"I don't recall" is never where these things end. It's not a magical phrase to make people go away.

Follow up questioning that is quite reasonable in my opinion would be along the lines of "What efforts have you made to find where you stored the recording?" "What is your usual practice with these recordings?" and that's where you trip yourself up and reveal the lie.

Others might be questioned and say that you're fastidious about keeping track of your data, further underscoring that you're keeping something from them.

I don't think this 'maniacal' in the slightest but that is a characteristic you perceive in the process. Remember only one person is being evasive here - you.

> "I don't recall" is never where these things end. It's not a magical phrase to make people go away.

It makes the question go away though. And you can use it as many times as you like. That's the beauty of it. Take notes from the ruling class who use this to its fullest advantage.

> Follow up questioning that is quite reasonable in my opinion would be along the lines of "What efforts have you made to find where you stored the recording?"

"Rummaged around looking for it."

> "What is your usual practice with these recordings?"

"Put them with the others and try not to lose them."

> and that's where you trip yourself up and reveal the lie.

I mean if you are singularly dimwitted yes but you've got bigger problems if that's the case.

> I don't think this 'maniacal' in the slightest but that is a characteristic you perceive in the process. Remember only one person is being evasive here - you.

Well you're changing your tune now aren't you? Before you said they were justified because I was lying. But they didn't know that, and therefore they would also believe themselves justified to bully people who are not lying and abuse the power and money of the state to attack people.

> It makes the question go away though. And you can use it as many times as you like. That's the beauty of it. Take notes from the ruling class who use this to its fullest advantage.

The 'ruling class' have something you don't - money and connections.

> I mean if you are singularly dimwitted yes but you've got bigger problems if that's the case.

Honestly this is classic nerdery thinking they're smarter than everyone else when dealing with systems they're not familiar with. That's the worst kind of stupidity. Hubris comes before the fall.

> Well you're changing your tune now aren't you? Before you said they were justified because I was lying.

No I didn't. You're confusing me for someone else. That kind of lack of attention to detail will catch you out if you need to lie to the courts :)

> The 'ruling class' have something you don't - money and connections.

They still get hauled before courts and don't just get off scott free. They get off because they use the right tools. You and I can use some of those tools too. Not all of them, but some of them.

> Honestly this is classic nerdery thinking they're smarter than everyone else when dealing with systems they're not familiar with. That's the worst kind of stupidity. Hubris comes before the fall.

It doesn't matter if you're honest or not, this simply is not something that helps to justify your position. It's just not an argument.

> No I didn't. You're confusing me for someone else.

Ah that's true.

> That kind of lack of attention to detail will catch you out if you need to lie to the courts :)

No it's not, but if you are the type of person to put the same attention to detail in to a court case as you put into posting on anonymous internet forums then I can see why you think it would be.

Let's go back to the start of this conversation:

> "I don't recall where it is", "I must have forgotten to put a USB stick in it", etc. If you can make a plausible lie, stick with it, then there isn't much they can do. There absolutely are one neat tricks"

And where we're at now:

> They still get hauled before courts and don't just get off scott free. They get off because they use the right tools. You and I can use some of those tools too. Not all of them, but some of them.

> No it's not, but if you are the type of person to put the same attention to detail in to a court case as you put into posting on anonymous internet forums then I can see why you think it would be.

I don't think we're disagreeing at this point. You've basically admitted there aren't 'neat tricks' and you'll have to go through a painful experience with the courts which is what everyone has been saying all along. Fighting legal battles isn't a neat trick.

No, let's go right back to the start. A person had their footage subpoenaed because of an investigation into a neighbor, and because it was on the cloud they had no knowledge or option to do anything until they found out it was already handed over.

A comment said that if it was not stored on the cloud, he would still be required to hand it over. You then said it would become some huge problem and no easy way to get out of.

The reality is actually if the police somehow did find out you had non-internet video cameras and served you with a subpoena before you realized what they wanted and had time to take prior action, you could dispose of the recordings and respond that you don't have anything. If they wanted to haul you before a court, "I don't recall where the sd card is", "I don't recall when I last recorded something", etc is going to be the end of it. So there absolutely are neat tricks. There's no word twisting and elaborate confabulation of lies to get caught out with, it's not like an episode of law and order. You just say that you don't recall.

If it was you under investigation and particularly if it was a very serious crime then sure they're going to try harder, that wasn't the situation we were discussing though (and in that case depending on what's on the tapes it's still not necessarily the case you'd be better off to be honest).