Replies

I’ve been listening to the trial for the truck driver in the crash with all of those motorcycle riders in New Hampshire from three years ago.

I was listening to the part where he is interviewed after the accident. He claimed to not be distracted by his phone, and the police ask if they can have his phone so they can download it.

“So if you just let us do that we can get the phone back to you a lot quicker. Otherwise we have to get a judge and a warrant and that takes a long time. But you said you have nothing to hide, so we can just take it now and get it back to you sooner.”

“That’s fine. So I’ll get my phone back before I leave?”

“Well it won’t be that fast, but it will be a lot quicker this way.”

“Sure - okay. So when do I get my phone back? I need my phone.”

All the guy cared about was getting his phone back. When they read the release form it said something about how any information regarding any crime could be used as evidence gained from the phone. I imagine that a warrant would be limited only to evidence related to the crash.

OTOH, the defense has been using the interview as a plus (so far). “Didn’t the defendant agree to all of your requests? He answered all of your questions? He allowed you to search his possessions? He was not disagreeable? And in the three hours that you spent with him in conversation, driving him to the hospital to get checked out, during the interview, did he appear to be impaired in any way due to alcohol or drugs?”