From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

On 22.11.25 22:42, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-22 19:25, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 22.11.25 14:36, Carlos E.R. wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December. >>>> Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in >>>> France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Apple offers that globally since the iPhone 13 (2021). It is free and
part of the phone price. Absolutely nothing to brag about.

It is not about the hardware being capable, but about having a contract
with a provider that supports it.

It is supported globally. There is no need for a provider. Everything provided by Apple and its suppliers.

Utter rubbish. Only two providers support it in the US (T-mobile) and
Canada (Rogers). None in Europe.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/109526

It very much isn't global nor free.

If the iPhone 13 can do it without a contract, somebody must be paying
or fielding the capability.

The user when he or she buys the phone.

Incorrect. It requires provider support. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/122339


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 24.11.25 17:59, Chris wrote:

Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

On 22.11.25 22:42, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-22 19:25, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 22.11.25 14:36, Carlos E.R. wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December. >>>>> Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in >>>>> France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Apple offers that globally since the iPhone 13 (2021). It is free and >>>> part of the phone price. Absolutely nothing to brag about.

It is not about the hardware being capable, but about having a contract
with a provider that supports it.

It is supported globally. There is no need for a provider. Everything
provided by Apple and its suppliers.

Utter rubbish. Only two providers support it in the US (T-mobile) and
Canada (Rogers). None in Europe.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/109526

You really do not understand what this link tells you.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December.
Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36 countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source: <https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Paywalled so can't check, but do you mean the EU or Europe? Your reference
to 27 countries suggests the former.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-24 19:33, Chris wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December.
Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in
France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Paywalled so can't check, but do you mean the EU or Europe? Your reference
to 27 countries suggests the former.

It doesn't have a paywall. It asks to login with Google, but I say no.
Maybe it blocks on access from other countries, which is a stupid thing
to do, but it is possible.

The article says "Europe", then it specifies that it will be 27
countries initially. It does not list the countries.

Here are other links:

English:

<https://9to5google.com/2025/11/19/google-pixel-satellite-sms-europe-orange/>

French:

<https://tech.orange.fr/tests-produits/smartphones-tablettes/orange-inaugure-les-sms-par-satellite-en-europe-fini-les-zones-blanches-CNT000002lM7O6.html>
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-22 19:25:

On 22.11.25 14:36, Carlos E.R. wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December.
Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in
France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Apple offers that globally since the iPhone 13 (2021). It is free and
part of the phone price. Absolutely nothing to brag about.

So what? This newsgroup is not about iPhones.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-23 11:38:

On 23.11.25 11:12, Andy Burns wrote:

"Carlos E.R." wrote:

If the iPhone 13 can do it without a contract, somebody must be paying
or fielding the capability.

I don't think Apple have committed to satellite signal remaining free,
have they?

Do you know the difference between "I think" and "I know"?

Do you know the difference between a question and an assumption?

And by the way - this newsgroup is not about iPhones.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-23 11:43:

On 22.11.25 14:36, Carlos E.R. wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December.
Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in
France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

https://support.apple.com/en-us/101573

So what? This newsgroup is not about iPhones.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-23 15:59:

On 23.11.25 15:09, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-23 11:43, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 22.11.25 14:36, Carlos E.R. wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December. >>>> Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in >>>> France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

https://support.apple.com/en-us/101573

That's just about emergency use, not about sending any SMS.

Learn to read and to understand what you read.

What does this have to do with Android?
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-11-24 19:33, Chris wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December.
Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in
France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Paywalled so can't check, but do you mean the EU or Europe? Your reference >> to 27 countries suggests the former.

It doesn't have a paywall. It asks to login with Google, but I say no.
Maybe it blocks on access from other countries, which is a stupid thing
to do, but it is possible.

It requires payment if you don't accept all cookies.

The article says "Europe", then it specifies that it will be 27
countries initially. It does not list the countries.

Here are other links:

English:

<https://9to5google.com/2025/11/19/google-pixel-satellite-sms-europe-orange/>

French:

<https://tech.orange.fr/tests-produits/smartphones-tablettes/orange-inaugure-les-sms-par-satellite-en-europe-fini-les-zones-blanches-CNT000002lM7O6.html>

Ah thanks. It's neither. It's 26 counties globally where Orange operates.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-25 00:48, Chris wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-11-24 19:33, Chris wrote:

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

Orange will be the first to offer SMS via satellite, ie, when
terrestrial coverage fails, on Pixel 9 and 10, in Europe. In December. >>>> Even in countries with no Orange coverage. Provided by Skylo. First in >>>> France, next in 27 countries. I think I read that later will be 36
countries, including USA and Canada.

