Colorado Woman Ordered to Decrypt Laptop in Bank Fraud Case

[Slappy3243]

Hmmm...so should I decrypt my hard drive so the prosecutor has evidence against me or ignore the judge and get contempt? I have no idea how the legal system works honestly, but I am assuming I would rather want the contempt charge . DailyTech - Colorado Woman Ordered to Decrypt Laptop in Bank Fraud Case Colorado U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn said the Fifth Amendment does not protect her from the order A Colorado woman was told to decrypt her laptop in court on Monday in order to aid prosecutors in her bank fraud case. Ramona Fricosu, the defendant who was accused of bank fraud in 2010, had her laptop seized by authorities during the investigation. However, authorities stumbled upon a big problem while attempting to search her hard drive -- it was encrypted. Full disk encryption, which prevents unauthorized access to data storage, is an option found in operating systems like Mac OS and Windows. The encryption can take decades to break, and if authorities tried to crack it, it could damage the computer. That's why Colorado U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn ordered that Fricosu decrypt her hard drive and return it to the court so prosecutors can use her files against her in the bank fraud case. Fricosu used the Fifth Amendment to protect herself. She argued that the Fifth Amendment protects her from compelled self-incrimination, and that the judge's order violates this. However, Blackburn didn't agree. "I conclude that the Fifth Amendment is not implicated by requiring production of unencrypted contents of the Toshiba Satellite M305 laptop computer," said Blackburn. Assistant U.S. Attorney Patricia Davies backed Blackburn's order, saying that allowing encrypted content to defeat authorities would send the wrong message to other criminals. In her words exactly, it would be a "concession to her [Fricosu] and potential criminals (be it in child exploitation, national security, terrorism, financial crimes or drug trafficking cases) that encrypting all inculpatory digital evidence will serve to defeat the efforts of law enforcement officers to obtain such evidence through judicially authorized search warrants, and thus make their prosecution impossible." Blackburn has ordered Fricosu to return the unencrypted hard drive by February 21. Civil rights groups are keeping a close eye on the case. Sources: Wired, Fox News

This ad is not displayed to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on CamaroZ28.com!

[Steve0]

I guess she has to weight it out... Is whats on the harddrive going to hurt her case worse than getting a contempt charge? If so, I'd probably plead the 5th too!

[94307]

In this situation, I would follow my attorney's advice.

[HelloMrAnderson]

5th amendment

[GrdLockV6]

Kind of BS to force someone to provide evidence against herself.

Of course this is along the same lines as no refusal weekends, where judges hand out court orders to draw blood samples for DUI purposes.

[eyeoutthere]

It makes sense that the 5th amendment doesn't apply here. They had a warrant to search her computer. She shouldn't be able to interfere with the execution of that warrant.

[96capricemgr]

They are not forcing her to testify against herself, that is why the 5th doesn't apply, they are attempting to gain access to stored records. Not really any different than asking a defendant to open the front door when a search warrant is served so they can access evidence in the building.

[ImportKILLER]

I would just say "I made the password so strong, I can't even remember it!".

That said, some of my files are 256-bit AES encrypted just for this type of case.

[97QuasarBlue3.8]

You know what I'd do if they handed my encrypted hard drive with incriminating evidence against me? I'd destroy the ****er and be like 'what now bitches?' -and see how it goes from there.

[mdenz3]

Originally Posted by 97QuasarBlue3.8

You know what I'd do if they handed my encrypted hard drive with incriminating evidence against me? I'd destroy the ****er and be like 'what now bitches?' -and see how it goes from there.

Tell them to boot it off a dos disk and the pass word is "format c:\"

[Good Ph.D]

Originally Posted by eyeoutthere

It makes sense that the 5th amendment doesn't apply here. They had a warrant to search her computer. She shouldn't be able to interfere with the execution of that warrant.

I don't know, since when do you have to tell them where the murder weapon is just because they have a warrant? If they can't figure it out it's tough titty.

Not that I'm arguing the fifth amendment does or does not apply here, I believe there are consequences specifically for impeding a search, and she should have to take them, but if the case doesen't stand up without the laptop then that should be the end of it.

[GrdLockV6]

"The password was 30 characters long, completely random letters, and I had it written on a scratch piece of paper on my desk. The cops took everything, so I no longer have access to that piece of paper. If they want in it, they'll have to look through their stuff and see if they can find it."

[bombebomb]

We have a warrant to search your house,

can you please unlock the vault in your back room?

Also, rather or not this will "send the wrong message" does not make it constitutional. That is pure opinion which has not be deemed "correct" as of yet.

[bigjoebowski22]

Originally Posted by bombebomb

We have a warrant to search your house,

can you please unlock the vault in your back room?

Also, rather or not this will "send the wrong message" does not make it constitutional. That is pure opinion which has not be deemed "correct" as of yet.

What vault?

[bombebomb]

Originally Posted by bigjoebowski22

What vault?

If this was CSI, this is where I would of just put my foot in my mouth.