:32AM (#54890497) Homepage

                I've been in two anti-Trump protests. Both were large (several thousand people) and both were peaceful. They didn't include acts of violence at all. Both were part of a series of national protests, most of which were peaceful as well. The news showed a couple clips of the protests and that was it. Had there been violence, though, the news coverage of it would have stretched for days. "A bunch of people peacefully protest" isn't very newsworthy. "A group of people rioted" is newsworthy. You could have a thousand anti-Trump protests run peacefully, but the one that has a small group of people rioting will get the news coverage - and thus will paint many people's views of the whole anti-Trump movement as a bunch of violent rioters.

          • If by misbehavior you are talking about something criminal, your safest bet is to arrest, detain and turn over to the police.

          • Re:Not a protest (Score:5, Insightful)

            by SEE ( 7681 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @04:27AM (#54889457) Homepage

            Ah, yes, who can forget about how all those angry Tea Party protesters, which of course included people with anger issues, resulting in all sorts of rioting.

            Oh, wait. Apparently it's actually possible to have protests that don't descend into riots. It's not natural or inevitable, it's just an effect of whether the "protesters" are decent people or scum.

            If rioting breaks out at a protest, it's because the "protestors" are choosing to aid and abet violence. There are no innocents at a riot, just co-conspirators. Lock up all the scum.

          • If you are angry while you are protesting you are doing it wrong. If you are protesting to change people's mind, the first rule is to leave your anger at home. Your dedication to your cause is not going to spread to others if you express anger. Those that are as angry as you are already on your side. You need to persuade and to get publicity that ultimately leads to people hearing your message.

            Anger in others is difficult to identify with if you aren't already negatively predisposed to the object of the

        • by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @04:05AM (#54889381) Homepage Journal

          you can't leave after the riot police comes.

          and if the protest was organized, then you will be apparently prosecuted for tens of years in prison.

          basically, feds could get a few stools in there to riot and throw the lot of them in prison for decades? even if there was no bodily harm or whatever even done by any of them except the stools.

          your prison sentences in usa are stupid. 20 year old woman meets a 14 year old "boy" in a bar of all places, potentially 50 years.

          stand near a protest: decades potentially.

          shoot the woman who called 9/11: nothing.

          vehicular manslaughter while drunk: basically nothing.

          and we all know nobody of them is going to do 75 years, its just the usual tactic to get them to confess so evidence isn't needed.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Evil Kerek ( 1196573 )

        Yeah, cause the police instantly started arresting people.

        The people that got swept up had been there for a good while AFTER the rioting started. I'm really sick of the 'it was peaceful except for these 3 people.'. That's horse shit and you know it. That was a full on riot with a ton of people involved. Here's a suggestion: When the rioting starts, you need to leave. If you stick around with the crowds that are running around after being ordered to disperse...guess what? You're a rioter.

    • The question is who were the rioters among the protesters.
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:15PM (#54887661)

    Worked for this guy [wikipedia.org].

    • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:29PM (#54887741)

      No, it didn't.. What got the Man's attention is when he got folks to boycott the buses. He hit them in the pocket book.

      Protests - marching in the street do nothing. When King protested, the authorities gave him the permits, let him protest, and the protestors cleared out and life went on - unchanged.

      And as far as the Trump protestors are concerned, just what did they think they'd accomplish? Really, what?

      The folks who voted for him dug their heels in - and many still have no doubts.

      The folks who hate him felt good seeing the protests or participated in them.

      The folks who became violent were jerks and hurt their cause. The black hoody folks who smashed shit are just assholes and deserve to have their faces bashed in by the cops.

      And sorry, Trump won according to our laws. Like it or not, he did. We are country of the rule of law and if we start applying them to what is popular only, we will be headed for some serious upheaval and unrest.

      Don't like the situation? Well, voter turnout is still only a fraction of the eligible voters. And if those folks spent the time voting and doing the leg work that the Tea Party Republicans are so good at, maybe they too can make changes.

      But it will be slow and tedious.

      See, those protestor people want a revolution - they want their way to happen overnight. But if they grew up and took their lesson from the Tea Party, they'd see how to do it.

      And now, the Fourth Amendment is yet being shredded even more. All thanks to assholes who don't know how our system works and refuse to work in it.

      • the mega-donors who created and fund the movement are. Also, they didn't have the Republican lead Congress attacking [google.com] their main voter turnout organization.

        What's that old Gore Vidal quote? "I'm not a conspiracy theorist - I'm a conspiracy analyst.".
      • And sorry, Trump won according to our laws. Like it or not, he did. We are country of the rule of law and if we start applying them to what is popular only, we will be headed for some serious upheaval and unrest.

