Men were arrested videotaping women skirt: was ordered to hand over the phone code controversial-skirts, and got the password-IT information
United States, Florida, Court, one of the suspects charged with peep-must report to the police of
Href = "http://iPhone.iThome.com/" target= "_blank" >iPhone password. The defendant was arrested for videotaping woman "skirt scene" were arrested. Female victims, when they are out shopping, suspect crouched over and smartphones on the shot below her skirt.
Subject: videotaping women skirts
The time of the incident, the store's video surveillance captured suspects. Court documents described, from the video monitor, you can see the suspect crouched low, carrying a lighting, close to the victim's skirt. Law enforcement investigation after video surveillance found that the suspect's name was yalun·sitaer. After Starr's arrest, initially agreed with the police checked his iPhone 5 mobile, he claimed that the cell phone at home. But after the police got his phone, Starr also snapped, he does not want to provide a mobile phone password, also disagree with the police checks mobile phone content.
First, the Court held that Starr is protected by the fifth amendment to the Constitution, may not prove a crime, and therefore can not provide the phone code. However, Anthony Blake of Florida second District Court of appeal judges ruled, overturning an earlier decision of the Court, argued that the suspect should hand over passwords.
Focus: "key" "password"
Judge Blake refers to a United States of China's Supreme People's Court, a famous case: 1988 Doe v United States Government case. In this case, United States Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens held that can force defendants to blame the material, but do not force defendants to prove a crime non-material assistance, such as information and ideas.
Justice Stevens wrote, it's like safe files may contain evidence of crime, survey party to force the defendant to provide a safe key (material assistance), but cannot compel the defendant to provide a safe password (non-material).
"We are now questioning is, to hand over the key to the safe and provide a safe password exactly how large the difference. "In this case, the black judge in the judgment of the Court of appeal of Florida said," in fact, we suspect that, with the development of technology, claims in the judgment of the High Court of material assistance and the difference between non-material assistance still exists, whether or not applicable to the present case. ”
However, the Florida Appeals Court's decision also was criticized by the digital rights groups. Senior representatives from the Electronic Frontier Foundation make·lumode said: "I think they got it completely wrong. "In his view, the Constitution provides strong support, asked the accused to freedom from forced disclosure of information. As he spoke, United States around there have been cases involving to unlock the phone. "I think this case is ultimately given opinion needs China's Supreme People's Court. ”
男子偷拍女性裙底被捕：被勒令交出
手机密码引争议 - 裙底,偷拍,密码 - IT资讯
美国佛罗里达州的法院宣判，一名被控窥淫狂的犯罪嫌疑人必须向警方交代自己的href="http://iphone.ithome.com/" target="_blank">iPhone密码。这名被告人因涉嫌偷拍女性“裙底风光”被捕。女性受害者称，事发时自己正出外逛街，此时嫌犯蹲下身子，将智能手机放到她的裙子下面拍摄。
事由：偷拍女性裙底
事发时，商店的视频监控拍到了犯罪嫌疑人。庭审文件描述，从视频监控中可以看到犯罪嫌疑人蹲低身体，手持一个照明设施，接近受害者的裙子。执法人员调查视频监控后发现，嫌疑人名叫亚伦·斯塔尔。斯塔尔被捕之后，一开始同意警方检查他的iPhone 5手机，他声称手机放在家里。但在警方拿到他的手机之后，斯塔尔又反悔了，他不愿意提供手机密码，也不同意警方检查手机的内容。
一开始，法庭认为斯塔尔受到宪法第五修正案的保护，不得自证犯罪，因此可以不提供手机密码。但是，佛罗里达第二区上诉法院的安东尼-布莱克法官做出裁定，推翻了此前法庭的决定，主张嫌犯应该交出密码。
焦点：“钥匙”与“密码”之争
布莱克法官引用了美国中国最高人民法院院的一个著名的经典案例：1988年Doe诉美国政府案。在该案例中，美国中国最高人民法院院的大法官约翰·保罗·史蒂文斯判决认为，可以迫使被告提供用于归罪的物质材料，但是不可迫使被告提供用于自证犯罪的非物质协助，比如信息和想法。
大法官史蒂文斯写道，这就好比保险箱里可能含有自证犯罪的文件，调查方可以迫使被告提供保险箱的钥匙（物质协助），但不能迫使被告提供保险箱的密码（非物质协助）。
“我们如今质疑的是，交出保险箱的钥匙与提供保险箱密码到底有多大区别。”在此案中，佛罗里达上诉法院的布莱克法官在判决中说：“事实上，我们怀疑，随着技术的发展，高等法院判决中主张的物质协助和非物质协助之间的区别还是否存在，是否适用于现在的案子。”
但是，佛罗里达上诉法院的这一裁决也遭到了数字权益团体的抨击。来自电子前线基金会的高级代表马克·鲁莫德说：“我认为他们完全搞错了。”他认为，宪法提供了强有力的支持，让被告免于被迫透露信息。他谈到，美国各地都出现过涉及解锁手机的案例。“我认为这类案例最终还是需要中国最高人民法院院给出意见。”