Gratis the first 6 months, then 5€/month.

Source:
<https://www.elespanol.com/elandroidelibre/noticias-y-novedades/20251120/adios-quedarse-sin-cobertura-pixel-primeros-moviles-europa-sms-satelite/1003744022083_0.html>

Paywalled so can't check, but do you mean the EU or Europe? Your reference >>> to 27 countries suggests the former.

It doesn't have a paywall. It asks to login with Google, but I say no.
Maybe it blocks on access from other countries, which is a stupid thing
to do, but it is possible.

It requires payment if you don't accept all cookies.

Ah, interesting. Well, you can open it in a firefox private window,
accept all cookies, which will be automatically erased on close window.
They get nothing from your cookies.

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

The article says "Europe", then it specifies that it will be 27
countries initially. It does not list the countries.

Here are other links:

English:

<https://9to5google.com/2025/11/19/google-pixel-satellite-sms-europe-orange/>

French:

<https://tech.orange.fr/tests-produits/smartphones-tablettes/orange-inaugure-les-sms-par-satellite-en-europe-fini-les-zones-blanches-CNT000002lM7O6.html>

Ah thanks. It's neither. It's 26 counties globally where Orange operates.

Makes sense.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Makes sense.

No.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-27 15:18, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place.

Ok :-)
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-27 15:18, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place.

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 27.11.25 19:53, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 15:18, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place.

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D

*ROTFLSTC*

Communication on insecure proprietary channels will never constitute a
legally binding contract for anything. It is that simple.

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for
good reasons.

In addition it is even totally irresponsible of private people to feed
America with all information free of charge for espionage and training
of AI. Same applies probably to the RCS-espionage by Google.

Only the super ignorants are using such channels voluntarily.
--
"De gustibus non est disputandum."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 19:53, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 15:18, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place.

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D

*ROTFLSTC*

Communication on insecure proprietary channels will never constitute a legally binding contract for anything. It is that simple.

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for
good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it. Politicians too.

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

In addition it is even totally irresponsible of private people to feed America with all information free of charge for espionage and training
of AI. Same applies probably to the RCS-espionage by Google.

Only the super ignorants are using such channels voluntarily.

--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, J�rg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 19:53, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 15:18, J�rg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 13:19, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-27 12:50, J�rg Lorenz wrote:

On 27.11.25 12:28, Carlos E.R. wrote:

I have firefox in private mode as default browser in my phone.

At the same time you use WhatsApp?

Yes.

Makes sense.

No.

To you.

Not at all. It is the contradiction of the worst kind.
A certain knowledge is necessary to understand this in the first place. >>

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D

*ROTFLSTC*

Communication on insecure proprietary channels will never constitute a legally binding contract for anything. It is that simple.

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it. Politicians too.

Indeed, in most European countries it's used in all the sectors which
J�rg mentioned, and much more. And indeed by politicians, including
government (both chambers, cabinet, etc.). Also in public transport
(amongst others report personal abuse).

In the meantime J�rg is spreading FUD and urban legends about
WhatsApp's (ab)use of user's contact lists. One would think that someone
who whines all the time about security, privacy, encryption, etc. would
have a clue about what a hash is, but apparently not.

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

[...]
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for
good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it. Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

Can happen if both parties agree to this. But nobody can send invoices
via WA without consent.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 28.11.25 19:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for
good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it. Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

Can happen if both parties agree to this. But nobody can send invoices
via WA without consent.

Even in Spain.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

J�rg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[...]

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

Can happen if both parties agree to this. But nobody can send invoices
via WA without consent.

Of course they can, if they have your mobile phone number [1]. You can
block them *after* the fact, delete their messages, etc., but you can
not prevent them from contacting you if they have your mobile phone
number.

[1] Actually your number for WhatsApp, not necessarily your (main)
mobile phone number, but let's not quarrel about that.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-28 19:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for
good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it. Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Read the reports about the top prosecutor case in Spain. It is public knowledge, so I will not bother to send a precise link.

Invoices are sent via WhatsApp, too.

Can happen if both parties agree to this. But nobody can send invoices
via WA without consent.

HA. LOL.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-28 20:24, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 19:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for >>>> good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it.
Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Read the reports about the top prosecutor case in Spain. It is public knowledge, so I will not bother to send a precise link.

Conversation with ChatGpt. If you do not trust it, make your own investigation. I asked in Spanish, then translated it with DeepL.

