That's not really the issue that concerns me. If the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is capable of complying with the warrant (but is choosing

That's not really the issue that concerns me. If the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is capable of complying with the warrant (but is choosing not to) then contempt and jail is wholly appropriate. Similarly, if the state could prove he knew where the body was beyond a reasonable doubt then that's enough to lock him up, sure, absolutely, 100%. Even if he didn't do it, concealing facts about it when subpoenad or served with a warrant etc is certainly illegal. But the difference here is, can the state prove the drives are encrypted? Probably. I'd assume that's the case (forensic examination could reveal file names, logs, etc that provide evidence of that volume having been decrypted, the vast majority of encryption systems are readily identifiable) Can the state prove he is capable and unwilling, rather than willing but incapable, of decrypting the drives? I don't think that could ever happen. What if he genuinely forgot the password? What if he never knew it (was storing them for someone else, a common lie/excuse to give to police but something that could be true, any number of other reasons)? Does every person have to be able to provide access to all encrypted data on their devices if served with a warrant, with the consequences of being unable to do so indefinite imprisonment? Is forgetting or losing a password in unlucky combination with an false accusation of wrongdoing grounds for a life sentence?