Criminal defence lawyer, specialized in crypto phone/PGP evidence cases (SkyECC, EncroChat). Cryptocurrency maters. Founder of IntercrimeDA.
Jul 24 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
🚨 GAME CHANGER Recently issued Catanzaro decision upheld by the Corte di Cassazione. The European Investigation Order is now a weapon against the prosecution. #SkyECC #EncroChat
1/8 The investigative judge in Catanzaro issued an OEI (European Investigation Order) to France under art. 32 Directive 2014/41/EU: freeze the underlying French investigative files, prevent destruction or transfer, and secure access so the defence can exercise its rights in France. The Catanzaro DDA appealed. The Corte di Cassazione declared that appeal inadmissible. The decision is not “abnormal”. It stands.
May 23 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
Breaking: For the first time, the ECtHR has communicated a Sky ECC case — I. and E. v. Norway.
This completes the trifecta: EncroChat (S. v. Germany), ANOM (R. and R. v. Estonia), and now Sky ECC.
Three countries. Three cases. One unmistakable pattern.
Strasbourg is building a landmark. Let's dive in. 🧵
Again the court refers to the : Yalçınkaya case (no. 15669/20 26 September 2023)
The Grand Chamber set the standard: when digital evidence is decisive, courts cannot simply accept it. Authenticity, reliability, integrity must be genuinely scrutinised.
Sep 17, 2025 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
Breaking: The French Cour de Cassation has delivered two landmark rulings in quick succession that could reshape SkyECC and EncroChat cases across Europe. As a criminal defense lawyer deeply involved in these matters, I'm thrilled to break this down—major wins for fair trial rights and evidence scrutiny. Let's dive in.
First up: The June 17, 2025 decision (Pourvoi n° 24-87.110). In a case involving cross-border data interception for organized crime, the Court ruled that France MUST notify other EU states when hacking/capturing data from devices that cross borders into their territory—even if no technical assistance is needed. Why? Sovereignty and EU law (Directive 2014/41/EU, Art. 31) (SkyECC and EncroChat)
Aug 3, 2022 • 12 tweets • 2 min read
Een draadje over de betrouwbaarheid van politie verklaringen en de beangstigende wijze waarop agenten elkaar rugdekking geven. Zet je schrap. Gisteren had ik een verhoor van twee agenten en een ‘burger’ getuige. Reden van het verhoor was dat de agenten hebben verklaard dat cliënt
opzettelijk op een van hen was ingereden en ook daadwerkelijk heeft geraakt. Daarbij is aangifte tegen cliënt gedaan van poging moord/doodslag. Met pech staat daar 7 jaar gevangenisstraf op. Het probleem hier is dat cliënt dit mordicus betwist en zegt juist alles te hebben gedaan
