Child porn suspect jailed indefinitely for refusing to decrypt hard drives

[enragedgorilla]

It's like that XKCD cartoon where the criminal gloats that nobody can decrypt his drive but then authorities hit him with a wrench until he agrees to comply.


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...t-hard-drives/

A Philadelphia man suspected of possessing child pornography has been in jail for seven months and counting after being found in contempt of a court order demanding that he decrypt two password-protected hard drives.

The suspect, a former Philadelphia Police Department sergeant, has not been charged with any child porn crimes. Instead, he remains indefinitely imprisoned in Philadelphia's Federal Detention Center for refusing to unlock two drives encrypted with Apple's FileVault software in a case that once again highlights the extent to which the authorities are going to crack encrypted devices. The man is to remain jailed "until such time that he fully complies" with the decryption order.

The suspect's attorney, Federal Public Defender Keith Donoghue, urged a federal appeals court on Tuesday to release his client immediately, pending the outcome of appeals. "Not only is he presently being held without charges, but he has never in his life been charged with a crime," Donoghue wrote (PDF) in his brief to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals.

The government successfully cited a 1789 law known as the All Writs Act to compel (PDF) the suspect to decrypt two hard drives it believes contain child pornography.

The authorities have called two witnesses. One was the suspect's sister who claimed she looked at child pornography with her brother at his house. The other was a forensic examiner who testified that it was his "best guess" that child pornography was on the drives," Donoghue wrote. The investigation began in 2015 when Pennsylvania prosecutors were monitoring the online network Freenet and executed a search warrant of the man's home.

Donoghue wrote that investigators had decrypted a Mac Pro using a recovery key discovered on the iPhone 5S the authorities seized from his client's residence. He said no child pornography was found. The authorities want the suspect to decrypt two external drives discovered in the search.

Does the 5th protect against this? Seems very odd that you are compelled to provide help to decode something that may or may not incriminate you.
You are essentially tying the rope they will use to hang you.
1789 Law?
Seems a bit of an overreach to me...but that is my ...non lawyer / judge opinion.

I have no clue ..cyber crime is relatively "new" and ...changing so fast.

[Bullettime]

Lol BoR nonsense? The 5th amendment is very real and this is about as obvious of an infraction as there can be. Quote me in your sig. Come back to me when this case is over.

He will be freed even if he doesn't comply and decrypt his HD (on the contempt charge, what they find thereafter is another story), and he will win a large lawsuit against the court.

Pretty much. All he has to do is ride the bullshit until his lawyer gets him off scot free PLUS he'll get significant amounts of money in damages.

- - - Updated - - -

Does the 5th protect against this?

I have no clue ..cybercrime is relatively "new" and ...changing so fast.

Yes because providing his password and unlocking the hard drives provides evidence against himself. If they want the evidence, then they have to find another way in.

[Deleted]

Pretty much. All he has to do is ride the bullshit until his lawyer gets him off scot free PLUS he'll get significant amounts of money in damages.

And labeled a paedophile for the rest of his natural life. Cast out by his community and social circle, so it's not all bad I guess.

[Eroginous]

It's like that XKCD cartoon where the criminal gloats that nobody can decrypt his drive but then authorities hit him with a wrench until he agrees to comply.


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...t-hard-drives/

A Philadelphia man suspected of possessing child pornography has been in jail for seven months and counting after being found in contempt of a court order demanding that he decrypt two password-protected hard drives.

The suspect, a former Philadelphia Police Department sergeant, has not been charged with any child porn crimes. Instead, he remains indefinitely imprisoned in Philadelphia's Federal Detention Center for refusing to unlock two drives encrypted with Apple's FileVault software in a case that once again highlights the extent to which the authorities are going to crack encrypted devices. The man is to remain jailed "until such time that he fully complies" with the decryption order.

The suspect's attorney, Federal Public Defender Keith Donoghue, urged a federal appeals court on Tuesday to release his client immediately, pending the outcome of appeals. "Not only is he presently being held without charges, but he has never in his life been charged with a crime," Donoghue wrote (PDF) in his brief to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals.

The government successfully cited a 1789 law known as the All Writs Act to compel (PDF) the suspect to decrypt two hard drives it believes contain child pornography.

The authorities have called two witnesses. One was the suspect's sister who claimed she looked at child pornography with her brother at his house. The other was a forensic examiner who testified that it was his "best guess" that child pornography was on the drives," Donoghue wrote. The investigation began in 2015 when Pennsylvania prosecutors were monitoring the online network Freenet and executed a search warrant of the man's home.

