

But for information to be considered “evidence” in the first place, there has to be an associated criminal act. I.e. a reasonable cause for suspicion that puts the individual under arrest, and henceforth, all manipulation of information is considered tampering.
However, he was not under arrest, so there was no baseline of information to be considered. If he was to wipe his phone in-flight, or after the border control (if the phone wasn’t checked at the border), or at any point in time at all really, this would also be considered evidence tampering, by this logic.
However, if I recall from the story, there was a certain jurisdiction at the border, which enabled the agents to have “reasonable cause for suspicion” for any reason, which means that it doesn’t matter what you have or not on your phone. If they are curious about you (i.e. suspicious), and you do not share your phone contents, just like the contents of your handbag, you’re effectively resisting arrest. And at that point, all information is considered evidence.

This is like one step away from Minority Report… Does no one see the parallels? Did no one understand the moral of the story?