1995-12-08 - Re: Is there a lawyer in the house?

Header Data

From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 0e99d38deca02d8f11648b3c0ad56649ae126da02349b65c233966362ecae297
Message ID: <30C7C407.4117@netscape.com>
Reply To: <199512080227.SAA15534@infinity.c2.org>
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-08 04:54:05 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 7 Dec 95 20:54:05 PST

Raw message

From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 95 20:54:05 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Is there a lawyer in the house?
In-Reply-To: <199512080227.SAA15534@infinity.c2.org>
Message-ID: <30C7C407.4117@netscape.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Black Unicorn wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 7 Dec 1995, sameer wrote:
> 
> > > > You mean if you give me your key the police can get it from me without a
> > > > warrant? What if I don't want to give it up, and you don't? How would the
> > > > police get it without a warrant?
> > >
> > > Yes.  Unless it could be shown there their was an expactation of privacy
> > > in the transfer, or that there was an understanding that you intended this
> > > to be a confidential matter.  Or in the alternative, that the
> >
> >       I do not understand.
> >
> > Alice has Alice gives Bob her key.  Cop wants Alice's key.  Cop tells
> > Bob "I want Alice's key, you need to give it to me. I don't have a
> > warrant."
> >
> > How is this different from
> > Bob has key. Cop want's Bob's key. Cop tells Bob "I want your key,
> > you need to give it to me. I don't have a warrant."
> 
> The real concern is this:
> 
> Bob gives his key to alice.
> 
> The cops walk into alice's place and 'convince' alice to turn the key
> over whithout a warant.  Perhaps alice is more susceptible to
> persuasion because of some external reasons.  Alice does, Bob has no privacy
> interest in the key, Bob can no longer argue that it is protected under
> the 4th amendment.
> 
> Now let's get more sinister.
> 
> The cops mysteriously 'find' the key somewhere without a warrant.
> Bob cannot argue that the key should be surpressed on the basis of the
> 4th amendment because he gave it to Alice, and thus clearly it's not
> information he was interested in protecting.  (This is assuming the cops
> didn't violate other areas, or break into a house or something, or that
> if they did, that the court will find out about it).

  How about if Bob had a contractual agreement with Alice to keep his
key secret?

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.





Thread