Jailed 180 days for "refusing" to disclose iPhone password to police

[Deozaan]

The man was ordered to give his iPhone password to police. He insists that he did. But the password he gave them doesn't work. So the judge is holding him in criminal contempt.

A Hollywood man must serve 180 days in jail for refusing to give up his iPhone password to police, a Broward judge ruled Tuesday — the latest salvo in intensifying legal battles over law-enforcement access to smart phones.

Christopher Wheeler, 41, was taken into custody in a Broward Circuit Court, insisting he had already provided the pass code to police investigating him for child abuse, although the number did not work.

“I swear, under oath, I’ve given them the password,” a distraught Wheeler, his hands handcuffed behind his back, told Circuit Judge Michael Rothschild, who earlier in May found the man guilty of contempt of court.

-http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article153373524.html

While the headline does sound scary, maybe it's a technicality. Maybe the case is that since he provided a password that didn't work, the judge thinks he's lying and holds him in contempt. Perhaps if he had simply refused to provide any password at all, citing the 5th amendment^w, the judge would not have held him in contempt of court.

[eleman]

Perhaps if he had simply refused to provide any password at all, citing the 5th amendment^w, the judge would not have held him in contempt of court.

-Deozaan (May 31, 2017, 04:36 PM)

Yeah, right. As if constitution means anything anymore...
https://www.techdirt...led-decryption.shtml

https://www.techdirt...mendment-issue.shtml

[wraith808]

While the headline does sound scary, maybe it's a technicality. Maybe the case is that since he provided a password that didn't work, the judge thinks he's lying and holds him in contempt. Perhaps if he had simply refused to provide any password at all, citing the 5th amendment^w, the judge would not have held him in contempt of court.

-Deozaan (May 31, 2017, 04:36 PM)

I've found that contempt of court is a catch all to get around the law or the need for the law, so I doubt that would have flown either.

[p3lb0x]

Doesn't the fifth amendment of the US allow people to not have to disclose something like a password to their electronic devices?

edit: Herpa derpa, should have read the entire thread.

[40hz]

Under the 5th you have the right to remain sikent to avoid self incrimination. But you have to remain completely silent. And if you do say anything, you'd better be sure it's true. Lying to the police or in a court is a felony although you'd never know it considering how police routinely commit perjury in courtrooms and seldom get so much as a slap on the wrist for doing it.

As any defense attorney will tell you: Fon't talk to the police. Period. Don't affirm, deny, or argue with them. Stand mute except to politely and calmly keep repeating you don't consent to any questioning without your attorney present nor (and this is extremely important) do you consent to any searches.

Don't speak if you've done something.

And especially don't speak if you haven't done anything.

Sad it's reached this point. But as any lawyer will tell you: Don't talk to the police. Don't consent to any searches.