On the other hand, police and prosecutors are allowed to obtain evidence with a warrant from a judge.
This is the reasoning many defense attorneys use when prosecutors try to force suspects to unlock their iPhones.
Admitting to owning a phone thats believed to contain incriminating evidence is testimony, because youre adding new information to the case.It would be really fantastic if Americans could also enjoy a common understanding of how to protect their digital rights.Lets send a passcode case to the Supreme Court.This is getting out of hand, guys.And then, maybe, five years from now, well finally have an answer from the highest court in the land.Both suspects claimed that they couldnt remember their passcodes which prevented police from obtaining evidence.According to actual legal experts, the phone-unlocking debate is so challenging because the Fifth Amendment defense depends on whether or not the suspect is actually testifying by giving up a passcode or fingerprint.
The suspect pleaded the Fifth and refused to sign anything.
Then again, maybe that suspect on his way to jail in Florida will appeal and appeal and appeal.
Are you sure you want to change your settings?While a suspect cant reasonably claim that they forgot how to sign their name, they can definitely claim to have forgotten their passcode, as the two suspects in Florida have.In the other case, the judge basically said, Okay, sorry you cant remember, no big deal, lets move.If its unclear who owns the locked device, however, things get dicier.In one case, the judge slapped the suspect with contempt and sentenced him to 180 days in jail.Thats what we did with the recent Lexmark printer ink case that determined once and for all that companies couldnt claim patent rights on products after theyd been sold to consumers.After all, the very act of supplying a key doesnt add any new facts to the case.Now, as it were, Americans can enjoy the privilege of not wondering if theyre going to get screwed over even more by huge corporations.