I agree with you to a point.
But repeatedly denying access to your harddrive when you've been accused of something as serious as child sexual exploitation doesn't make me very sympathetic to him.
(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:44, 3 replies, latest was 15 years ago)

Well, I know there's nothing illegal
on my laptop, but if the police busted me I would refuse to give them my password out of sheer bloodymindedness, because I'm innocent and they're wrong. Mind you, I suspect they would find mine considerably more easy to crack, what with it not being a 50 character encryption key.
(berk, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:46, Reply)

And it being "Password1"

(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:47, Reply)

You'd willingly break the law?
You might not agree with it, but it's still a law.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:48, Reply)

It's a fucking appalling law.
I'd probably break it.
(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:49, Reply)

I agree with you, I don't like the law
But it's still a law. Either work to get it overturned, or shut up and conform ;)
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:51, Reply)

I don't think I would. I might be really pissed off that they had invaded my privacy like that
but I still think an innocent person's privacy invasion is worth the hundreds of convictions they get for people actually doing wrong.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:52, Reply)

Slippery slope.

(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:56, Reply)

yeah I agree with that
there's a fine line between justice and abusing police power. I guess I've never been on the wrong side of it though.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:09, Reply)

No, that is totally the wrong attitude
If you start of saying it's okay to trample a right occasionally as long as it's for "The greater good" you lose all rights.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:56, Reply)

well no, like Wookiee said, it's a slippery slope
I don't think you should give up all rights, especially the ones to do with your physical safety and wellbeing, but in this case I think he was silly not to give up his password.

And please don't tell me my attitude is 'totally wrong' because you disagree with it.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:11, Reply)

how about a "that's how the Nazis started" ?

( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:25, Reply)

He's right - you are wrong.
The fact he has a 50 character encryption shows he's up to something dodgy. He's clearly either a pervert or a scammer.

However, the police have to prove wrongdoing and do not have the right to expect someone to incriminate themselves. It's the same as the right to silence. People have the right to make the police prove something against them.

I know that this means the odd person will get off scot-free when they're guilty (like me, last time I got nicked. I went no comment, and they had nothing substantial enough to lay a charge) but if you remove this right, the police can apply pressure, and fit people up as used to happen.

This guy will get what's coming to him, if he's guilty. I know it's 50 characters, but it's breakable. He'll not get his machine back, and he will eventually be busted. Crooks that are persistent get caught.

Better ten guilty go free than one innocent gets convicted.
( disasterprone "Pyjamas caused the Holocaust", Wed 6 Oct 2010, 13:14, Reply)

Meh there's no need.
You can get encryption software that has dual partitions and two passwords. 1 nice and legal 1 running a criminal empire.
Give the legal one to the police and your criminal records just look like disk fragments.
(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:52, Reply)

Exactly

( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:57, Reply)

This is the shitest attitude in the world
and is the reason the Daily Mail makes so much money by repeating it all the time.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:48, Reply)

It's not the shittist attitude in the world Al,
it's perfectly legitimate and just because some stupid people can comprehend it doesn't make it wrong.
(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:50, Reply)

It is shite
it's saying that principles are great unless they get in the way of what I want you to do, in which case you should abandon them.

If I want to keep something a secret it doesn't matter what the reason is, it's my right to have a secret, if it upsets or inconveniences you then that is just your tough shit. He shouldn't have to give up his password regardless of what he's accused of.

If the police can't find any other evidence to convict him other than his hard drive, then they clearly have a crap case.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:54, Reply)

^This.
and I hate myself for agreeing.
( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:58, Reply)

you've got to ignore the particulars of the case
Al is right, regardless of what the guy is accused of.
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:00, Reply)

it's not the case I'm worried about
it's agreeing with Al. He is 100% right in what he says unfortunately.
( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:02, Reply)

you will discover that at some point, most people on here are right
you won't like it, but you have to come to terms with it
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:06, Reply)

I'm on here, so would I be the exception that proves the rule?

( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:07, Reply)

there may be a fleeting moment when you are correct
I did say 'most' though
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:14, Reply)

Not if you keep using the expression "the exception that proves the rule" incorrectly
they may never find all your body parts.
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:39, Reply)

I don't know, I think I would be really pissed off
if people weren't being convicted because the police weren't allowed into their computers. Criminals seems to get off lightly enough already.

I also hate people who hide behind the ECHR, obviously I don't agree with torture and stuff like that, but you can't have a strong justice system when the ECHR is used by every petty criminal the way it is at the moment.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:59, Reply)

Don't be so stupidly naive
The ECHR is not used by every petty criminal, the tabloids just like to portray it that way.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:05, Reply)

I work in criminal defence law, I see it used like that every bloody day!
Also, again with insulting me because you disagree, pack it in.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:11, Reply)

Principles aren't so black and white al.
It's your right to kidnap someone and then refuse to tell anyone where they are?
He's been accused of a non specific sex crime against minors. He's allowed to make a choice and he did, now he has to accept the consequences.
(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:00, Reply)

