View Single Post
billybobsky
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.
 
2012-01-24, 22:40

Quote:
Originally Posted by kscherer View Post
Now, if this woman were being called as a witness against someone else, then the government would have the authority to order her to testify as to the information in her laptop. But she is not being ordered to testify against someone else, she is being ordered to testify against herself. To testify is to "serve as evidence or proof of something's existing or being the case", and by releasing what she has in her head, she is validating the existence of information that the government is, on its own, unable to prove exists. **That** is self incrimination.
No.


She isn't testifying against herself. She isn't testifying what is on her laptop. She is merely being required to produce a password that allows the government access to something they already have a warrant for.

Self incrimination on the other hand is being coerced to make statements that may or may not be incriminating. A password is NOT one of those. Nor is giving your name (for instance, already decided as not protected under either the 1st or 5th amendment).

This isn't ANY different than the safe example.


Look: you either admit that by the warrant she must provide full access to information contained in a safe (in this case it is digital) or you let the government get the right to force backdoors into every encryption program out there.
  quote