In UK, Two Convicted of Refusing To Decrypt Data
ACKyushu clues us to recent news out of the UK, where two people have been successfully prosecuted for refusing to provide authorities with their encryption keys, resulting in landmark convictions that may have carried jail sentences of up to five years. There is uncertainty in that the names of the people convicted were not released; and without those names, the Crown Prosecution Service said it was unable to track down details of the cases. "Failure to comply with a section 49 notice carries a sentence of up to two years jail plus fines. Failure to comply during a national security investigation carries up to five years jail. ... Of the 15 individuals served, 11 did not comply with the notices. Of the 11, seven were charged and two convicted. Sir Christopher [Rose, the government's Chief Surveillance Commissioner] did not report whether prosecutions failed or are pending against the five charged but not convicted in the period covered by his report."
Look into the Phonebook filesystem. Not quite what you mentioned, but almost as good.
If you want to be seen, stand up. If you want to be heard, speak up. If you want to be respected, sit down and shut up.
I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle.
The issue is no longer whether you can prove their is nothing incriminating in the "ecrypted file" but whether the old memory you've had for 7 months is an encrypted file or not.
Further, TrueCrypt is well known. "Hey, do you have a second 'hidden' partition on this slightly incriminating but pretty inoccuous drive?" "No." "I don't believe you. Do not collect £200."
This is a very, very bad day for the British public.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Where the definition of 'terrorist cell' is up to the authorities, and in this case means 'animal rights activist'. It could mean anything according to this corrupt, overbearing government.
Some animal rights activists do use terror tactics, including bombing campaigns, so in this case it might not just mean 'animal rights activist', it could mean everything you normally mean by 'terrorist'. Yes, there are huge problems with the law, but its being used against animal rights campaigners is not de facto one of them.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Indeed. Here's two different videos to drive the point home, one from an attorney and the other from a police officer himself.
Never ever EVER talk to the police. Nothing you can say to them is going to help you. Shut your damn mouth and ask for an attorney.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.