Man arrested for allegedly wiping his Google Pixel before a CBP search \ stacker news ~Politics_And

pull down to refresh

Man arrested for allegedly wiping his Google Pixel before a CBP search www.techspot.com/news/110560-man-arrested-allegedly-wiping-google-pixel-before-cbp.html

910 sats \ 23 comments \ @Scoresby 12 Dec Politics_And_Law

A man has been charged with destruction of evidence after allegedly erasing the contents of his phone before a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent could search it. It's unclear why CBP wanted to search Atlanta-based activist Samuel Tunick's Google Pixel.

Tunick was arrested earlier this month during a traffic stop in Atlanta. According to a statement issued by his supporters, the musician was asked to step out of the car to observe an issue with the tail light. He was handcuffed by the officer and surrounded by the FBI and DHS.

According to the indictment, the phone was supposed to be searched by a supervisory officer from a CBP Tactical Terrorism Response Team.

Feels like there is more to this story. But, I don't doubt that they will come after you like this.

Many Americans assume that if they wipe a phone or lock it with strong encryption, they're simply exercising their privacy rights. But the moment an electronic device becomes the target of a lawful federal search or seizure, erasing it can itself constitute a crime – even if agents haven't yet obtained physical possession of it.

view all related items

100 sats \ 5 replies \ @OT 12 Dec

How did he manage to wipe it in a sting like that?

121 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 12 Dec

Make the duress pin 0000

100 sats \ 3 replies \ @OT 12 Dec

Or have a pin that bricks the device. That way it would be the agent that wipes it.

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 12 Dec

Yeah that's what - at least on Graphene - the duress pin does. 0000 or 1234 are great duress pins.

Best way is to travel without your phone. If you have to take it with you, shut it down during all transit. If you need a device, burner.

200 sats \ 1 reply \ @OT 12 Dec

Good to know! I remember them talking about it a while back. Didn't know it went live.

250 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 12 Dec

Been live since mid last year: https://grapheneos.org/releases#2024053100

102 sats \ 2 replies \ @itsrealfake 12 Dec

just some links I found trying to figure out what sort of shit this dude is up to that gets him in the crosshairs of CBP.

https://atlpresscollective.com/2025/12/05/samuel-tunick-atlanta-activist-arrest/

https://fireantmovement.org

I'm curious about Cop City, and it gives me similar vibes to the pipeline protests... specifically, the demographic of folks who make it their mission to do something about it.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby OP 12 Dec

Gotta love it when cops have nothing better to do than go after people who think they are spending too much on training facilities.

102 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 12 Dec

Yea... I guess 85 acres seems like a lot if it's mowing down a forest that you love to party in or something ... and militarizing the police is a real thing. but the police are also facing a militarized youth movement.

Competing interests will compete. Let's strive for alternative strategies, fam

144 sats \ 2 replies \ @itsrealfake 12 Dec

this is not what I would have imagined the founders intended

63 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby OP 12 Dec

Borders apparently allow the government to do anything they want. You have your rights as long as you don't cross, erm...don't go near, uh...stay at least 50 miles away...uh 100 miles... from any entry point (well, actually it seems like border patrol can also do whatever they want anywhere in the country...)

123 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 12 Dec

Yeah, some of us may know about the 80 100 mile zone

But I mentioned it to a friend of mine who used to work @ TSA. He informed me that zone counts "international" airports as nodes on that zone... so, anything within 100 miles of such an airport is (apparently) fair game for our men in brown.

102 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 12 Dec

Wonder if this is part of a US discussion (like the one in France) aimed at getting in front of GrapheneOS

https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/man-charged-for-wiping-phone-before-cbp-could-search-it/33657

102 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 12 Dec

Feels like there is more to this story. But, I don't doubt that they will come after you like this.

100%

And in many places it would be worse. Wiping the phone won't save you. Might save others or things on the phone from being exposed but the act of wiping or even having something like GrapheneOS installed will be used against you if the thugs want to use it.

Even with those considerations I still use it. I think many privacy hobbiest haven't thought this far ahead. IMO use a long passcode and shutdown your phone. This requires the code to decrypt the device and should give you protection and looks less suspicious to a judge.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 12 Dec

I should add that wiping the phone is a good idea among worse ones in some situations. If you are gonna put people in danger and are willing to face the consequences. But, it's not magic.

154 sats \ 0 replies \ @Aeneas 12 Dec

Well you know what they say: a prosecutor can charge a man with anything at all, even tying his shoes wrong. Wake me up when he's actually doing time for this obviously Constitutionally protected activity.

(No really, wake me up; I'm not confident the Constitution will protect him)

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @xz 12 Dec

Could it not be argued that from the perspective of the laws of physics, when you rearrange the sequence of zeros and ones, you are not destroying anything at all?

42 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 12 Dec

if you burn a paper, you're just rearranging molecules

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 12 Dec

Good point. I was just thinking of these terms 'destructive' and 'non-destructive' formatting.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @OriginalSize 12 Dec

What made this a lawful search?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @openyoureyes 12 Dec

The well known tail light stop search. Only for keeping us all safe. And terrorism, so you loose all rights and nothing what they do is unlawful.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Sandman 12 Dec

That doesn't make any sense, individuals have every right to their privacy.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 12 Dec

I don't know a single jurisdiction where you have a right to privacy from the officer.