3 ms·
the DOJ have laptop (like a knife in a murder case). According to Miranda, the defendant have the right to remain silent (incl. all kinds of communications, ie
by VladRussian 15y ago
the DOJ have laptop (like a knife in a murder case). According to Miranda, the defendant have the right to remain silent (incl. all kinds of communications, ie. oral, keyboard typing, Morse alphabet using campfire smoke, etc... ) and, in particular, can't be compelled into communicating any information in connection with her/his using of the laptop (or murder knife), while the DOJ is free to have as much witnesses as they can describing defendant's usage of the alleged crime tool.
- Estragon 15y agoMiranda doesn't apply, here. That derives from the 5th amendment, but it pertains to police interviews after arrest. The ability to obviate the 5th amendment by offering immunity amounts to a way to compel potentially incriminating testimony. It's likely that eventually the question here is going to be the extent of the immunity required to compel testimony of the password: just immunity for information contained in the password itself, or for information contained in the files it unlocks? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning