> But at 3:15 p.m., the quiet was broken when, out of nowhere, a young woman in street clothes charged toward Ulbricht yelling, "I'm so sick of you!" and grabbed his laptop. Ulbricht leapt from his seat to grab it back, when the half dozen other readers at nearby tables suddenly lunged for him, pushing him up against a window.
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dead-end-o...
Though the British police are using it as well:
> Undercover surveillance officers trailed Yew and waited for him to unlock his phone to make a call - thereby disabling the encryption. One officer then rushed in to seize the phone from Yew's hand
If the government will condone torture to get information out of people because of the “War on Terror”, why wouldn’t they do the same for the “War on Drugs”?
The tactic you mentioned has been used here in the US aswell. Something similar was done to DPR that brought down The Silk Road.
You should be able to answer those yourself. Legal rights are not trumpt by illegal tactics, no matter what information is recovered.
No, but it happens all of the time.
Is any evidence gained through torture admissable?
If the police lie and say the person wasn’t tortured or do you believe that police don’t lie?
Are any law enforcement allowed to use torture to gain access to information?
Yes and police never lie and district attorneys never illegally withhold evidence from the defense....
You’re making a lot of assumptions that police, judges, and district attorneys play by the rules and that overworked public defenders have the time or the will to be great advocates for defenders.
On the other hand, it was reported in the UK (?) that law enforcement follows around suspects, wait for them to unlock their phone in public and tackle them before they re lock it.