        A) laws are often unjust in some way, and some notable ones in your country are unjust in some deliberate, blatant and discriminatory ways. B) in many cases where the laws are fairly just, they're selectively applied based on among other things how much fame, political power or especially money one has. And you must not be paying much attention, but you're headed for some serious upheaval and unrest as it is. Applying some laws based on what is popular would actually make that less likely to boil over, the

    • You know he dies at the end, right? Oh, and while we're linking Wikipedia articles how about this [wikipedia.org] one? Only problem is the use of 'was' in the opening line...
    • Worked for this guy [wikipedia.org].

      You do know he got assassinated, right?

    • by Kargan ( 250092 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:47PM (#54887845) Homepage

      Yes, peaceful protesting worked so well for Dr. King. How did that turn out again?

      Oh, that's right. The whole "got murdered in broad daylight" thing.

      But, less sarcastically, what I find to be so noble and admirable about his tactics is that he knew that would happen and incorporated it into his philosophy.

      After the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963, King told his wife Coretta, "This is what is going to happen to me also. I keep telling you, this is a sick society."

      • by Chris Katko ( 2923353 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @12:54AM (#54888835)

        Holy shit you guys have tunnel vision.

        How'd it work out for him? I don't know, why don't you ask your black coworkers that wouldn't be there if not for his protests embodying the civil rights movement?

        Yeah, he got assassinated. All victories are meaningless unless you personally get to gain from them! If only we could go back in time and tell him how "enlightened" you are, and how stupid he was.

    • It really didn't work for that guy, he was murdered by someone.
      • It really didn't work for that guy, he was murdered by someone.

        No, it did work, mostly... he just didn't live to see the victory.

    • by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @10:57PM (#54888457) Homepage

      It's worth noting that Dr. King wasn't really after "peaceful protests". To think he was looking for everything to be peaceful diminishes both how smart and tough the civil rights protesters were.

      The story you were probably told was that MLK and other protesters just wanted to have a nice, peaceful sit-in, and then the police came in and ruined it by getting violent. That's not quite right. It's sort of true, but not quite. They went looking for venues of protest where they'd elicit a violent reaction. Having things turn violent was kind of the point. They wanted the public to see white supremacists beating up innocent black people. They were relying on the idea that there were a large number of Americans who would tolerate smaller injustices against black people (e.g. not being allowed to use a specific water fountain), but who would not tolerate larger injustices (e.g. being viciously beaten by police without any defensible reason).

      So to achieve that goal, it was incredibly important that the protesters weren't violent. Any violence on their part would allow people to excuse the violence against them. If people see the police beating up or even killing violent rioters, most won't be too upset with the police, or feel too much sympathy for the rioters. However, if people see police beating up a nice, respectful, non-violent protester who doesn't even defend himself, then many of them will be upset with the police and sympathetic to the protester. The latter was the scenario that the protesters were trying to create.

      So MLK demanded that his protesters be completely non-violent, but that's not the same as saying he wanted a non-violent protest. If he hadn't wanted violence, he could have had protests in safer ways and in safer areas. He could have protested among people who already agreed with his cause. instead, he protested among the KKK.

  • upon which one cannot rely
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ScentCone ( 795499 )

      consumer-grade encryption is that upon which one cannot rely

      No, it's having violent tantrums as lefty social currency and expecting that since it's put up with in places like Berkeley that it'll all be just fine, since one got that rockin' balaclava shipped Prime from Amazon ... upon which one cannot rely.

      • consumer-grade encryption is that upon which one cannot rely

        No, it's having violent tantrums as lefty social currency and expecting that since it's put up with in places like Berkeley that it'll all be just fine, since one got that rockin' balaclava shipped Prime from Amazon ... upon which one cannot rely.

        I was with you right up until the Prime Baclava; and though she pales in comparison to the Rib of the same forename, i (just a little i) have been astonished by the reliability of the Bezos iteration of Sears & Roebuck.

    • upon which one cannot rely

      Really? It says they weren't able to get into the encrypted phones. Only the unencrypted ones with a simple lock screen.

  • by rahvin112 ( 446269 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:39PM (#54887793)

    When the violence took place (those involved in the violence should be caught and prosecuted) the FBI closed of an entire city block without warning and arrested EVERYONE within the block (this included people going to work, journalists covering the protest, people legitimately protesting and others but not rioting) and charged every single person with rioting whether or not they have any evidence of rioting. They are trying to charge them all as a group and use the evidence against the handful they have evidence of to convict the rest. This is a massive violation of rights.

    I pray to god a Judge throws this whole case out and lets the guilty get away with it because of the tactics the FBI and Justice are using to convict innocent people of felonies they did not commit by being on a street when a riot they weren't involved with took place. Make no mistake if Justice is allowed to do this, the next time there is something they can call a riot they will be out there arresting every single person again and YOU might be the one caught up in it by being on a block where something happened.