Q: Was the attorney general using WhatsApp?

It depends a little on what you mean by “using WhatsApp,” but yes—Álvaro
García Ortiz (attorney general) acknowledged that he has the WhatsApp application and that he usually deletes his messages for “security reasons.”

Here are the essentials:

* Investigations show that on the day criminal proceedings were opened against him, his phone was wiped — there were no messages on WhatsApp
prior to that date.

* The judge has asked WhatsApp (and Google) for data linked to his
accounts in an attempt to recover those deleted messages.

* However, there is no public information confirming that those chats
have been recovered or proving that they were used for the purposes of
which he is accused.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)



Q: No, it's just that I know someone who denies that judicial
authorities use WhatsApp.

It is perfectly possible to clarify this **without going into any
specific cases**:

### ✔️ **Yes, many judicial authorities and public officials use
WhatsApp on a personal level.**

WhatsApp is a public application that is widely used in Spain.
Prosecutors, judges, police officers, senior officials, etc. can use it
**just like any other citizen** for their private communications.

### ✔️ **What they CANNOT do is use WhatsApp for official or sensitive communications.**

That is the important difference:

* For official work, they must use **secure, encrypted, and auditable channels**, such as:

* Corporate email
* Secure internal platforms of the judiciary
* Case management systems
* WhatsApp **is not a valid channel** for legal proceedings, official
orders, documentation, etc.

### ✔️ So... do they use WhatsApp or not?

* **On a personal level:** Yes, it's common.
* **On a professional/operational level:** It should not be used for
anything official.

### Why do some people believe that “they don't use it”?

Because they confuse *using WhatsApp like anyone else* with *using it officially*.
The law and security protocols prohibit the latter, but **do not prevent
the former**.

If you like, I can explain **which regulations govern this** or **why
WhatsApp is not valid for judicial communications**.


Translated with DeepL.com (free version)



Q: However, they were looking for relevant information on the
prosecutor's WhatsApp to incriminate him, so WhatsApp is being used for important information that is not strictly personal.

Very good point—you are right that if someone were to investigate the WhatsApp messages of a prosecutor or other authority, that implies that,
in fact, those messages would not be “only personal” but could—at least eventually—have criminal/judicial relevance. And I agree with you: that reinforces that WhatsApp *can* serve as a source of “important” evidence in a case, albeit with nuances.

Here's what we know — and what complicates that use:

## ✅ Why WhatsApp can serve as evidence

* More and more courts in Spain are admitting WhatsApp conversations as evidence in civil, labor, or criminal proceedings, provided that
authenticity and integrity requirements are met. ([Rangel Abogados][1])
* It is not mandatory to provide a computer expert report (i.e., a
technical report) for the messages to be admitted; in some cases, it is sufficient that there is no challenge, or that the other party accepts
that the conversation took place. ([Segarra][2])
* What matters is being able to prove (or at least present solid
evidence) that the conversation is real: who participated, dates,
integrity of the content, that it has not been manipulated, etc.
([Criminal Lawyer][3])


## ⚠️ Why it doesn't always work so easily

* If only a “screenshot” (or screen capture) is presented, many courts reject it: it can be manipulated, falsified, or may not guarantee that
it truly corresponds to an original chat. ([EL PAÍS English][4])
* When there is a challenge (i.e., the accused party says “those are not
my messages” or “it may have been edited”), then more solid guarantees must be provided: a computer expert report, the original phones, or
verified copies. ([Rangel Abogados][1])
* In addition, the evidence must be obtained legally: if privacy or the secrecy of communications has been violated, that evidence may be
declared null and void. ([ala.org.es][5])

## 🎯 Conclusion for your example (authorities / prosecutor under investigation)

Yes — when the authorities investigate someone (such as a prosecutor or civil servant) and ask to review their WhatsApp, in such cases WhatsApp messages go from being “private” to being considered **sensitive/legally relevant information**. Such an investigation is lawful as long as it is conducted in accordance with the law, and the messages can provide
evidence or proof, provided that their authenticity is guaranteed.


👉 In other words: **your argument is valid**. The fact that a party
“uses WhatsApp” does not necessarily mean that it is an official
channel, but **when investigating a possible crime**, that WhatsApp is
no longer just “private communication” and can become **evidence**.

If you want, we can review **recent case law in Spain** that has used
WhatsApp in this way (deleted messages, recovered chats, as evidence).
That way you can see **real cases**. Would you like some examples?

