SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On Monday, a US federal appeals court sided against a former Philadelphia police officer who has been in jail 17 months because he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. He had refused to comply with a court order commanding him to unlock two hard drives the authorities say contain child porn.
The 3-0 decision (PDF) by the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals means that the suspect, Francis Rawls, likely will remain jailed indefinitely or until the order (PDF) finding him in contempt of court is lifted or overturned. However, he still can comply with the order and unlock two FileVault encrypted drives connected to his Apple Mac Pro. Using a warrant, authorities seized those drives from his residence in 2015. While Rawls could get out from under the contempt order by unlocking those drives, doing so might expose him to other legal troubles.
In deciding against Rawls, the court of appeals found that the constitutional rights against being compelled to testify against oneself were not being breached. That's because the appeals court, like the police, agreed that the presence of child porn on his drives was a "foregone conclusion." The Fifth Amendment, at its most basic level, protects suspects from being forced to disclose incriminating evidence. In this instance, however, the authorities said they already know there's child porn on the drives, so Rawls' constitutional rights aren't compromised.
[...] The suspect's attorney, Federal Public Defender Keith Donoghue, was disappointed by the ruling.
"The fact remains that the government has not brought charges," Donoghue said in a telephone interview. "Our client has now been in custody for almost 18 months based on his assertion of his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination."
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 23 2017, @06:31PM (4 children)
So come make good on those death threats you made to me a year and a half ago. If you got the balls. Which you don't.
Funny how you go utterly silent and stop posting on any subthread when I reply with this :) It's almost like you know even a woman--granted, a ridiculously tall one who's almost as heavy as a man--could kick your ass, and the shame of it would make you commit suicide. We can only hope.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @11:58AM (3 children)
I don't know who you are, where you exist, and I would never attack someone in an honourable manner.
I would strike from the shadows. With you I cannot do that, so why would I?
Enemies should be shot in the back with a tokarev, not squared off with.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday March 24 2017, @04:43PM (2 children)
God, you're pathetic. You can't even face a woman head-on, despite all the shit you talk about us.
Get it through your mainframe, bro-bot: you will NEVER have sex, EVER, with ANYONE, let alone an underage girl you fucking paedo. Your life is a failure, you have no future, and if you killed yourself now the entire world would be a marginally better place for it.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @09:00PM (1 child)
>Your life is a failure, you have no future,
I know. I have known since I was 6.
>and if you killed yourself now the entire world would be a marginally better place for it.
Perhaps such is what women do. I am a male: I do not wish to make the world a marginally better place for you.
I wish to make the world a worse place for you, and a better place for me. Barring that: a worse place for you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @02:22PM
#notallanonymouscowards