cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1993-06-14 - Re: DH for email (re: email protection and privacy)

Header Data

From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
To: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Message Hash: d86ecad8e10614d0001939ce71e7528fe4908201aab999fb517c80d454b4d2b3
Message ID: <199306141706.AA02197@eff.org>
Reply To: <9306141627.AA07743@vail.tivoli.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-06-14 17:06:44 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 14 Jun 93 10:06:44 PDT

Raw message

From: Mike Godwin <mnemonic@eff.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 93 10:06:44 PDT
To: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: DH for email (re: email protection and privacy)
In-Reply-To: <9306141627.AA07743@vail.tivoli.com>
Message-ID: <199306141706.AA02197@eff.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


 
Mike McNally writes:

> I understand this, but could I be cited for failure to produce
> evidence not known by the court to exist?

Absolutely. And it looks very, very bad for you if the court later
discovers that you were holding back.

> Is there a process that
> the court can use that says "hand over absolutely all artifacts
> pertinent to the case at hand known to *you*, whether such artifacts
> be known to the court or not." ?

Yes.

> Or is it the case that failure on my
> part to offer up such evidence is inherently contemptuous?

You're not required to go *beyond* what is specified in a subpoena.
But the subpoena's specifications can be pretty broad.



--Mike

Thread