Your cell phone and the police

[Leadeye]

I see the requirement for the warrant as a boundary line, when you cross that line you have now moved into a police state with all that comes with it.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Interesting points in this discussion. What we refer to as a "phone" is actually a computer we occasionally speak into. The phone part does have your list of contacts (mine includes Church Mouse, CBhausen and BrotherBill3 not to mention a couple area code 703 NRA POCs.) It also has your e-mail (who do I email?), photos (where do I go and take pictures? Who are these people?), music (5 hours and 48 minutes of music, did I pay for all of them?) I also have Text2Group (to whom do I send group texts?), security cameras app (there is an NVR somewhere with 12 days of footage), a doorbell app (who's been to my door? Helps with where to start looking in the 12 days of camera footage), and a SafeNet MobilePass (a code that changes every 30 seconds for remote access to my work computer. This KellyinAvon guy works where?)

I got my first iPhone in 2016 maybe. There is a whole lot you can find out about me from that little device we call a phone. I bet a lot of you have a lot more on your phone than I do.

What can I say, got a warrant?

 

[Principal Skinr]

its already been ruled by several state supreme courts (and maybe even SCOTUS) that they cannot compel someone to give out a password. fingerprints, yes. Passwords no.

Are you saying fingerprints in general, or a fingerprint pass key to the phone? I don't see the technical difference other than a password being less unique than a fingerprint for access.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Are you saying fingerprints in general, or a fingerprint pass key to the phone? I don't see the technical difference other than a password being less unique than a fingerprint for access.

Using the fingerprint reader to unlock the phone.

You have something tangible that can unlock the device, much like a physical key.

Now the passcode is wholly different. What if you dont know it? What if you honestly cannot remember? Its not beyond reason; I recently configured a new network device and within a couple days forgot which passcode I set. Couldnt recall for the life of me and it ended up being easier to factory reset it and spend 30 minutes setting it up again.

What if that was an NVR that captured a cop being shot? And what if they also think it was me on camera doing it? They demand the password, which I do not recall. Honestly. So they throw me in jail to "think about it" They take me to the judge and the judge also demands I give up the password. I can't. Judge doesnt believe me and orders me held until I decide to cooperate.

How much would that suck?

They cannot prove that you know but are just being uncooperative. Therefore its not lawful for them to require divulging that info.

 

[Principal Skinr]

Using the fingerprint reader to unlock the phone.

You have something tangible that can unlock the device, much like a physical key.

Now the passcode is wholly different. What if you dont know it? What if you honestly cannot remember? Its not beyond reason; I recently configured a new network device and within a couple days forgot which passcode I set. Couldnt recall for the life of me and it ended up being easier to factory reset it and spend 30 minutes setting it up again.

What if that was an NVR that captured a cop being shot? And what if they also think it was me on camera doing it? They demand the password, which I do not recall. Honestly. So they throw me in jail to "think about it" They take me to the judge and the judge also demands I give up the password. I can't. Judge doesnt believe me and orders me held until I decide to cooperate.

How much would that suck?

They cannot prove that you know but are just being uncooperative. Therefore its not lawful for them to require divulging that info.

I'll tell them I forgot my fingerprint.

Honestly, if they act professionally and ask, I'd have no reason not to share with them, if it served what I believe is a reasonable purpose. Hell, if I had something like a cop getting shot on there, they wouldn't have to ask. I'd be sharing it with them. Then again, I don't go around photographing or recording video very often, especially when something crazy is going down. I just don't get how the first thing some people do in a crisis is pull out that phone.

 

[Doug]

 

[Cameramonkey]

I'll tell them I forgot my fingerprint.

Honestly, if they act professionally and ask, I'd have no reason not to share with them, if it served what I believe is a reasonable purpose. Hell, if I had something like a cop getting shot on there, they wouldn't have to ask. I'd be sharing it with them. Then again, I don't go around photographing or recording video very often, especially when something crazy is going down. I just don't get how the first thing some people do in a crisis is pull out that phone.

I agree on principle. I've provided footage to IMPD twice. Just illustrating a good reason why they cannot force someone to produce information from memory.

 

[actaeon277]

If they have a warrant to search your house, they can get a locksmith.
Same with the car.
But a computer/phone, how is that different? They can hire a codebreaker, or electronics firm.
To me, providing your password is self incrimination.
How is it NOT?


