"Schizophrenic" jailed for refusal to decrypt file

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :

The vermin running this country are truly mentally diseased. This entire ethos of using a sledgehammer to crack every nut is the hallmark of every nazi-flavoured dictatorship since history began.

I hope the human race is exterminated. Better oblivion than having to live under the rule of such evil degenerate filth.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"

Mushroom · Nearly there... Joined: 30 Apr 2009 Karma :

the programming of the masses towards such an end is getting rather advanced.

pa_broon74 · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Karma :

So...

Going by this, RIPA has only been used once and even then erroneously?

Typical.

Lots of heehaw currently about the DNA database south of the border today too. The claim is, Police forces have been arresting people purely in order to 'farm' DNA records.

Apparently (according to the screaming meemies that phone or email Jeremy Vine of an afternoon) an 11 year old boy was picked up for throwing stones, his DNA was taken as was his Mothers when she came to pick him up.

Interesting.

Rolling Eyes

____________________
Didn't catch anything.

Itchy · Super Spammer Joined: 07 Apr 2005 Karma :

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :

stinkwheel · Bovine Proctologist Joined: 12 Jul 2004 Karma :

Not all encryption keys are passwords.

If anyone was serious about keeping secret information that they don't want anyone to look at on their computer, they'd use one-off goldkey encryption. It uses a 256 bit encryption algorhythm stored on a USB device which in turn requires a passphrase to activate it.

USB device goes through shredder, no lookee at files. At all. Ever.
____________________
“Rule one: Always stick around for one more drink. That's when things happen. That's when you find out everything you want to know.”
I did the 2010 Round Britain Rally on my 350 Bullet. 89 landmarks, 3 months, 9,500 miles.

pa_broon74 · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Karma :

It remains unclear just what you'd be charged with if you refuse to allow a sample to be taken. It's part of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 which has been amended several times.

They had an ex-chief constable on the radio who wouldn't (read, couldn't) say what a person would be charged with if they refused to give a sample. He did hint that if a person attempted to fight off officers, assault or obstruction charges might be laid.

You have to remember, this is a person who has done nothing wrong in the first place which I find out of order. By being the victim of a crime or just an every day polic mistake (they're only human) they can end up criminalising themselves.

In a sense, it's quite similar to the original topic and links in with your right to remain silent. What they're now saying is, it only applies to the spoken word (and not at all if they think they can squeeze a suspicion terrorism in somewhere.)

Thumbs Up

____________________
Didn't catch anything.

smegballs · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Karma :

If he really did maintain

stinkwheel · Bovine Proctologist Joined: 12 Jul 2004 Karma :

smegballs · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Karma :

iooi · Super Spammer Joined: 14 Jan 2007 Karma :

If he had nothing to hide, then why not pass the key.....

Right to silence fine. But if you are innocent then why.......

He applied to get a new passport after his was retained to stop him leaving the country.

When coming to the UK to meet customs he had packages sent to where he was staying.....

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :

Ste · Not Work Safe Joined: 01 Sep 2002 Karma :

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :

Ste · Not Work Safe Joined: 01 Sep 2002 Karma :

He's not in prison, he's in a secure mental health unit, probably teaching crazier people how to make bombs. Razz

pa_broon74 · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Mar 2006 Karma :

The onus of proof used to be on the Police and the CPS (or PF up North) to gather evidence to prove guilt.

Now it's turned round, we have to provide evidence to prove our innocence. The Police, as in this case, just have to sit back and let it happen. Same with DNA sampling, the actual charge you end up with has nothing what-so-ever to do with what the police were originally investigating.

It's 'ya boo' law making, they can't get you on the more significant charge so they'll get you on some made up procedural one which has the effect of criminalising an otherwise innocent person.

Thumbs Up

____________________
Didn't catch anything.

Itchy · Super Spammer Joined: 07 Apr 2005 Karma :

GhostRider · World Chat Champion Joined: 31 Jan 2008 Karma :

smegballs · World Chat Champion Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Karma :

The people saying "he could have saved so much hassle by just showing the police", thats the whole point. The pigs want this fear of them so you "take the easy way out" and sacrifice your freedoms and privacy to avoid the "consequences".

The sad fact is that when most people see someone standing up for what they believe in they assume he/she is guilty. I admit there is a possibility that it could be kiddy porn, drug files, bomb files etc etc, there is also a very good chance that it is just innocent data. I really hope that he did it to prove the point that he will not bend over and take it from the govt scum and that he is going to standby his principles at whatever cost.

If that is the case then I have nowt but 100% respect and admiration for the man!

Really of course, who is to say that it should be a bad thing to have drug/bomb cookbooks? Most of the data is public on the net anyway so why should saving it for later reading be a criminal offence. In my eyes this man may have "broke the Law" but he is certainly not a criminal.

Ste · Not Work Safe Joined: 01 Sep 2002 Karma :

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :

Ste · Not Work Safe Joined: 01 Sep 2002 Karma :

It would be exposing abuse from the authorities if he proved himself right, by showing what innocent content it is that they've been fighting for him to show them. Until then lots of people do agree with 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear'.

It'd be a public service if he was to highlight their abuse by proving that it's happening. Instead he's allowing the authorities to present themselves in the press as being an important public service that removes schizophrenic bomb makers from the streets.

He's let themselves dig a deep hole, once they convicted him they stopped digging and put the spade down. That's when to show what it was they're making such a fuss to see.

It would be more in the public eye if he proved them wrong, it would be in the public eye in a way that would be quite hard the authorities to spin in their favour.

At the moment from what's in the public eye he's highlighting abuse from the authorities but it's only seen that way by those who already think that the police/courts abuse their powers. Whilst those who have complete faith in the police/courts won't see anything wrong with what's being done, nothing to hide nothing to fear and all that. Those people are the ones who would have their opinions changed by seeing proof of authorities abusing their power, until then all they see is the police and courts detaining a dangerous person.

Hetzer · Super Spammer Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Karma :