3 ms·
> In practice there's a case where a defendant is being held in contempt (jailed) for years now, for refusing to provide her encryption passwords. Link to stor
by andsoitis 1y ago
> In practice there's a case where a defendant is being held in contempt (jailed) for years now, for refusing to provide her encryption passwords.
Link to story?
- happymellon 1y agoThe only one I know of was this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13629728 And he was freed after about 4 years. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/man-who-refused-to-decrypt-hard-drives-is-free-after-four-years-in-jail/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/man-who-refused-...
- piyuv 1y ago> Prosecutors were able to gain access to the laptop, and police say forensic analysis showed Rawls downloading child pornography and saving it to the external hard drives.
- happymellon 1y agoMy comment was more about this > In practice there's a case where a defendant is being held in contempt (jailed) for years now They are not still being held due to contempt, they were released. Now if he was convicted then thats different and the correct reason to be imprisoned. > she It was not a she. The ruling showed that you can only be held for 18 months in the US for refusal. They would need to actually charge them with a crime if the government wanted more than that.