Donoghue wrote that investigators had decrypted a Mac Pro using a recovery key discovered on the iPhone 5S the authorities seized from his client's residence. He said no child pornography was found. The authorities want the suspect to decrypt two external drives discovered in the search.

Was it actual child porn? Like pictures of naked children that aren't related to him in a familial way? Cuz pics of your kids in the bathtub that one time when they were being cute, doesn't count as child porn. We need more info.

[Sorrior]

People turn off their critical thinking skills when it comes to Terrorism and Child endangerment.

Hey some of us have the reverse happen...we get incredibly suspicious of people trying to manipulate us

[Detritivores]

But it's up to the defense to prove incompetence/corruption of the investigators. Its not up to the prosecutor to prove that there was no incompetence or corruption. The assumption is that the investigation was handled correctly until evidence is presented to show that it may not have been.

You seem confused. The assumption is that the prosecution is wrong unless they can prove otherwise. Again, no on is assuming they're wrong because they're incompetent or malicious. We assume they're wrong because that's what the law dictates.

- - - Updated - - -

Besides a pirated copy of Adobe Photoshop, plus a bunch of pirated mp3s/TV Shows/Movies , I'm in possession of absolutely nothing unlawful. Neither do I partake in any criminal activity beyond downloading said content.
I'm pretty happy to take my chances that the police aren't going to pursue charges against my illicit collection of Game of Thrones episodes during an investigation into whether I've got videos of children being abused on my hard drive.
I'd sure as fuck take that risk to clear my name.

But oh no! One of your porn views, unbeknownst to you, involved a minor. RIP in federal prison. Good thing you complied with unlawful searches.

- - - Updated - - -

This is the one of the most insidious arguments that people use that destroy your rights as a US citizen. On the surface, it sounds good but, in reality, things go wrong all the time. People use similar arguments about people that use the 5th amendment...they assume the person must be guilty, but that isn't what is going on.

This is a long watch, but everyone should really watch this to understand. It is a lawyer explaining why the 5th amendment is so very important, and why you shouldn't talk to the police without a lawyer present.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Mandatory re-plug of this video to explain why you don't hand over all your shit for no reason.

- - - Updated - - -

so you know all the details? are you making a informed comment or a feelings comment

Clearly making a feelings comment. We all know that N. Korea is a superior society. I'm sure Daish agrees.

[Deleted]

But oh no! One of your porn views, unbeknownst to you, involved a minor. RIP in federal prison. Good thing you complied with unlawful searches.

Considering I'm mostly into GILF and BBW, I think your scenario is pretty unlikely.

[Reeve]

This is par for the course in contempt of court cases. I'm not sure why the OP decided to bring to light some dude in jail on kiddie porn when, if one wanted to piss upon the concept of contempt, there are far better means and examples from which to do so.

If it's par for the course, the par is wrong.

There's a reason people are guaranteed a speedy trial. If the prosecution didn't feel they had enough evidence to convict him, they shouldn't have arrested him in the first place. A defendant should never be compelled to provide evidence against themselves.

[Citizen T]

I really don't feel sympathy for him. They had a warrant and he's obstructing their right to search. If he wants out, then he should just give them the decryption key, else he should be charged to the full extent of the law.

Governments don't have rights. They have powers. Individuals (and groups of individuals) have rights.

just sayin...

[Wildtree]

Is it illegal to view child porn? Manufacturing and distribution - obviously - but I wasn't aware that viewing it was a criminal activity.

Possession is illegal.
https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceo...ld-pornography

Federal law prohibits the production, distribution, reception, and possession of an image of child pornography using or affecting any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce (See 18 U.S.C. § 2251; 18 U.S.C. § 2252; 18 U.S.C. § 2252A).

on the applicable state level:
http://www.philadelphiacriminalattor...d-pornography/

Pennsylvania law makes it a crime to intentionally or knowingly view or possess books, magazines, photos, videos, computer depictions or other materials that depict children under 18 engaging in sexual acts or simulating those acts.

I hope that clears that question up.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

You seem confused. The assumption is that the prosecution is wrong unless they can prove otherwise. Again, no on is assuming they're wrong because they're incompetent or malicious. We assume they're wrong because that's what the law dictates.

Not confused at all. Read what he was writing. He is saying that the police are incompetent and corrupt.

Just pointing out the investigation was handled by law enforcement is more than enough to place into question the handling of a case. All one needs to do is look into how law enforcement has behaved with Stingrays to see that.

No, the accuser should ALWAYS be assumed to have conducted everything improperly and should be forced show that is was done correctly and legally. The accused on the other hand need only show reasonable doubt to get off scott free.

