Suspects Can Be Forced to Provide Smartphone Passcodes, Rules New Jersey Supreme Court

[theprizerevealed]

Not really, it would be tampering of evidence of a criminal investigation which could lead to serious jail time.

Maybe, but less than whatever it is they seek to obtain from the phone.

 

[shplock]

Wouldn't erasing the phone by using the wrong passcode be spoliation of evidence?
And, if this stands, what's the whole point of the beefed up security of mobile phones?

So your point is why should we all have door locks if the police can simply bash the door down?

 

[yaxomoxay]

Maybe, but less than whatever it is they seek to obtain from the phone.

It's 15/20 years of jail I think. Unless you have done something REALLY bad it wouldn't be a good idea.

 

[seek3r]

I think this is a good thing. Apple does not protect the iPhone for criminals to use it for criminal activities. Apple does not open the iPhone because building such a mechanism will create a backdoor, a universal key that cannot be protected and that will compromise all iPhone users to all threats, even from outside law enforcements. Apple complies with law enforcement in every other way. Some people misunderstand this and think Apple is trying to protect terrorists as long as they own an iPhone. That is not the case.

That said, forcing biometrics is one thing. Forcing someone to give up password is still forced testimony (This point however is outside of scope of what Apple is trying to do).

your last sentence is in direct contradiction to your first....

 

[shplock]

Understand: This is with a warrant. The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled on this, that the police can't just compel someone to unlock their phone and search it. The were unanimous on that: get a warrant.

Now, what THIS is that after they get a warrant, and the suspect still doesn't unlock it. It still stands that the police cannot do this without a warrant or you give them permission.

You have a good point though the police ALWAYS get a warrant. In the UK when the spooks want a warrant, the judge just rubber stamps it, literally. Similar case for all enforcement in the US.
No chance a judge is going to say no to a warrant to go on a fishing trip for somebody's phone.

 

[theprizerevealed]

It's 15/20 years of jail I think. Unless you have done something REALLY bad it wouldn't be a good idea.

I don't think so, that can't hold you in contempt for 15/20 years. Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court#United_States

 

[yaxomoxay]

Maybe, but less than whatever it is they seek to obtain from the phone.

I think one possible workaround would be a passcode that locks ALL apps with a randomly generated passcode (each app a different password) that the user doesn't know and can't know. That way the evidence would still be intact on the phone.
[automerge]1597175384[/automerge]

I don't think so, that can't hold you in contempt for 15/20 years

I was referring to tampering with evidence during a criminal trial.

 

[shplock]

Technically it doesn't. Your diary, your photo album, etc are not protected by the Fifth, otherwise no documentary evidence would be admissible in court. The phone is nothing else than a repository of documentary evidence (similar to your hard drive), therefore it's not protected by the Fifth - provided a warrant.
[automerge]1597172944[/automerge]


I mean... are you for McCarthyism?

Are you for Trumpism and total and utter deference to a narcissistic dictator who ignores the rule of law and the very democratic nature of the system. Look at Rodger Stone and out of the 36 pardons that Trump has issued 31 are for his cronies and lackeys.

 

[JosephAW]

Compel someone to self incrimination? Not likely to survive at the Supreme Court. Just take the 5th for now.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Are you for Trumpism and total and utter deference to a narcissistic dictator who ignores the rule of law and the very democratic nature of the system. Look at Rodger Stone and out of the 36 pardons that Trump has issued 31 are for his cronies and lackeys.

I.... don't even know how to reply to this post. You are aware that the rules on documentary evidence predate 2017, right?
[automerge]1597175580[/automerge]

Compel someone to self incrimination? Not likely to survive at the Supreme Court. Just take the 5th for now.

That wouldn't be self-incrimination. It's the equivalent of forcing (=through warrant) Bernie Madoff to hand over his documents, hard drives, etc.