Sorry Chompers but priniciples are black and white.
subject to change but fundamentally black and white. How can they not be?
( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:07, Reply)

because circumstances change day to day
like the whole stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family argument. You could argue that's not as bad as stealing a games console because you want to play L4D but can't be arsed getting a job.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:20, Reply)

right I see what you mean but your principles are your values, ones moral code if you will.
If they are subject to change on a daily basis then what's the point of them? Principles guide you on key decisions and life choices. Yes they may change over time, like this kid who is refusing to play ball with the police may have a change of heart after this but it will have taken a huge event to do so. Your principles should be unmoving unless YOU have a revelation leading you to consider alternatives.
( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:24, Reply)

Ok I see what you mean
but I don't think anyone's principles or opinions should be set in stone, anyone and everyone can be wrong. You say they can change over time, well that means that they must be open to influence.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:26, Reply)

I think we are making the same point but I'm using an aga and you're microwaving stuff x

( SteveFrench Cardio is for homo's. do you even lift bro?, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:27, Reply)

He hasn't been convicted of a crime
therefore he is innocent and should be afforded all the rights of any other innocent person i.e. The police shouldn't be able to force him to disclose his password.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:07, Reply)

He has been convicted of a crime
He was in contravention of the RIPA.
I agree with you that the police shouldn't be able to force him to disclose his password, it IS an infringement on their privacy, but RIPA has been established.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:10, Reply)

A hard drive isn't evidence
It's referred to as an exhibit, but it's more a scene of crime.

If the investigator has found absolutely nothing other than an encrypted container file, then they can either get the password, crack it, or give up. They would have had intel of some sort to get a warrant to seize the computer, so finding absolutely nothing other than this file would call the validity of that intel into question.

Obviously I don't know what the Investigator has found, for all we know the hard drive could be riddled with tons of 'clues' (without boring you with technical stuff) all pointing to this file.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:02, Reply)

Do you get the police officers to look under the keyboards for post-its with the password on?

(PsychoChomp, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:05, Reply)

If they're clever they do this anyway.
Sometimes we get them sent with the computers.
Also most of the time the cops ask them in interview if there are any passwords, and let us know if there are.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:11, Reply)

if I were to put together a team to commit a high-tech heist of some kind
how useful would you be?
( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:16, Reply)

In assisting you? Probably not very
I can't code or remote hack.
I would be better use as a consultant of sorts.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:19, Reply)

I will bear that in mind

( Vipros. clever got me this far, then tricky got me in, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:29, Reply)

Gaz me and Catface,
*secretive heist wink*
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:35, Reply)

I can.
How much are we stealing?
( Peej, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 13:29, Reply)

"If I want to keep something a secret it doesn't matter what the reason is"
That is simply untrue.
(Cave Duck, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:09, Reply)

devil's advocate number 3: what about "for the greater good" argument?
so if i don't give you my password because i want to blow up chanel for not giving me enough free stuff and it's all hidden on my computer, and so you have to let me go and give it back, and i then kill 15 people and injure 150 more, are my rights to privacy more important than their life and limb?

i can see it both ways, but i do think fundamentally if you have nothing to hide, you'd make less of a fuss.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:21, Reply)

No, no you don't
You don't have any right to keep a secret if that secret is a crime. If the police have to find out a non-criminal secret trying to find a crime then that is unfortunate but a price that has to be paid for a criminal justice system.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:28, Reply)

Repost from higher
The fact he has a 50 character encryption shows he's up to something dodgy. He's clearly either a pervert or a scammer.

However, the police have to prove wrongdoing and do not have the right to expect someone to incriminate themselves. It's the same as the right to silence. People have the right to make the police prove something against them.

I know that this means the odd person will get off scot-free when they're guilty (like me, last time I got nicked. I went no comment, and they had nothing substantial enough to lay a charge) but if you remove this right, the police can apply pressure, and fit people up as used to happen.

This guy will get what's coming to him, if he's guilty. I know it's 50 characters, but it's breakable. He'll not get his machine back, and he will eventually be busted. Crooks that are persistent get caught.

Better ten guilty go free than one innocent gets convicted.
( disasterprone "Pyjamas caused the Holocaust", Wed 6 Oct 2010, 13:46, Reply)

Maybe not,
but it's still an erosion of the right to remain silent, so I'm siding with him.
(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:48, Reply)

^this

( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:50, Reply)

I do think that the penalty is pretty strong
which suggests that the evidence that they did have to begin the investigation is quite strong also. I don't think enough detail has been reported about the case for me to decide whether or not it's a breach of his rights or not.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:55, Reply)

NO NO NO NO NO.
Whether he's been noncing it up all over the shop or not, it's either a breach of his (and everyone's) rights or it's not. The circumstances are irrelevant.
(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 11:57, Reply)

You're just saying that because you're a nonce.

( Monty Boyce, My cheese game is strong, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:08, Reply)

I do all my noncing OFFLINE so it's not a problem.
I just don't want to go to jail for refusing to out myself as having illegally downloaded SATC2.
(wellgroomedwookiee is a filthy-minded hobgoblin, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:20, Reply)

I'm not going to be able to explain myself without everyone going all 1984 about it
so I'll just say I think he was stupid to not give up his password. His stint in prison, innocent or not, will fuck up his entire future unless he's extremely lucky.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:24, Reply)

dude have you seen him?
he only has a future as an organ donor anyway (not sperm though, noone would want that)
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:25, Reply)

haha
This is well stressing me out, I hate arguing with people. I would make a rubbish troll.
( Kitty v1.0 desperately naive, Wed 6 Oct 2010, 12:27, Reply)