From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort@crl.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 94 08:27:55 PDT
To: Eric Hughes <hughes@ah.com>
Subject: Re: LITTLE BROTHER INSIDE
In-Reply-To: <9407270358.AA06874@ah.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.87.9407270837.A25102-0100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


C'punks,

On Tue, 26 Jul 1994, Eric Hughes wrote:

> . . .
> When, under oath, you tell the judge that the passphrase is "I do not
> pay income taxes", the less abbreviated version is "I testify under
> oath that the passphrase is 'I do not pay income taxes'."
> 
> The second statement is not testimony that you do not pay income
> taxes.

Just to play Devil's Advocate, here is another twist to this "passphrase
as self-incrimination" thread.  Let us say you have, in fact, committed a
more serious offense about which the government knows nothing.  If your
passphrase not only admitted the crime, but gave information which could
lead to corroboration of the admission, you could arguably withhold the
passphrase. 

As an example, your passphrase could be:

	I shot a cop in the back and buried his body under
	the porch at 123 Main St., anywhere USA.  The gun is
	wrapped in an oily cloth in my mother's attic.

"I decline to answer on the grounds that my passphrase is a statement 
which may tend to incriminate me.  I will only give my passphrase if I am 
given immunity from prosecution for the actions to which it alludes."

Too cute, I know, but who knows, it might work.


 S a n d y