5th Amendment in danger?

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
AZhitman
Administrator
Posts: 54538
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
Location: Surprise, Arizona
Contact:

Post

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/24/tech/web/ ... index.html

Yeah, I have the solution for this one....

"I forgot."

Case closed. Let's hope that SCOTUS not only gets it right, but that Blackburn is disbarred.

The fact that this case even went as far as it has, tells me that the oft-voiced concerns over personal liberties being increasingly at stake are not entirely unfounded.


User avatar
stebo0728
Posts: 2810
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:43 pm
Car: 1993 300ZX, White, T-Top
Contact:

Post

Great article, I hope as well that SCOTUS makes the distinction that forcing the user to incriminate themselves does in fact conflict with the 5th amendment. There would be no problem admitting the laptop into evidence, and having IT forensics attempt to acquire the data. They argue this could damage the evidence, but its akin to running DNA tests. Sometimes the tests are inconclusive and/or damage the sample beyond testing. Thats the risk involved with criminal prosecution. We wouldnt make a lab technician run their own DNA test if we thought they were the only ones who could do it. Similarly we can't force someone on trial to take self incriminating action. However, failure to cooperate on the defendants part should make any judge throw the book at them upon successful prosecution.

User avatar
IBCoupe
Posts: 7534
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:51 am
Car: '08 Nissan Altima Coupe 3.5SE
'19 Infiniti QX50 FWD
'17 BMW 330e iPerformance
Location: Orange County, CA

Post

A factually similar dispute involving child pornography ended with a Vermont federal judge ordering the defendant to decrypt the hard drive of his laptop.

While that case never reached the Supreme Court, it differed from the Fricosu matter because U.S. border agents already knew there was child p0rn on the computer because they saw it while the computer was running during a 2006 routine stop along the Canadian border.
I think the Vermont case was wrongly decided, too. I don't care what the cops saw you looking at on your computer, the point is that they're trying to get access to your hard drives in order to see what else is on there.

EDITED to provide clarity.
Last edited by IBCoupe on Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 26254
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

I ain't decrypting a damned thing. I hope this comes down on the side of the 5th. Build your damned case prosecutor.

User avatar
bigbadberry3
Posts: 2095
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: USA

Post


User avatar
hannibal
Posts: 9680
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 2:38 am
Car: Red Line to Glenmont
Location: Washington DC

Post

That's some bullisht right there! Cops don't ask for keys to search your house. If they can't get into the PC, that's their problem.

User avatar
carloslebaron
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:51 pm
Car: 95 Nissan pickup XE

Post

The day I must present myself to court I will take the fifth regardless of the court rules...and I will share the bottle with my attorney, the pretty juror young woman with blue eyes that smiles at me from time to time, with the accuser...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 240AAPASXA


Return to “Politics Etc.”