1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Woman accused of remotely wiping her iPhone after it was seized as evidence

By midian182 · 24 replies
Nov 13, 2018
Post New Reply
  1. Juelle L. Grant from Schenectady, New York, is accused of being behind the wheel of a vehicle involved in a shooting, in which there were no injuries, on October 23, according to the Daily Gazette.

    “Grant is accused of driving the shooting suspect from the scene shortly after 4:30 p.m. that day and concealing the shooter’s identity,” the report reads. “In driving the suspect from the scene, she also helped remove the gun used in the crime, police allege.”

    Grant’s iPhone X was taken as evidence, but Schenectady police claim she used the remote wipe option in the Find My iPhone tool to erase its contents. The device could have placed her at the scene of the crime, in addition to holding other clues.

    The alleged wiping took place on October 24, a little over 24 hours after the shooting. Grant was arrested on November 2 and charged with two counts of tampering with physical evidence and one count of hindering prosecution. One of the tampering charges, which can result in a 20-year sentence when connected to serious crimes, is related to the phone erasing.

    Grant's attorney, Daniel Smalls, says she wasn’t involved in the shooting and never wiped the phone, adding that his client is “not a computer-savvy person.”

    Seeing as Apple implemented a “mystery fix” in iOS 12 that blocked the GrayKey tool’s password cracking abilities, a remote wipe might not have even been necessary. But maybe the police force should look into buying some Faraday bags.

    Permalink to story.

     
  2. Uncle Al

    Uncle Al TS Evangelist Posts: 4,431   +2,888

    HAHAHAHA ..... if the *****s knew anything about getting cell tower records they could also place her at the scene ..... guess they didn't teach that one at the police academy ......
     
  3. QuantumPhysics

    QuantumPhysics TS Maniac Posts: 261   +174

    I think it's the 5th Amendment that comes into play here.

    The cops do not have the right to search my phone without a warrant.

    But since more and more people have smartphones with face recognition and finger print scanners cops can unlock out devices without a warrant. I do believe some state laws give them the power to use fingerprint scanners - which my XS MAX doesn't have.

    They, however, cannot coerce me to open my phone using the passcode which only I know.

    Remote wiping is a good feature to prevent data theft in the event of lost or stolen iPhones. I'm not mad at all.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2018
  4. Reehahs

    Reehahs TS Guru Posts: 709   +445

    May be she does not want leery people looking at her pictures?
     
  5. gusticles41

    gusticles41 TS Guru Posts: 307   +333

    I place a good chunk of the blame on law enforcement. Faraday bag should be pretty standard in this situation.Or at least pop out the dang sim card.
     
  6. senketsu

    senketsu TS Guru Posts: 821   +553

    The police are sadly behind the 'tech curve', the lawyer's contention that the alleged offender is not computer savvy is BS. How many people do you know that own phones that they operate like experts while knowing nothing about computers? For me, it's everyone I know except for one. Someone could have easily instructed her how to wipe the phone even if she didn't know. The Tampering charge with a possible 20 years, yet she was still willing to do this, all I can say it doesn't make her look innocent.
     
    Clamyboy74 and gusticles41 like this.
  7. Roy Mepham

    Roy Mepham TS Rookie

    That's all well and good, but to tamper with evidence is a bit stupid don't you think?
     
  8. Dosahka

    Dosahka TS Enthusiast Posts: 50   +23

    When she was accused as an accessory to murder they had the right (and the warrant) to confiscate her phone and at some point the police should've taken out the sim (iPhones are not saving the contacts to the sim card since forever) and put a phone to Airplane mode and use a Faraday bag too, but instead they were sloppy.

    Also it is safe to say she is not tech savvy if does not have any tech related degree :D
    It's like me working in IT, and every time ppl asking me about 'how to torrent with VPN' and I'm 99% sure you are gaming because you are in IT I can easily deny both, hence it is not my area of expertise.
    No offence (but you will take it, probably, hope not), but this is so American.
    Go through her browsing history on her laptop/desk computer whatever she has, and they can find if it's true or not.
     
  9. mrjgriffin

    mrjgriffin TS Evangelist Posts: 341   +157

    an accessory to murder?

    "Juelle L. Grant from Schenectady, New York, is accused of being behind the wheel of a vehicle involved in a shooting, in which there were no injuries, on October 23, according to the Daily Gazette."