 

[seek3r]

Technically it doesn't. Your diary, your photo album, etc are not protected by the Fifth, otherwise no documentary evidence would be admissible in court. The phone is nothing else than a repository of documentary evidence (similar to your hard drive), therefore it's not protected by the Fifth - provided a warrant.

Good analogy, wrong application. If your diary is written in a cipher or some made up language only you know the court can have the cops seize the diary but they can't compel you to translate it. They've seized the phone in this case, but without the passphrase they can't translate it.

 

[compwiz1202]

oops... I entered it wrong five times, darn... it’s erasing my phone

Exactly. Any one who would be doing anything shady would turn on erase on x failed attempts. Or just put in a bunch wrong until next try is in like 6 months.

 

[shplock]

Only violent protestors are being violated as their actions are indeed illegal. Or do laws regarding arson, robbery, murder, and assault not apply just because you are protesting?

Sorry but totally wrong. There was a journalist from the Guardian whose only crime was to be at the barrier to the square and the cops arrested him for no reason, refused to let him speak to the British Consulate and his lawyer. They refused to tell him what the charges were and kept him locked up in a cramped cell with other people and expect them all to adhere to Covid-19 protection measures which was impossible.
He was also physically assaulted by the police and shown no rights whatsoever. Does not sound like the paradise you Trump fans think it is.
The reason there are some violent protests in Portland is because Trump sent the goons in(unmarked armed military gangs) to to dominate and attack them. Before they came the protestors were peaceful.
Trump is the one causing the problems and not Biden.
Sorry you disagree but the truth is the truth and not fake news just because you or he does not like it.

Trump's press secretary said recently the president has never lied.
Trump said that facts do not get past him and he is so well informed.
In 2018 the BBC interviewed Trump who said that Ireland was part of the Uk, newsflash! It is not! It is part of the EU. Also Trump said (and repeatedly says) that he won Wisconsin and Reagan never won it. This is a lie as Reagan won it both in 1980 AND 1984!

So not only is Trump flat out wrong about Ireland and therefore not the most informed person ever but he also is a liar!

Checkmate!

 

[shplock]

I have legitimately forgotten passwords and would be out of luck: I know how everybody likes to harp on how terrible the United States is, nevertheless its constitution is actually pretty good. look at countries like Australia and France that have very strong criminal jail time penalties If you do not or can not produce the password when demanded by the court...

I am pretty sure that Trump has now pretty much destroyed the constitution and ignored it anway as all republicans tend to do.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Good analogy, wrong application. If your diary is written in a cipher or some made up language only you know the court can have the cops seize the diary but they can't compel you to translate it. They've seized the phone in this case, but without the passphrase they can't translate it.

Nah, the passcode is the equivalent of a key, not the equivalent of some hidden knowledge you have. You can be compelled to open a door that has a PIN code for entrance.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

Providing a passcode can be considered an admission that the device was in fact yours, in that sense there should be clear fifth amendment protections. If you've already admitted the phone is yours however the waters get much murkier and ultimately SCOTUS will need to weigh in.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Sorry but totally wrong. There was a journalist from the Guardian whose only crime was to be at the barrier to the square and the cops arrested him for no reason, refused to let him speak to the British Consulate and his lawyer. They refused to tell him what the charges were and kept him locked up in a cramped cell with other people and expect them all to adhere to Covid-19 protection measures which was impossible.
He was also physically assaulted by the police and shown no rights whatsoever. Does not sound like the paradise you Trump fans think it is.
The reason there are some violent protests in Portland is because Trump sent the goons in(unmarked armed military gangs) to to dominate and attack them. Before they came the protestors were peaceful.
Trump is the one causing the problems and not Biden.
Sorry you disagree but the truth is the truth and not fake news just because you or he does not like it.

Trump's press secretary said recently the president has never lied.
Trump said that facts do not get past him and he is so well informed.
In 2018 the BBC interviewed Trump who said that Ireland was part of the Uk, newsflash! It is not! It is part of the EU. Also Trump said (and repeatedly says) that he won Wisconsin and Reagan never won it. This is a lie as Reagan won it both in 1980 AND 1984!

