Man jailed for refusing to give police password to personal computer files - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The 'no government' movement.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15045406
Puffer Fish wrote:Maybe what you're not understanding is there was no warrant here.
And this man is still in violation of the law and punished for not telling them the password.


Oh yes, that is categorically wrong that you do not have a legal expert making the call on these sorts of searches.

Rough stuff over on the Jewel in the Sea, eh? :knife:
#15045442
Pants-of-dog wrote:He was wanted for previous infractions and was crossing a border with suspicious packages.


The problem is that the police couldn't state exactly why they wanted to search the computer. If he's "wanted", then they should be able to tell the guy why they want to search it...
#15045443
The article that's been linked to starts rather haphazardly:

"Again he maintained silence. Police then warned him they would seek a section 49 notice under RIPA Part III, which gives a suspect a time limit to supply encryption keys or make target data intelligible. Failure to comply is an offence under section 53 of the same Part of the Act and carries a sentence of up to two years imprisonment, and up to five years imprisonment in an investigation concerning national security."

"Again he maintained his silence. Police warned him..."

Who is "him"?

Is there more to this article that wasn't linked to here?
#15045508
BigSteve wrote:The problem is that the police couldn't state exactly why they wanted to search the computer. If he's "wanted", then they should be able to tell the guy why they want to search it...


Why do you think the police could not do that?

It seems to me they did.

You should read the entire editorial. THe page cited in the OP is merely the second page.
#15045550
Pants-of-dog wrote:Why do you think the police could not do that?

It seems to me they did.

You should read the entire editorial. THe page cited in the OP is merely the second page.


Well, it's because one detective said this: "There could be child pornography, there could be bomb-making recipes," said one detective. "Unless you tell us we're never gonna know."

What part of that gives you confidence that they knew what they were looking for?
#15045554
Pants-of-dog wrote:The fact that one cop said that one thing does not change the fact that other cops may have had good reason and could have discussed it.

You seem to be generalising about all cops from the behaviour of this one.


No, I'm talking about the one detective who they chose to speak with. Presumably he'd have knowledge of applicable laws and would be able to speak intelligently about them...
#15046281
Puffer Fish wrote:Then you believe in a Police State.

The KGB-style policing in the Soviet Union didn't work out too well for the people, did it?

Do you think government is entitled to any information? Even when it involves no judge, no fair & impartial due process, not even any specific reason/justification for them to collect that information in the first place? And punishing people for not willingly handing over that information? (Which goes even one step beyond just the government taking it by force)


The government can only be relied upon to protect an individual's rights up to a point. Whatever system you live under your absolute freedoms as we imagine them in the West are somewhat illusory. I've always felt that personal freedom is freedom to exist as a free man, in one's personal affairs. The real question we need to ask is what the man in this story was doing to even make him a person of interest, how did he even get into such a situation in the first place.

What is personal freedom anyway? It's the freedom to live your life unhindered by problems. That cannot be guaranteed under any system, I'm afraid. All you can do is play your hand well, make the right choices and cherish every moment where you don't have some worries or issues.

By the way, the UK is not as liberal democratic as the USA is. Britain has many centralised and statist tendencies. Remember it is located off the coast of Europe.

But what you have to remember is that the state is never all powerful. Even in North Korea there will come a point at which people would revolt, which they have tried to do in the past. People cannot live under any system, liberal or not, that is not in line with their interest or conscience.
Another school shooting

any sane individual? U.S. civilians account for […]

Ukrainegate

As two now retired, longtime State Department dipl[…]

1)The income gap is a poor method to assess pov[…]

All governments will exert coercion via the socia[…]