Guy locked-up forever for forgetting his password.

[Jehanne]

freenet, vm, and search log with specific terms, separately might not be much, but together looks pretty damn suspicious. But if he claims to forgotten the password, can't the feds just break the damn password? They are good at breaking apple protection after all...

That is very true; the NAS can crack passwords at something like a trillion guesses per second.  If the feds can't crack it, then it must be a pretty complex password, difficult to remember.

[SteelCurtain]

Nope, but it's probable cause for investigating me.

And if someone reports me because they've seen child porn on my computer, then if you legally seize my computer and find child porn search terms and indexing files on there but not the files, then yes, that is considered enough to hold someone from being in public, where they could, you know, harm a child.

But not for possession. For things like obstruction of justice and maybe contempt of court.

In US law, there is, of course, the presumption of innocence, but again, let's say that the guy is telling the truth, that is, he can't remember his password.  Then what?  Does he stay in jail "forever" over that fact?  As far as being a threat to children, the guy is not accused of any child abuse, and even for child sexual offenders, their sentences are typically not life-without-parole sentences.

I never stated they should hold him forever. They should charge him with something or let him go until they can. I don't agree with him being held without being charged, I'm saying they have enough to charge him with something now.

The maximum penalties for obstruction and contempt of court are similar to first offense CP charges in most areas. He won't be a sex offender, though.

[account_inactive]

Guys suspicious as fuck.

[Jehanne]

Guys suspicious as fuck.

He was a police officer with 17 years of experience.  Maybe he just doesn't like the federal government and is trying to make a point of it?

[account_inactive]

Guys suspicious as fuck.

He was a police officer with 17 years of experience.  Maybe he just doesn't like the federal government and is trying to make a point of it?

From the article:

The system was found to be running Freenet, the software authorities allege was used to obtain the illicit content. Log files also contain search terms that are commonly used to search for and categorize child porn.

If that isn't suspicious, I don't know what is.

[Minimalist]

Can't this guy plead the 5th?

frankly, this seems like a too-cutesy way around that but here it is.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/06/techno...rives.html

Many of the cases involving court-ordered access to personal devices include arguments centering on an individual’s right under the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, and about whether they can be compelled to reveal passwords or decrypt those devices.

In the Philadelphia case, for example, the officer was told to type in the passwords in a private room in the district attorney’s office, rather than to simply tell the password, which could be construed as testifying against himself.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Can't this guy plead the 5th?

Exactly, extracting a password from a suspect is a form of self-incrimination, it seelms to me.

[Tiberius]

The way I see it -- and perhaps I'm alone in this line of thinking -- presumption of innocence is important, and so is the fifth amendment.

Forcing the accused to unlock a laptop with a password for the purposes of an investigation, if that laptop contains incriminating information, is self incrimination. The test for self-incrimination should be "could the police have obtained that exact piece of evidence without the help of the accused?" If the answer is "yes", then it is not incrimination.

I would rather see 1,000,000 guilty people go free, that sacrifice the 5th amendment and presumption of innocence.

[Jehanne]

He was a police officer with 17 years of experience.  Maybe he just doesn't like the federal government and is trying to make a point of it?

From the article:

The system was found to be running Freenet, the software authorities allege was used to obtain the illicit content. Log files also contain search terms that are commonly used to search for and categorize child porn.

If that isn't suspicious, I don't know what is.

Freenet is used to exchange all sorts of things, most of which are completely legal.

[Minimalist]

The way I see it -- and perhaps I'm alone in this line of thinking -- presumption of innocence is important, and so is the fifth amendment.

Forcing the accused to unlock a laptop with a password for the purposes of an investigation, if that laptop contains incriminating information, is self incrimination. The test for self-incrimination should be "could the police have obtained that exact piece of evidence without the help of the accused?" If the answer is "yes", then it is not incrimination.

I would rather see 1,000,000 guilty people go free, that sacrifice the 5th amendment and presumption of innocence.

Yep.  Prosecutors do not think like civil libertarians.  That's for sure.