So not only is Trump flat out wrong about Ireland and therefore not the most informed person ever but he also is a liar!

Checkmate!

Seriously stop it please. Trump has nothing to do with this thread which is about the State of New Jersey and the Bill of Rights. The fact that he's heading a branch of the Federal Government doesn't mean that he is to be included in each and every conversation.
Post flagged.

 

[theprizerevealed]

Nah, the passcode is the equivalent of a key, not the equivalent of some hidden knowledge you have. You can be compelled to open a door that has a PIN code for entrance.

The PIN IS knowledge - NOT a physical key!

 

[TrevorR90]

I’m all for privacy but what if the phone belonged to a pedophile or sex trafficker and law enforcement needed to get into the phone. Would people advocating for privacy change tune or would they still insist we not get into the pedophile/ sex traffickers phone?

 

[yaxomoxay]

The PIN IS knowledge - NOT a physical key!

In general I wouldn't disagree with you but many States do. SCOTUS hasn't ruled on it yet, so I guess we'll have to wait and see.
[automerge]1597176891[/automerge]

I’m all for privacy but what if the phone belonged to a pedophile or sex trafficker and law enforcement needed to get into the phone. Would people advocating for privacy change tune or would they still insist we not get into the pedophile/ sex traffickers phone?

The crime committed doesn't change the rules. The pedophile has the very same rights of you and me.

 

[seek3r]

Nah, the passcode is the equivalent of a key, not the equivalent of some hidden knowledge you have. You can be compelled to open a door that has a PIN code for entrance.

You may want to read this https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/opiniondoe22312.pdf

 

[I7guy]

I’m all for privacy but what if the phone belonged to a pedophile or sex trafficker and law enforcement needed to get into the phone. Would people advocating for privacy change tune or would they still insist we not get into the pedophile/ sex traffickers phone?

What if you were stopped for a minor traffic violation and the cops wanted access to your phone? Where is the line in the sand?

 

[thisisnotmyname]

I’m all for privacy but what if the phone belonged to a pedophile or sex trafficker and law enforcement needed to get into the phone. Would people advocating for privacy change tune or would they still insist we not get into the pedophile/ sex traffickers phone?

Or what if the phone held the plans for a perpetual motion machine? Or the DNA sequence of unicorns? Or photographs of a Sasquatch?

Sorry, I don't like it when people try to use their favorite boogeyman to bait others into diluting constitutional rights. First, fourth, fifth amendments and all the rest are there for the benefit of all individuals regardless of whether we like them or not, agree with them or not, or are a part of whatever the current widely demonized (for good reason or not) group is (terrorists, drug dealers, Muslims, pedophiles, hate groups, Uyghurs, sexual aggressors, Jews, gang members, Will Wheaton, hippies, the 1%, welfare queens, CEOs, militia members, Antifa, KKK, etc...).

 

[Treq]

In all fairness, spying on Americans by removing their rights is incredibly bi-partisan.

Apple–FBI encryption dispute - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ehhhh... I'd disagree with that assessment. The GOP have been pretty authoritarian to the point of the beginnings of fascism. They have consistently favored law enforcement over privacy rights. If any party is going to favor individual privacy rights it's going to be the democrats but certainly the justices they appoint are going to be less partisan and more reasonable than what trump has been coming up with.

 

[seek3r]

ehhhh... I'd disagree with that assessment. The GOP have been pretty authoritarian to the point of the beginnings of fascism. They have consistently favored law enforcement over privacy rights. If any party is going to favor individual privacy rights it's going to be the democrats but certainly the justices they appoint are going to be less partisan and more reasonable than what trump has been coming up with.

Agreed, it's quite possible for both sides to be bad but one side to be worse. The Democrats aren't *great* on this end of things, but the GOP is vastly worse.