I'm not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm trying to understand how it is NOT self incrimination?

 

[Cameramonkey]

If they have a warrant to search your house, they can get a locksmith.
Same with the car.
But a computer/phone, how is that different? They can hire a codebreaker, or electronics firm.
To me, providing your password is self incrimination.
How is it NOT?


I'm not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm trying to understand how it is NOT self incrimination?

Much to the consternation of many govts apple at least makes it as difficult as possible to break into these phones. So it’s not always as simple as forcing your way in.

 

[actaeon277]

Much to the consternation of many govts apple at least makes it as difficult as possible to break into these phones. So it’s not always as simple as forcing your way in.

That is beside the point.
The point is, your phone has incriminating evidence on it. It is the police's job to find it. But, you are not supposed to be required to incriminate yourself.
Giving your password is incriminating yourself.


Are you next going to be required to point out all evidence that the police may have missed?

 

[Denny347]

If they have a warrant to search your house, they can get a locksmith.
Same with the car.
But a computer/phone, how is that different? They can hire a codebreaker, or electronics firm.
To me, providing your password is self incrimination.
How is it NOT?


I'm not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm trying to understand how it is NOT self incrimination?

Therein lies the rub. It is self incrimination. However, the encryption is good enough in these devices that many cannot be forced without losing the data.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

What if your Kroger or Meijer loyalty card information is stored on your phone??

 

[Cameramonkey]

Therein lies the rub. It is self incrimination. However, the encryption is good enough in these devices that many cannot be forced without losing the data.

Exactly my point. Thanks, Denny.

Lots of people got butthurt when Apple wouldnt use their inside info to help the FBI crack open the San Bernadino Terrorists' phones. They admitted they probably could, but it would set a bad precedent if they did so they wouldnt. (hackers figured out it was possible a couple days later and still got the data as I recall) If they did it for those criminals, next it could be a Christian pastor in the middle east who was considered a criminal by that regime's standards and so it would make the encryption less effective overall. SO they decided not to wade into ANY of the cases and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[BigShow]

I do not think I should be able to be force to unlock my phone in any way shape or form.

The rules on compelled decryption are more lenient at the U.S. border, where federal agents have given themselves wide authority to search the phones of people entering the country ─ and have reportedly spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on third-party hacking tools.

This I do not have a problem with, as illegal aliens have 0 Constitutional rights.

 

[Shadow01]

Therein lies the rub. It is self incrimination. However, the encryption is good enough in these devices that many cannot be forced without losing the data.

Would it be any different if you had a safe that could only be opened by explosives? The chance of losing the contents would be the same.

 

[actaeon277]

Would it be any different if you had a safe that could only be opened by explosives? The chance of losing the contents would be the same.

that's a better analogy then my house analogy.
If a safe cracker can't open it, or you're in a small town and there isn't a safe cracker (locksmith), would a warrant compel you to provide the combination?

 

[Cameramonkey]

that's a better analogy then my house analogy.
If a safe cracker can't open it, or you're in a small town and there isn't a safe cracker (locksmith), would a warrant compel you to provide the combination?

Whether it is electronic or turning of a dial, as Denny posted up thread, it is self-incrimination.

 

[Sigblitz]

He refused to provide his password because they were on a fishing expedition. The did get a warrant. The warrant should have specified what evidence they were looking for. The problem with getting a warrant to search your phone for nothing specific is it will lead to searching your home or car for nothing specific. I would have to assume the phone warrant stated specifically what they were looking for, and not just any evidence to support a hunch. Your right to privacy is bigger than any one case.

 

[Denny347]

Would it be any different if you had a safe that could only be opened by explosives? The chance of losing the contents would be the same.

Possibly. On a side note, I'm not sure there isn't a safe built that CANNOT be cut open given enough time. Excluding bank vaults...but even then

 

[HoughMade]

If they have a warrant to search your house, they can get a locksmith.
Same with the car.
But a computer/phone, how is that different? They can hire a codebreaker, or electronics firm.
To me, providing your password is self incrimination.
How is it NOT?


I'm not trying to be a smart ass.
I'm trying to understand how it is NOT self incrimination?

The same way opening your door to keep your door jam from being destroyed isn’t self-incrimination.

You cannot be forced to testify against yourself. There is no constitutional right to not provide evidence.