[The Stormbringer]

If he has nothing to hide, why wouldn't he give them the password?

[Eshalon]

it is self incrimination, he is being held and they are trying to force him to do something. they cannot force the suspect/accused to do anything. He has the right to remain silent.

Its not self incrimination. If it has gone this far its safe to assume they have had a warrant. In which case he is refusing access. Which is a crime.

Claiming the 5th is not refusing a warrant of search, its denying answering questions that would incriminate yourself with a crime by directly using your questions.

However you all may feel. No laws are being broken here.

And to the guy who said the murder weapon thing. That is very different. In your scenario, Police accuse someone of a murder, then hold him until he produces the weapon. In this scenario, There was an accusation, a witness that provides reasonable doubt, a warrant that provides access to his things, and a refusal to allow access to his things.

To change the murder scenario from an earlier OP. Police accuse man of murder, witness agrees murder happens, warrant to search house begins, man has locked safe, refuse to open safe, he is held in contempt until he unlocks his safe.

[The Stormbringer]

I think the moral of this story is essentially that the United States Bill of Rights is fucking retarded.

"His rights are being violated." "Well his rights are stupid."

Are... are you even real?

[Torgent]

Its not self incrimination. If it has gone this far its safe to assume they have had a warrant. In which case he is refusing access. Which is a crime.

Claiming the 5th is not refusing a warrant of search, its denying answering questions that would incriminate yourself with a crime by directly using your questions.

However you all may feel. No laws are being broken here.

And to the guy who said the murder weapon thing. That is very different. In your scenario, Police accuse someone of a murder, then hold him until he produces the weapon. In this scenario, There was an accusation, a witness that provides reasonable doubt, a warrant that provides access to his things, and a refusal to allow access to his things.

To change the murder scenario from an earlier OP. Police accuse man of murder, witness agrees murder happens, warrant to search house begins, man has locked safe, refuse to open safe, he is held in contempt until he unlocks his safe.

No. Not at all. They have his hard drive. They are asking him to unlock it, which he has no obligation to do. The search warrant applies to items, they have all of the items. They don't have the capability to access and analyze the items, and that isn't the suspect's problem. If they can't find the evidence on their own, that's their problem. You shouldn't have made an account just to post to prove to us that you don't know what you're talking about.

[Reeve]

Its not self incrimination. If it has gone this far its safe to assume they have had a warrant. In which case he is refusing access. Which is a crime.

Claiming the 5th is not refusing a warrant of search, its denying answering questions that would incriminate yourself with a crime by directly using your questions.

However you all may feel. No laws are being broken here.

And to the guy who said the murder weapon thing. That is very different. In your scenario, Police accuse someone of a murder, then hold him until he produces the weapon. In this scenario, There was an accusation, a witness that provides reasonable doubt, a warrant that provides access to his things, and a refusal to allow access to his things.

To change the murder scenario from an earlier OP. Police accuse man of murder, witness agrees murder happens, warrant to search house begins, man has locked safe, refuse to open safe, he is held in contempt until he unlocks his safe.

They have access to his things. They shouldn't be able to compel him to operate his things for them though. And they certainly shouldn't be able to hold him indefinitely without trial.

If they have evidence to convict him, go ahead and arrest him. Otherwise, you shouldn't be able to hold him.

[Detritivores]

Considering I'm mostly into GILF and BBW, I think your scenario is pretty unlikely.

That's super cool for you I guess, but most people don't focus exclusively on old ladies. My point stands.

[Kaeth]

Drawing or not. People who collect sexually explicit Loli drawings deserve jail just as much as people with photos and videos.
I don't give two shits whether it's 'real' or not. If you get enjoyment out of looking at that kind of shit you're as fucking sick as your standard garden variety paedophile.

Yes, let's jail people with a mental illness who haven't caused harm and are not likely to cause harm to anyone based purely on your illogical emotional appeal.

We should also jail action movie fans for promoting assault and murder. Have to be comprehensive with this kind of stupid bullshit. Don't want to be a hypocrite!

[Noradin]

This has happened to you has it? Where do you live? Mexico?

Please give me one example of when police have used their stop and search powers and proceeded to confiscate money from the subject despite finding no evidence of criminal activity.

We were talking about the US, weren't we? Why would we bring up Mexico?
Just did a litte search and picked the first source that came up, it is pretty old news after all:
link

Good enough for you?

[Detritivores]

Not confused at all. Read what he was writing. He is saying that the police are incompetent and corrupt.

Again, I don't feel like it makes a difference. Burden is on them to prove someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That means the default position is that the accusation is wrong and they have to prove otherwise. Why it's wrong is not important.