From: John.Nieder@f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Nieder)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 22:53:35 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: 5th AMENDMENT & DECRYPTION
Message-ID: <4627.2B64DAF9@fidogate.FIDONET.ORG>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



from: john.nieder@f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org

> In a recent message, Murdering Thug said:
> | The Fifth Ammendment is the tastiest one of all when it comes to
> | encryption.  By pleading the Fifth, you do not have to decrypt anything
> | for the prosecution.  The Fifth Ammendment gives you the right not to
> | testify or provide evidence that would incriminate you.  Providing a
> | key to decrypt your hard disk would incriminate you, and you don't
> | have to do it.

I should like to see the body of case law on which this opinion is
based, if any.
.   Recently this question came up in another forum on encryption & an
"authority" on communications law claimed the probable scenario would be
that the arresting agency would have the encrypted material decrypted by
a competent government or academic agency & the costs of said decryption
would eventually be recovered from the defendant through civil suits,
presuming the defendant had sufficient assets.  It is my memory of the
thread that he claimed this had been done in previous cases.

        JN


... Gun control: It ain't about guns, it's about *control*.  
--- Blue Wave/Opus v2.12 [NR]
--  
John Nieder - via FidoNet node 1:125/555
    UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!33!John.Nieder
INTERNET - John.Nieder@f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG