[frogblast]

The path of least resistance is skipping the search warrant and asking the owner politely, which the article indicates is what is happening.

But if that doesn't work, then preserving evidence is considered to be very important. For example, it would be a problem if the car owner deleted the video.

[neaden]

While I can see why the police would find it a problem, I don't like the idea that that means they get to potentially have 24/7 access to my property just so they can check.

[JohnFen]

I don't see how preserving evidence enters into the decision to seize the entire car rather than the drive.

[frogblast]

The drive is inside the car. How do they get at it, and guarantee it isn't tampered with in the meantime?

[JohnFen]

They have Tesla (the company) unlock the car, then remove the drive. They already have the search warrant, which could compel Tesla to assist. They have a cop babysit the car until the seizure is completed, like they have to do anyway.

[dzhiurgis]

Sorry, but towing is much easier than dealing with Tesla's lawyers.

But Tesla should add remote wipe too, just like with iPhones.

[JohnFen]

> towing is much easier than dealing with Tesla's lawyers.

Which only underlines my other comment here, that this is a great reason to not own a Tesla.