Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 615 posts

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#391

Post by maerF0x0 »

wahern wrote: post #385
dahart wrote: post #128

> this case turns on one of the most fundamental protections in our constitutional system: an accused person’s ability to exercise his Fifth Amendment rights without having his silence used against him. A very interesting tidbit I learned here on HN a couple years back — the Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that you have to declare out loud an intent to invoke your Fifth Amendment rights, if you haven’t been formally arre…

There's a certain irony in people thinking this was a bad decision. Let me explain: The right against self-incrimination originally arose because of a quirk in English law relative to continental European law, and middle-age French law in particular. See, in France judicial execution was only permissible if the accused confessed . You couldn't use evidence as justification to execute someone; the defendant had to con…

> but surely nobody would confess to a crime they didn't commit.

And then we consider the concept of reduced sentences for a plea. A plea bargain can allow one to consider pleading guilty for a crime which was not committed, but is too costly or improbable to defend. So we do get people confessing things they didn't do.

Also we get the even further stage in that officers are allowed to lie about a reduced sentence being offered for a plea. And when it comes to trial the offer is no where to be found, but the confession remains.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#392

Post by jsilence »

hutrdvnj wrote: post #64
jsilence wrote: post #58

If the government has my fingerprints, would they be allowed to use them to unlock the confiscated phone? Might explain why in Germany as of lately you have your fingerprints taken when getting your personal ID (Personalausweis).

I think it's possible to deny that.

It was possible to deny it. As of July this year it is mandatory.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#393

Post by kingcharles »

bleachedsleet wrote: post #376
kingcharles wrote: post #264

This happened to me. The police wanted my password and refused my right to silence, wouldn't let me call a lawyer. I wouldn't talk. Then they threatened my wife and I gave up my password to stop them from hurting her. The password was suppressed by the court, but they let the police use it anyway because one of the officers (with no formal computer qualifications) testified he could have broken 2048-bit AES encryptio…

Also, if you do use biometrics and ever find yourself in a sticky situation most modern operating systems have built in features to quickly disable them on demand. iOS, for example, allows you to quickly disable Face/Touch ID by holding the side+any volume button for two seconds and then quickly tap the side button again when the shutdown slide appears.

Probably won't have time. I had a loaded gun pointed at my head and told not to touch my phone. Had every reason to believe they would have fired.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#394

Post by kingcharles »

giantg2 wrote: post #382
kingcharles wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I live you can only appeal once you're found guilty at a trial. The case is over 8 years old now and I still haven't had trial. I would hope the appeal court would reverse, but I've had about a dozen cases wrongly denied by the appellate courts recently. The appellate courts are pretty much as biased as the trial courts, especially at the state level. The federal courts are a little bit smarter. I've tried talk…

Sounds like a nightmare, but also unsurprising based on my limited experiences. I hope you are outside the statue of limitations or speedy trial window by now.

Statute of limitations only applies to charging someone, not after they've been charged.

Speedy trial doesn't apply in almost any situation you can think of. It's almost impossible to beat a case on speedy trial grounds. All my speedy trial motions have been denied so far, most recently because of COVID. I'm still working this angle though.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#395

Post by jsilence »

avianlyric wrote: post #63
jsilence wrote: post #58

If the government has my fingerprints, would they be allowed to use them to unlock the confiscated phone? Might explain why in Germany as of lately you have your fingerprints taken when getting your personal ID (Personalausweis).

What do American constitutional protections have to do with German ID?

Also in other jurisdictions people have the right to not incriminate themselves by refusing to answer questions.

If I am allowed to refuse giving my pin code for unlocking the phone, it would be interesting whether the police is allowed to use your fingerprint to unlock your phone.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#396

Post by SavantIdiot »

giantg2 wrote: post #384
SavantIdiot wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello privilege. "Incriminating" is whatever the man with the badge decides it is at that time. If you're aren't the right color, sex, orientation, or religion, you could be doing something considered incriminating by cops and courts in most of the US. It is a very red, conservative place outside of the cities.

Not sure why you had to add that last sentence. The prior statements can be true in cities or "blue" places too.

True, Portland, Ore. police department are documented white supremacists and clan sympathizers, and there's not many places bluer than PDX. But my last statement is 100% true. There's only one side in the corrupt police debate, regardless of your feelings of "both sides are the same". Show me where the liberal cops standing up for social justice and BLM are hiding, please, I'd love to live in that town.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#397

Post by jsilence »

pasabagi wrote: post #387
inglor_cz wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? Because in neighboring Czechia, a court can definitely rule evidence inadmissible if its gathering was legally unsound. For example, call recordings that were obtained without lawful permission can be thrown out and actually currently were in a highly visible case.

Well, according to the wikipedia article, it goes to the extent that even if you've got evidence through, say, coercion, while that evidence would be invalid, you could use that information so obtained to collect further valid evidence, or even just get the suspect to repeat the previous statements (not under coercion) then resubmit it. But I've mostly just got this from my wife complaining about it. There's very lit…

Thank you for detailing this!

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#398

Post by rootusrootus »

giantg2 wrote: post #390
rootusrootus wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a police officer is considered an officer of the court [1]. His exposure to consequences for lying is higher than the average citizen under oath. Given two conflicting statements that cannot be resolved with evidence, it isn't a surprise that the judge is going to defer to the cop. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/officer_of_the_court

It should be surprising that they defer to the cop. That's basically assuming that one is guilty without proving it. At a minimum, it should objectively provide reasonable doubt. I have an experience where a trooper lied to the court twice and I have evidence to back it up. Nobody cares . I tried a the ACLU (bigger fish to fry), a complaint with the department (they counseled him and made the excuse that they have a…

Are you talking about a judge, or a jury? An officer of the court is compelled to tell the truth, under oath or not. A jury is not required to give an officer of the court any more weight than they give to anyone else.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#399

Post by andrewxdiamond »

oohaargh wrote: post #274
clarkmoody wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The intent of the Bill of Rights is that all humans have those rights, and the document restrains the federal government concerning them. So the people in the UK have the right against self-incrimination, but the state systematically violates it.

This is such a hilariously weird take on how rights work. I don't want to tar all Americans with the same brush, but I think only someone from the US could possibly have come up with this

Ideologically, this is exactly how the US Bill of Rights works.

The rights listed in the Bill of Rights are unalienable, natural, and apply regardless of your citizenship status.

Of course this is weird from another country’s perspective, but it is the mentality that many Americans take because to us, it is right.

Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused

#400

Post by kingcharles »

LinuxBender wrote: post #20

Sortof off topic question. I've never owned a smart phone but might get one soon assuming I can find a decent one that will run grapheneOS. Is there an app that can be given permission to intercept the unlock code and upon receiving the panic/under duress code, discretely put the phone into a "parental controls" configuration that sandboxes all your data and only presents the storage you want the law enforcement chil…

The idea about planting data is important. The police did all sorts of weird shit to my digital devices. Would not have known about it except that a forensic guy was taking photos in the room and accidentally caught the police in the background making changes.

Try getting your own forensic guy to see what changes were made. You need money for this. The court is supposed to supply you one, but often they do not, so you cannot show that the data was planted.

Post reply on HN