Caught on Tape: Andrew Tate’s Phone Panic

[00:00:00]Andrew Tate, who boasted once that he wiped his cell phone every night and dared investigators to try to take it from him because there's nothing on it.

[00:00:09]Well, when he was arrested in Miami, check out this video of him trying to get rid of his cell phone. Why? What's on the cell phone? Maybe he didn't wipe it.

[00:00:18]And is he going to get away with this?

[00:00:20]Let's discuss. I'm Dave Aronberg, former State Attorney for Palm Beach County, aka the Florida Law Man here on Substack and YouTube. Thanks for your support.

[00:00:28]Hit the subscribe button. And if you upgrade your subscription on Substack, you'll be part of the live Q&A this Wednesday, 6:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Now, let's talk about Andrew Tate and his brother. The Tate brothers are by all accounts despicable, I mean, misogynistic, uh and accused rapists and child pornographers. And they're pro Hamas. I mean, they're just pretty awful dudes.

[00:00:52]And they have connections. They're pro MAGA.

[00:00:55]They have connections within the Trump White House. I mean, they have befriended Don Jr. and Barron, according to reports. Although, uh you see everyone scrambling to get away from them now. No one wants to be part of these guys. And that's one reason why in my previous videos I've said the Trump people are not going to die in this hill. They're not going to stick their necks out to save the Tate brothers because the Tate brothers are toxic. And you know how I know? The fact that no one wants to admit they're friends with them. The fact that Rick Grenell, who was a special envoy for for Trump, who was the one who supposedly went to the leaders of Romania and said, "Let them free. Let them free."

[00:01:37]He's saying he didn't do that. I mean, if these guys were proudly supportive of them and friends with them, they would be like, "Hey, yeah, we are." I mean, that's how Trump's people are. Remember, MAGA means never to have to say you're sorry. Never apologize.

[00:01:54]But here, they're running away from it.

[00:01:56]So, do you think that they're going to now put their necks on the line and stop their extradition? They won't be able to run away from that. They won't be able to say, "No, no, no, it wasn't us." when the only people who could stop it would be Marco Rubio who wants to run for president.

[00:02:11]And that would be potentially a career killer. So, even in the MAGA movement, there are individuals who do not want anything to do with the Tate brothers. I mean, openly who are openly against them. I mean, Ron DeSantis, governor Florida, who I've been critical of and his attorney general James Uthmeier, they have both been anti-Tate brothers.

[00:02:31]They're trying to get uh an investigation of the Tate brothers which they started uh leading to criminal charges. They're trying to They were trying to get them charged with some crimes in Florida, but uh the UK has stepped in front. Now, let's discuss the phone. I mean, so, this brash-talking guy who would brag about wiping his phone is now trying to hide his phone. What does that mean?

[00:02:56]Well, if you truly wipe your phone every 24 hours, your phone's effectively a $1,500 paperweight.

[00:03:03]You have zero reason to panic when federal agents walk through the door, right? You hand it over, you smile, and let your lawyers deal with it.

[00:03:11]But, when the US Marshals Service executed that warrant, he didn't act like a guy with a clean phone. He acted like a suspect with a live grenade. So, when he attempted to pass his phone off to an aide or staff member in the middle of the arrest, it's uh conscience of guilt.

[00:03:28]It's an instinctual move of someone who knows there's something on there that's very uh incriminating. So, if a jury eventually hears that during the arrest, he tried to transfer his phone to a third party, prosecutors can argue that his physical actions betrayed his public stance of innocence.

[00:03:50]You don't try to hide what you don't think will hurt you.

[00:03:54]Now let's discuss legally whether that phone can be seized. Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement generally needs a warrant to search your property, but when federal agents execute a an arrest warrant, they have the authority to perform what's called a search incident to an arrest. So, they could do that search to secure the person, prevent escape, preserve evidence within the suspect's immediate grab area. This was the big issue with Luigi remember when the cops were allowed to get some things but not others?

[00:04:27]Well, when Tate attempted to pass his phone to a member of his entourage, he he gave law enforcement two legal grounds to seize it on the spot, what's called exigent circumstances and spoliation of evidence. So, the second a suspect attempts to to give a digital device to a third party during a raid, the agents have an immediate legally recognized exigency. They They could say, "Well, we don't seize that phone immediately, then the third party could destroy it, throw it into the ocean, wipe it, smash the flash storage." Courts have held that officers can immediately seize and secure device to prevent the destruction of evidence. And then there's the what looks like obstruction. By trying to involve an aid in to hide or remove evidence during an ongoing federal arrest, he he opened up potential federal obstruction or evidence tampering inquiries for himself and the staff member who's involved in this.

