Re:Apple’s dangerous game, part 2
by twoodfin on Monday September 22, 2014 @09:51AM
(#8350514)
the defendant is protected by the 5th Amendment, and can refuse to answer on the grounds that it may incriminate. If this is how the law goes, then any attempt to backdoor the phone is essentially an attempted end run around the 5th amendment.
I'm pretty sure that's not how the 5th Amendment works: Just because your protection against self-incrimination allows you to withhold potential evidence doesn't imply that the government can't attempt to acquire that evidence themselves through other means.
You can refuse to answer questions like "What's written in your diary entry for the night of the murder?" or "Where did you hide your diary?". The police can still get a warrant to search your house for your diary and read it.
I'm pretty sure that's not how the 5th Amendment works: Just because your protection against self-incrimination allows you to withhold potential evidence doesn't imply that the government can't attempt to acquire that evidence themselves through other means.
You can refuse to answer questions like "What's written in your diary entry for the night of the murder?" or "Where did you hide your diary?". The police can still get a warrant to search your house for your diary and read it.