    I mean unless this article is completely wrong im pretty sure that says nobody was hurt lol. that's the problem with this country these days. heresay. any little ***** or prick can just say something because they don't like u or whatever and then boom the cops are involved or your boss is involved or hr is involved or your mommy is involved. heresay is garbage. also the cops are trying to charge for tampering with evidence (something they cant prove) from a case where they can't even prove she did that either. 2 forms of heresay and accusations without any form of proof. case dismissed. these cops are pretty useless.

    edit: im not reading the main article either just in case people may have been hurt because this posting says nobody was hurt so I shouldn't have to dig any further.

    g-g-g-g-g-goodbye
     
  10. QuantumPhysics

    QuantumPhysics TS Maniac Posts: 261   +174


    The average cop doesn't have the education to understand the new iPhone tech.

    there was a story only a few weeks ago warning cops not to look at the iPhone or else they would trigger the auto-erase since the iOS software would think they were brute-force-attacking it.
     
  11. p51d007

    p51d007 TS Evangelist Posts: 1,705   +988

    IF they had a warrant for the data on the phone, PRIOR to taking it from her, then "technically" I could see a statutory tampering with evidence.
    Now, if they SEIZED the phone, then got a warrant, I'd let her go on the technicality that they "took" her property without a warrant.
    As others have mentioned, not my fault the detectives were behind on the curve of not getting a faraday cage bag, or at least wrapping it in aluminum foil.
    I'm a law and order person (was involved with police for 20 years...911 dispatcher), but, I ALSO believe the laws are there for a reason, and, police must follow them as anyone else does.
     
  12. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 13,929   +3,304

  13. Xclusiveitalian

    Xclusiveitalian TS Evangelist Posts: 758   +132

    Well if you didn't think she was guilty prior to them seizing her phone, she is definitely guilty now.
     
  14. Right side bob

    Right side bob TS Booster Posts: 113   +25

    The reason I like this comment was because it touched on a interesting point. Innocent until proven guilty. Accused of being behind the wheel of a vehicle involved in a shooting, no evidence.

    "Grant’s iPhone X was taken as evidence, but Schenectady police claim she used the remote wipe option in the Find My iPhone tool to erase its contents. "
    The police claim she wiped her phone, claimed. No evidence as before. Both claims seem to be suspicious none the less. I firmly believe in Innocent until proven guilty. I am currently waiting till the motive is clear.
    If there was evidence blame Rob Thubron the writer for not bringing it up.
     
    Theinsanegamer and Reehahs like this.
  15. Reehahs

    Reehahs TS Guru Posts: 709   +445

    Not evidence without warrant since there is an amendment against self-incriminating. Police have yet to prove that she wiped the phone.
     
  16. dms96960

    dms96960 TS Guru Posts: 314   +72

     
  17. Darth Shiv

    Darth Shiv TS Evangelist Posts: 1,914   +540

    Yeah it doesn't add up... why the hell would they need the data off the phone for that?
     
  18. gamerk2

    gamerk2 TS Addict Posts: 156   +101

    Yes they do, or at least that's how the courts have ruled. The gist of it is basically as long as it is on your person at the time of arrest, the cops have the right to go through it. Hence why most court fights are instead focusing on their right to avoid encryption.
     
  19. gamerk2

    gamerk2 TS Addict Posts: 156   +101

    Not in this case, per previous court rulings.

    People need to understand: If your phone is on you at the time of your arrest of the suspicion of a crime, the courts have consistently ruled the 4th and 5th amendments do not apply.
     
    Reehahs likes this.
  20. Cubi Dorf

    Cubi Dorf TS Enthusiast Posts: 85   +32

    I don’t understand amendment number 4, but I learn it is only protect from random search. If police think you did something wrong they can still searching. Is true? I also learn amendments number 4 not taken for essence, but taken very literally. It say house, but car not protected. It say papers, but phone not protected. I feel that stupid, no offense to your country.
     
  21. Right side bob

    Right side bob TS Booster Posts: 113   +25

    Source, I know I can google search fact check but I want to get the correct sources.
     
  22. Joe Blow

    Joe Blow TS Addict Posts: 244   +77

    She took a hint from that other criminal, Hillary Clinton. Lock them both up!
     
  23. Right side bob

    Right side bob TS Booster Posts: 113   +25

    I said source not yelling (I'm paraphrasing here) Woo trump cool guy, **** Hilary shes in trouble for mysterious disappearances of people who oppose her family.
    I'm not here to debate politics or argue I just want the source for future arguments about change.
     
  24. flyboydale54

    flyboydale54 TS Rookie Posts: 21

    A person has the right not to incriminate themselves, so the police are blowing smoke up her *** for charging her with the remote wipe they have no proof she even did that.
     
  25. mbalensiefer

    mbalensiefer TS Enthusiast Posts: 54   +26

    She only wiped it to remove her yoga appointments and personal emails.
     

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...