You're mistaken in your assertion that the US fifth amendment protects self-incriminating evidence stored on your hard drive. The fifth amendment is construed rather narrowly, that you cannot be compelled to incriminate yourself. If you've created any external evidence, however, you can be compelled to provide it to the courts (see the Northwest flight attendant case for a current example; it's on/.)
Any judge can order any person subject to its jurisdiction to provide any key or pad necessary to read anything. If the person is unable or unwilling to do so, that same judge can order the person fined or jailed for contempt of court. Courts in the US are much more powerful than in other jurisdictions. This is at least partly because by giving courts that power, elected officials can avoid appearing directly responsible for the actions taken.
Lawyer commented that this search presents no privacy concerns that are absent from other civil discovery questions. But if my wallet were stolen, no judge should issue a warrant to search the entire state in hopes of finding it. The search which took place seems to be extraordinarily broad relative to its target. Searching even one entire computer for an email which might or might not exist is a stretch. Searching hundreds is an abuse of judicial discretion that should have been appealed and overturned.
Slashdot Mirror
You're mistaken in your assertion that the US fifth amendment protects self-incriminating evidence stored on your hard drive. The fifth amendment is construed rather narrowly, that you cannot be compelled to incriminate yourself. If you've created any external evidence, however, you can be compelled to provide it to the courts (see the Northwest flight attendant case for a current example; it's on /.)
Any judge can order any person subject to its jurisdiction to provide any key or pad necessary to read anything. If the person is unable or unwilling to do so, that same judge can order the person fined or jailed for contempt of court. Courts in the US are much more powerful than in other jurisdictions. This is at least partly because by giving courts that power, elected officials can avoid appearing directly responsible for the actions taken.
Lawyer commented that this search presents no privacy concerns that are absent from other civil discovery questions. But if my wallet were stolen, no judge should issue a warrant to search the entire state in hopes of finding it. The search which took place seems to be extraordinarily broad relative to its target. Searching even one entire computer for an email which might or might not exist is a stretch. Searching hundreds is an abuse of judicial discretion that should have been appealed and overturned.