- cross-posted to:
- fightforprivacy@feddit.ch
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- fightforprivacy@feddit.ch
- privacy@lemmy.ml
To be fair they were also using encrypted messaging to talk to each other like WhatsApp and Signal, they even show their mom how to use it which is extremely suspicious.
“All members of this group were particularly suspicious, only communicating with each other using encrypted applications, in particular Signal, and encrypting their computers and devices […].
The Investigating Judge
https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2023/06/05/criminalization-of-encryption-the-8-december-case/ https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2023/10/06/the-beginning-of-the-8-december-trial-is-also-the-judgement-of-the-right-to-privacy-and-encryption/
when the DGSI [a French security agency charged with counter-espionage, counter-terrorism, countering cybercrime and surveillance of potentially threatening groups] has questioned Bastien about what he thinks of Macron. A photograph on his computer is mentioned, which according to them details the President’s security arrangements for the July 14th parade. (…)
The device in question (an aerial photo taken from the press) is highlighted in such a way as to draw a dick. A dick.
The link is made with Bastien’s passion for drones. The implication is that he could have used a drone to attack this dick-shaped device using explosives.
https://www.auposte.fr/j7-quis-terroristiat-ipsos-terroristes/
To give more context, one person came back for from Rojava to France in 2018.
Rojava is an area in Syria fighting against Daesh, they also experimented a lot around different political structures which interested a lot of militants in Europe.
When he came back the DGSI flagged this person as a potential terrorist and start tracking him and the people he knows, before violently arresting them and keeping them in prison for up to 15 months for some of them.
Then there is the whole investigation for 5 years. They did not found any evidence during this investigation but rather than admitting the fact that they fucked up and that everyone in the group is innocent, they are trying to argue that all the evidence have been hidden by the fact they encrypted everything.
In this case the DGSI used methods that are illegal unless “Justified by elements of fact” (I don’t know how to translate this part). So if they are innocent the DGSI will be in trouble for their illegal actions unless they are judged guilty. If their are guilty the dgsi will argue that their actions were justified to stop a terrorist attack.
Figured it was something like this. It sounds like one of those “The police know they fucked up and are now grasping at any straw they can find in an attempt to cover their asses” situations.
“We can’t find any evidence. But we definitely know they’re guilty! They just covered their tracks so well that there is no evidence of wrongdoing available anywhere. Given the situation at hand and how obvious it is, without evidence, that these guys have committed a crime, we better lock them up.”
You made a surprisingly accurate description of the situation.