  • They crossed the line when they decided to riot.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ScentCone ( 795499 )

      They crossed the line when they decided to riot.

      That almost sounds like something that a protest turned into. No. These clowns planned violence for months - it was their purpose in gathering together. It's a shame that some of their idiotic fellow protesters either were or pretended to be so dumb that they were standing around in the middle of a bunch of them and got caught up. But since the rioters were broadcasting their intentions well in advance, and were dancing around with black masks on smashing stuff ... well, too bad if you hang out with those

      • we call them soccer hooligans. Every time there's a big event they come out. When my local college sports team won a playoff the same damn thing happened. The difference is nobody threatened them with 20 years in jail because it was pretty damn obvious they were hooligans. Here it's still just as obvious they're hooligans the difference is they were protesting a sitting President who doesn't think once about abusing power.
        • If you plan ahead to do violence and then show up and do violence, we don't put up with that shit in the USA. Obama did for 8 years, but that ship has sailed. The best way to deal with rioters and looters is the national guard with live ammunition. Hooligan is just another name for thug.

    • There's plenty of evidence [google.com] that non-violent protestors are being prosecuted.
    • You're saying it like it was a decision that was made. The last New Years celebration I was at. Someone got stabbed and a couple of cars got overturned one or two blocks away from where I was at. Does that mean I should be arrested for what those rioters did?

      Hopefully, they can find videos on those phones, or maybe incriminating texting/chat evidence like "Hey, the guitar shop has just been breached. Go to the guitar shop and grab a free guitar before all the guitars are taken." or "Hey, let's go to Starbuc

  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:47PM (#54887841)
    >> Officials seized (rioters) cell phones, cracked their passwords, and are now attempting to use the contents to convict them

    If you're dumb enough to wear your tracking device to the scene of the crime, then what do you really expect? Cops have been using location, texts and social media posts to pin perps for at least a decade now.
    • If you're dumb enough to wear your tracking device to the scene of the crime, then what do you really expect?

      And if you are actually innocent? There appears to be evidence that innocent people were caught up in the dragnet arrests.

      Stop assuming that everyone who is arrested is guilty.

  • Instead of just charging them with what they did, extraordinary measures are being taken to punish these people. The question is, do you honestly think this will make them more or less likely to become politically radicalized? If history has taught us anything then it's that when you up the ante, opponents will respond in kind.

    • A trip to rape camp will take the wind out of your sails.

    • What exactly would consist as upping the ante?
      They are already trying to murder people for voting for the wrong guy. There is a professor that has been caught on video using a very heavy bike lock to crack skulls.
      What would be "more radicalized" than yelling "kill all whites", "Die cis scum" and many other nasty slogans? Because this is whats happening right now. Backed and emboldened by the mainstream media those domestic terrorists have lost all restraint. Just look up "Berkeley riots" on google (and mayb

      • They are already trying to murder people for voting for the wrong guy. There is a professor that has been caught on video using a very heavy bike lock to crack skulls.
        What would be "more radicalized" than yelling "kill all whites", "Die cis scum" and many other nasty slogans? Because this is whats happening right now. Backed and emboldened by the mainstream media those domestic terrorists have lost all restraint. Just look up "Berkeley riots" on google (and maybe try to avoid media that are proud of being to the left of Karl Marx).

        I'm talking about with these individuals in particular, dummy.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:05PM (#54887961)

    This mess has nothing to do with Trump.

    The law is the law, and you don't get an exemption to break it because you're upset about Trump ( or anything else ).

    If you riot and trash cars and you get caught, you will be punished, AND YOU WILL DESERVE IT.

    The people who are wondering about encryption should know that ANY encryption you can get at your amateur level can be cracked, though parallel construction may be used to avoid revealing that your encryption was broken. Welcome to the adult world. The government has nuclear weapons and you don't. The government can crack your encryption. Don't conspire to do illegal things and you will have no problems.

    Some of you who frequent this website seem to think life is a contest in which you can outwit the people or entities you don't like. I can tell you from 40 years of practicing law that very few people are able to pull this off. A lot of people think they can, and nearly all of them end up in prison or on the run. Life is hard enough without behaving in ways that society doesn't accept. Truly intelligent people realize this early on and they live accordingly. People who learn the hard way have tough and unpleasant lives. Chew on that for a while and decide whether you want a shitty life or a good one.
    And learn to accept that there are things you are utterly powerless to change. This is the case for all of us humans. There will always be something you don't like, and sometimes you won't be able to do anything about it. People who are adults in the truest sense of the word understand this and deal with it.

  • NTR

  • by OYAHHH ( 322809 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:42PM (#54888141) Homepage

    Peaceful protest is one thing, I've done it myself.

    But there was a plot uncovered for an acid attack to occur during the inauguration activities. That is not protest. Certainly not even remotely a peaceful protest planned.

