Defendant Ordered to Decrypt Laptop May Have Forgotten Password

[TEAMJACOB]

Worst case the FBI rips back the cord on a standard issue chain saw and case closed

[ThreeFingerPete]

Unless you lose your house becaues part of the mortgage scheme involves taking your payments but not applying them to your account and your house is foreclosed.

Then I'd bet you'd be all like "oh, help me justice system....."

A crime committed against one citizen does not necessitate trampling the rights of another.

[sc281]

A crime committed against one citizen does not necessitate trampling the rights of another.

Abso-f'n-lutely.

[sc281]

Someone can clarify, but is this any different than when you have to allow your place to be searched due to warrants?

It's one thing for you to let them look, it's entirely another to lead them to the evidence.

It's akin to the Judge making you go into your house and take the drugs out of your hiding place FOR the cops, because the cops can't find it.

You are proving the prosecutions case for them, and you have a right not to self incriminate under the 5th Amendment.

[CJ]

It's akin to the Judge making you go into your house and take the weed out of your hiding place FOR the cops, because the cops can't find it.

You are proving the prosecutions case for them, and you have a right not to self incriminate under the 5th Amendment.

I agree with what you're saying. But I think it would be more closely compared to the cops trying to enter your house, but being unable to do so, and asking you to bring them the key to unlock the door.

Which I find equally interesting from a legal perspective.

[ceyko]

It's one thing for you to let them look, it's entirely another to lead them to the evidence.

It's akin to the Judge making you go into your house and take the drugs out of your hiding place FOR the cops, because the cops can't find it.

You are proving the prosecutions case for them, and you have a right not to self incriminate under the 5th Amendment.

With a warrant, it seems no different than the door being locked and you opening or them busting it down or otherwise entering.....with the warrant.

The article was not real clear if there was a warrant for that aspect of the laptop, sort of seemed like they'd have to get it.

[sc281]

I agree with what you're saying. But I think it would be more closely compared to the cops trying to enter your house, but being unable to do so, and asking you to bring them the key to unlock the door.

Which I find equally interesting from a legal perspective.

Yea, I was gonna say something like that, but didn't feel like dealing with the inevitable post of "Well, what if they used a battering ram, etc....."

With a warrant, it seems no different than the door being locked and you opening or them busting it down or otherwise entering.....with the warrant.

The article was not real clear if there was a warrant for that aspect of the laptop, sort of seemed like they'd have to get it.

Up until this ruling, the 5th amendment guaranteed the right not to incriminate yourself in any way. The very reason we have the 5th amendment is because King George would force you to tell them what illegal stuff you did so they can throw you in jail for it.

I'm glad she's fighting this decision all the way to the Supreme Court, and I hope they make the right call.

She's still a scumbag, but she's in the right on this issue.

[line-em-up]

...

I'd tell em, "Decrypt this motherfuckers!"

[SMEGMA STENCH]

I guess she falls into the 1% of mortgage fraud that is committed by the customers of the mortgage company, and not the mortgage company itself. That's not the actual statistic of course, IIRC it was actually like 6%. The mortgage companies are only responsible for 94% of all the fraud.

[Gargamel]

LMAO.... Let them decrypt THAT!

[03trubluGT]

Just out of curiosity, if hearsay from a citizen (co-defendant) is the basis of the warrant, is the warrant even valid?
I've always heard hearsay is not admissible in a court of law. lol... Is that just hearsay?

I don't believe pure hearsay is enough for PC. It has to be corroborated before it can meet the standard of Probable Cause, or as known in the hood "Proper Causes".

A crime committed against one citizen does not necessitate trampling the rights of another.

This would be far from trampling of someone's rights. Would you rather a person maintain the right to victimize you or someone you love?

[03trubluGT]

It's one thing for you to let them look, it's entirely another to lead them to the evidence.

It's akin to the Judge making you go into your house and take the drugs out of your hiding place FOR the cops, because the cops can't find it.

You are proving the prosecutions case for them, and you have a right not to self incriminate under the 5th Amendment.

No it's not. She's not leading them to the evidence, it's there and she's refusing access.

Say I'm hiding stolen guns in my safe, and the police have a search warrant. I can refuse to open the safe, and they can call in a blowtorch.

[sc281]

No it's not. She's not leading them to the evidence, it's there and she's refusing access.

Say I'm hiding stolen guns in my safe, and the police have a search warrant. I can refuse to open the safe, and they can call in a blowtorch.

Exactly right.

I can refuse to open the laptop, and they can call in whatever the hell they want.

Not my problem if they can't get into it. I won't incriminate myself by opening it for them.

[Forever_frost]

Exactly right.

I can refuse to open the laptop, and they can call in whatever the hell they want.

Not my problem if they can't get into it. I won't incriminate myself by opening it for them.

Exactly. A judge can order anything he wants. If there's something on that laptop that is incriminating and she knows she's going to jail, well, I'd rather sit there on contempt charges

[SMEGMA STENCH]

You can't argue with the cops man. Everyone's a criminal, and the and the jacked up system is always right. Even though by design its subject to change. And I like how stupid they are when they ask people why they carry a gun. I can't even count the times I've had some sheriff/cop/HIpo ask me that over the course of my life. Its written all over their face, that they ask cause they're piss scared of being shot, even though they opted for the job. Yet they don't realize that if we lose our guns... guess who is next. They're so hypocritical. They'd prefer we not have guns, yet they damn sure want one to defend their own life. And then on top of all this, they wonder why average (non-criminals) people don't like them. This is why I'm still an advocate of an IQ test for any would be LEO, as well as paying them much more than they currently make. Like double or even triple.