Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now I'm wondering what he does for a living. Maybe he's an activist or something/.
How do you make a living as an activist?
Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
501–510 of 615 posts
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#502This 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.
[deleted]
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#503This 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…
Thank you for sharing your story. It provides yet more evidence that no one should interact with police under any circumstance if it is at all avoidable.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good to know. I'm am getting rid of biometrics asap
Yeah, it's a pain-in-the-ass to always have to enter a code to open your phone, but I'd rather suffer that than have the cops hold my face in front of the phone to open it up.
You can keep your eyes closed or not look at the phone. I believe iOS needs your attention to allow biometrics. And a few times it fails, it will require the password.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#505Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> Anyhow, my point is that in the spirit of English Common Law, the foundational rule is that any probative evidence should be admissible. You're citing English common law, but this is one of the places where the US Constitution explicitly rejects English common law. Several clauses of the Constitution - including both the Fifth and Sixth amendment - were composed specifically to make these rejections explicit. For c…
> where the US Constitution explicitly rejects English common law
Or another way of putting it, the U.S. Constitution codified American Common Law, which had already evolved to guarantee a right to counsel in felony cases even before the revolution. English Common Law was already heading in that direction, AFAIU (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1923146), but hadn't yet affirmed it categorically--there were still exceptions and caveats in English law at the time of the American Revolution.
In hacker terms, the Common Law is a process, not a product.
But, yeah, things are far more complex than that little slice of history, which is why I said I didn't necessarily agree with the outcome of that particular case. But it's important to distinguish what you're trying to achieve from how you're trying to achieve it. The Bill of Rights has become articles of faith, which is problematic because there are definitely ways to apply and extend it that actually subvert the underlying principles and purposes.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it's a pain-in-the-ass to always have to enter a code to open your phone, but I'd rather suffer that than have the cops hold my face in front of the phone to open it up.
You can keep your eyes closed or not look at the phone. I believe iOS needs your attention to allow biometrics. And a few times it fails, it will require the password.
I guess the police would just force your eyes open. They would be allowed to drug you in this situation too.
The police most often use this kind of power in DUI cases where they extract your blood forceably. In the terms and conditions of your driver's licences in the USA most of them say that you agree to allow the police to do this.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#507Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#508Earlier 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
Well the idea originates with John Locke and other European Enlightenment thinkers...
Locke himself was English, so it's a real shame to see the state of human rights in the UK in 2021.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
> some cops are really good… That’s why you ask for a defense attorney. Police even tell you this in your Maranda rights. If they fail read you your rights prior to detainment any thing they get in response to their questions or requests cannot be used against you.
> If they fail read you your rights prior to detainment any thing they get in response to their questions or requests cannot be used against you. That's not true in theory or practice. They are supposed to issue a Miranda warning at the time of arrest or prior to interrogation; detainment is not arrest, asking questions is not interrogation. If they pull you over and ask how fast you were going, if you confess to spe…
If you are not under arrest then all you have to do is ask to leave. When this is somehow confusing you are free to request an attorney at any time.
Re: Police can’t demand you reveal your phone passcode then tell a jury you refused
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police job attracts most people who do not have a college degree, are white, and lean into conservative/justice-heavy politics. Many of those people are bullies. That doesn't mean anything about people that do not have a college degree, or white people, or conservative/justice-heavy politics, it just means something about the police job and the people who agree to take it. We're looking at probability of (white A…
If the US were to adopt the requirement of a police candidate having an A-level (or whatever the local equivalent is called, I can't figure it out), I predict the problem would solve itself within a generation. This requirement is not just an idea, but tried-and-working policy elsewhere.
And it's a requirement, or highly preferred in a lot of US jurisdictions as well.