News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on We Just Got a Rare Look at US National Security Surveillance. Parent comment

Re:We Just Got a Rare Look at US National Security Surveillance by merpnderp on Thursday December 12, 2019 @11:03AM (#21772978)
Why would anyone talk to the FBI? They don't record interrogations, but rather rely upon the memory of the investigator who has up to 3 months to record what was said. And if his memory doesn't match what you claim you said, you are automatically lying and guilty. It's such an obvious route of official abuse of power, I'm not for getting rid of the FBI and starting over. How could you trust anyone who was willing to work in that environment?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Just Got a Rare Look at US National Security Surveillance by snowwrestler on Thursday December 12, 2019 @12:38PM (#21774107)
It doesn't matter if agents record your conversation. At trial, the recording will only be trusted to the extent that the agent's testimony as to its provenance is trusted.

If your testimony is important to the trial, you'll be asked to deliver it again in person, or in a deposition; either way you will have an opportunity to prep with your counsel.

In theory, a recording could be detrimental to you, as either the prosecution or defense would have a chance to play up tiny inconsistencies between your first recording and your live testimony/deposition. Without the recording, the best they can do is have the agent testify "that's not what he/she said the first time." Which doesn't really matter.

If you get prosecuted for lying to the agent, again, you would have a chance to testify at trial, and for your counsel to try to impeach the agent in front of the jury.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:We Just Got a Rare Look at US National Security Surveillance by merpnderp on Thursday December 12, 2019 @04:16PM (#21776559)
"If you get prosecuted for lying to the agent, again, you would have a chance to testify at trial, and for your counsel to try to impeach the agent in front of the jury."

Lol, your word against a federal agent's. How well did that work out for Martha Stewart and her literal army of top end lawyers?

[ Parent | on HN ]