[00:05:27]So, we don't know if the feds physically grabbed the phone.

[00:05:31]And I guess we'll know more soon. And if they did, there's still a Supreme Court case called Riley versus California from 2014 where the Supreme Court unanimously held that while police can seize a cell phone during an arrest to secure it, they can't search the device without a search warrant based on probable cause.

[00:05:50]So, it would not be difficult for federal prosecutors or UK authorities to get that search warrant because the foreign arrest warrant is based on 38 serious felony charges. That's including human trafficking, sexual assault, >> [sighs] >> um digital offenses including child exploitation, uh child pornography. Um you combine these charges with his attempt to conceal the phone, and you would think a federal judge would certainly sign off on the search warrant for the contacts uh for the contents of the phone.

[00:06:22]And you may say, "Well, this isn't a federal arrest. This is the UK, not the United States." Well, under constitutional law in the United States, uh if a lawful arrest was carried out by federal agents, the officers have the same exact search search and seizure authority. That's including the search incident to arrest.

[00:06:40]That's whether the underlying offense is domestic or an extraditable offense requested by a foreign treaty partner like the UK. And if the feds have the phone, federal authorities can ask a magistrate judge for a US search warrant to search through the device. And you just need to show probable cause. So, that's very possible. Of course, the question is whether or not they got the phone because once the federal authorities search the phone pursuant to a US search warrant, any relevant evidence can be shared legally with foreign authorities like the UK. We have a mutual legal assistance treaty with the UK, and that's part of the extradition case itself. And if the feds did not get the phone, the fact that we're talking about it, the fact that the internet is discussing it, the fact that that video exists, and if a staff member has it, well, whoever took the phone could be charged with obstruction, with tampering. That's 18 USC 1512 and 18 USC 1519.

[00:07:46]So, you can't tamper with evidence.

[00:07:48]And federal prosecutors can get a search warrant or grand jury subpoena for that staff member uh to get that physical evidence. And so, what if the phone was whisked away and wiped?

[00:08:04]Well, that person could be charged for doing that, charged with the crime. And also, wipe doesn't always mean wipe. You could still get a subpoena to Apple or Google to get the backups, uh the message syncs, uh location data.

[00:08:20]You know, there's certain things you can do. I'm not an expert at technology.

[00:08:23]That's why I went to law school. But, I it's not over over if someone grabs the phone and then just tries to delete stuff, especially if you're staffers who may not be experts in doing that, or maybe they are.

[00:08:37]And then, there's going to be potentially more hell to pay in criminal court. But, either way, that video that we saw, that is evidence of conscious of guilt. That could be used against the Tate brothers in eventual trial. And you may be wondering, is it going to go to trial? Well, I think so. I have two videos now that have been posted as to why the Trump administration is very unlikely to block the extradition.

[00:09:00]Remember, it goes through the courts.

[00:09:02]This decision is made first in the courts. It could take a year, could take 2 years.

[00:09:07]But, eventually, the courts are going to sign off on the extradition because you don't need a lot. Need probable cause.

[00:09:13]Need to make sure it's the right people.

[00:09:14]This is not a case of mistaken identity.

[00:09:17]And the crimes have to be serious.

[00:09:18]Clearly, they're serious.

[00:09:20]And then, it's up to Marco Rubio to do the final sign-off.

[00:09:24]Marco Rubio uh would have to go out of his way to block the extradition of the Tate brothers.

[00:09:31]I don't think it's going to happen. I know some of you disagree. I've I've seen the comments. Okay, some If wants to bet me.

[00:09:41]Just come back here after this is all said and done.

[00:09:43]And we'll see who's right. We'll keep following this here on Substack and YouTube. I'm Dave Aronberg, aka the Florida Law Man. If you like this video, hit the subscribe button, share with a friend, leave a comment below.

[00:09:54]Come join me on Wednesday. That's coming up 6:00 p.m.

[00:10:00]Eastern Standard Time for our live Q&A.

[00:10:02]See you there. And I'll see you next time.