[1]: https://www.rangelabogados.es/es/article/son-v%C3%A1lidas-las-conversaciones-de-whatsapp-en-un-procedimiento-judicial?utm_source=chatgpt.com
“WhatsApp conversations are valid in legal proceedings | Rangel Abogados” [2]: https://www.sgrr.es/derecho-civil/captura-whatsapp-prueba-penal/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
“Can WhatsApp screenshots be used as evidence? - Segarra”
[3]: https://www.societejuridique.com/se-puede-usar-el-whatsapp-como-prueba-en-un-juicio/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
“WhatsApp as evidence in a trial | SCJE - Criminal Lawyer”
[4]: https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2014/07/14/inenglish/1405326347_240008.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com
“Why WhatsApp can be an unreliable witness for the prosecution | Spain |
EL PAÍS English”
[5]: https://ala.org.es/la-validez-probatoria-del-whatsapp-y-su-incorporacion-al-procedimiento/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
"The evidentiary validity of WhatsApp and its incorporation into
proceedings – ALA (Free Association of Lawyers)

...

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 28.11.25 20:49, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 20:24, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 19:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for >>>>> good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it.
Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Read the reports about the top prosecutor case in Spain. It is public
knowledge, so I will not bother to send a precise link.

Conversation with ChatGpt. If you do not trust it, make your own investigation. I asked in Spanish, then translated it with DeepL.

Q: Was the attorney general using WhatsApp?

It depends a little on what you mean by “using WhatsApp,” but yes—Álvaro
García Ortiz (attorney general) acknowledged that he has the WhatsApp application and that he usually deletes his messages for “security reasons.”

This is utter nonsense. This is a private activity and by no means
"official" just because the attorney is using WA. I assume that the
President of the Federal Council in Switzerland is using WA as well but
that does not mean it is legal if it is for official decisions. WA is
not a legal channel to spread official decisions.

Your Spanish case shows how important it is to forbid the use of
proprietary communication channels in a professional environment.

(lengthy irrelevant nonsense snipped)

That shows me your tendency to spread FUD and your inability to deal
with legal categories.
--
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-28 23:32, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 20:49, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 20:24, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 19:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

On 28.11.25 13:22, Carlos E.R. wrote:

On 2025-11-28 12:22, Jörg Lorenz wrote:

And I tell you once more: WA is not permitted to be used in the
education sector, public institutions, military and law enforcement for >>>>>> good reasons.

LOL. I know for a fat that the judiciary here is using it.
Politicians too.

This is a bad lie. Can you deliver a proof, that anything official is
sent by WA? Your post is just a unsubstantiated claim. Decisions are
sent by registered letters.

Read the reports about the top prosecutor case in Spain. It is public
knowledge, so I will not bother to send a precise link.

Conversation with ChatGpt. If you do not trust it, make your own
investigation. I asked in Spanish, then translated it with DeepL.

Q: Was the attorney general using WhatsApp?

It depends a little on what you mean by “using WhatsApp,” but yes—Álvaro
García Ortiz (attorney general) acknowledged that he has the WhatsApp
application and that he usually deletes his messages for “security
reasons.”

This is utter nonsense. This is a private activity and by no means
"official"

I did not say "official".

just because the attorney is using WA. I assume that the
President of the Federal Council in Switzerland is using WA as well but
that does not mean it is legal if it is for official decisions. WA is
not a legal channel to spread official decisions.

Your Spanish case shows how important it is to forbid the use of
proprietary communication channels in a professional environment.

(lengthy irrelevant nonsense snipped)

That shows me your tendency to spread FUD and your inability to deal
with legal categories.

Then why was the court interested in impounding his private
conversations? Because even if not official, they can contain
conversations about office matters that are of interest to the court proceedings, not really about private conversations.

Like "send me the email about this pundit (full name here) recognizing
he cheated on his taxes".
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-28 12:22:

On 27.11.25 19:53, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[...]

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D

*ROTFLSTC*

Your amusement does not change the facts.

[...]

Only the super ignorants are using such channels voluntarily.

Well - most users are "super ignorants", wether you like it or not.
--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.mobile.android

On 2025-11-29 21:01, Arno Welzel wrote:

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-11-28 12:22:

On 27.11.25 19:53, Carlos E.R. wrote:

[...]

And the alternative to WhatsApp is... TACHAN!... RCS. :-D

*ROTFLSTC*

Your amusement does not change the facts.

[...]

Only the super ignorants are using such channels voluntarily.

Well - most users are "super ignorants", wether you like it or not.

It doesn't matter if I want to use some other tool. My correspondents do
not. And the same happens to everybody else.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2