    Since the article is sorely lacking in details as to what is being searched for, they state a "riot", I am sticking with they are looking for the acid attack planners. And that is a worthwhile pursuit.

    If not, guess what, throwing rocks, bottles, and pipes is a worthwhile reason to search a phone. It's no different from searching a home for hidden child pornography, or a knapsack for molotov cocktails or a car for a cache of guns that a suspected criminal might possess.

    If it's felonious behavior, which rioting with acid is, then absolutely search the phones.

  • Warrantless searching of a person's papers is constitutionally protected. Seems like a really easy way for the charges to be dropped.

    "If investigators were able to crack the phonesâ(TM) passwords within their department or through a contract, they would not necessarily have to file any additional court documents, Jennings said.
    Police appear to have begun searching at least one phone within a day of its seizure, CityLab reported in January."

    "no additional court documents" my eye. Also, a warrant has to

  • 75 Years? Really? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Arzaboa ( 2804779 ) on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @10:11PM (#54888249)
    I get it that most folks don't appreciate the rioting. I certainly don't approve by any stretch of the imagination.

    75 years is insane for this. They broke some windows. If the internet wasn't around, they would have used a phone. Conspiracy for some windows breakers? That's ridiculous. Make them fix a few windows and pay a fine. Keep their phones.
  • by LostMyBeaver ( 1226054 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @12:34AM (#54888763)
    Look up U.S. statistics on prisons.

    Now, be warned... Googling this topic puts out more fantastic and exaggerated headlines than searching for Trump on the NY Times. Well in both cases, let's be honest, headlines in general are generally the best way to misinform a population who don't read the articles with part-truths. Trump hasn't figured out that it isn't fake news that's a problem for him, the problem is, he refuses to read anything longer than a Tweet so he stops after the headline and name of the author. Watching Trump and the New York Times fight is like watching two knuckle-draggers in a boxing ring.

    So... here's the way we make America great again... it's easy.

    1) Decrease unemployment... wait.. why am I numbering... it's the only point I have.

    How do you decrease unemployment the fastest?

    - Increase the number of people who can't work.
    - Increase the number of people required to care for them

    So, if you increase the prison population from about 1% to 2% of adult Americans... you can remove at least a few million people from the job market. You can also increase the number of prison jobs by quite a bit. Not only that, but consider all the additional post-prison jobs like folding laundry that can be made.

    Prisons are profitable as all hell to politicians. Keep in mind that American prisons are not correctional facilities. A correctional facility tries to take a person who made a wrong turn (like running over a few lawyers with a bus... this should't actually be illegal) and then help raise them up to be something more after some time. American prisons are penal facilities. They exist to extract revenge.

    America LOVES REVENGE!!!!

    Nothing has ever gained more votes than revenge... especially when you can combine revenge with righteousness. Nothing has ever made Americans more excited than finding retribution by doing at least 10 times more wrong to someone else than has been done to them! Some asshole bombs you, a friend or even talks about bombing you... that's ok... if every single person involved with a bombing you is dead, we'll bomb your entire country or even your entire religion... and we don't even need to know what your religion is... we'll judge by skin color and guess.

    So... we can work towards making America great again through honesty.

    "You have been sentenced to three years in super-max for paying a parking ticket late. We are placing you in prison, not because you should be there. In fact, you shouldn't even be in this court room. But the US has 4-5 times more people passing the bar exams each year than it can employ. Those people (myself included) didn't actually study anything other than law and most of our jobs have been replaced with software already. In fact, we couldn't even work as paralegals.If we weren't representing the people, the plaintiff or the defendant, we'd be out of work and praying for a managerial position at a local McDonald's. So therefore, we need to keep the court full as much as possible and avoid due process wherever possible as to increase double and triple billable hours.

    In addition, we have recently struck agreements (me, the prosecution and .. the defense) with the privately owned prison system to send more prisoners their way. They aren't concerned about the crimes themselves, they will gladly treat everyone as poorly as possible. They agreed to pick up the majority of the cost of upkeep and maintenance of the court house which leaves more money in the budgets for my raises. They cut a deal with the mayor too and I actually get bonuses now when I reach certain quotas for sending people to specific prisons. I've been asked recently to increase female inmate populations. Apparently this is great for the prisons who have to supply "special needs" but awesome for the Las Vegas community afterwards.

    We also got a great deal from a prison telephone company that my buddy down the hall actually sued. They had to pr
  • by acoustix ( 123925 ) on Thursday July 27, 2017 @09:49AM (#54890599)

    How many of these "cracked" phones used fingerprint or facial recognition locks? These authentication types don't need to be cracked. The device owners can be compelled to unlock without cracking the device.

"If that makes any sense to you, you have a big problem." -- C. Durance, Computer Science 234

Working...