Posted on 03/31/2016 10:20:28 AM PDT by BenLurkin
The FBI agreed Wednesday to help an Arkansas prosecutor unlock an iPhone and iPod belonging to two teenagers accused of killing a couple, just days after the federal agency announced it had gained access to an iPhone linked to the gunman in a mass shooting in California.
Faulkner County Prosecuting Attorney Cody Hiland said the FBI agreed to the request from his office and the Conway Police Department Wednesday afternoon. A judge on Tuesday agreed to postpone the trial of 18-year-old Hunter Drexler so prosecutors could ask the FBI for help. Drexler's trial was moved from next week to June 27.
Drexler and 15-year-old Justin Staton are accused of killing Robert and Patricia Cogdell at their home in Conway, 30 miles north of Little Rock, in July. The Cogdells had raised Staton as their grandson.
The FBI announced Monday that it had gained access to an iPhone belonging to Syed Farook, who died with his wife in a gun battle with police after they killed 14 people in San Bernardino in December. The FBI hasn't revealed how it cracked Farook's iPhone. Authorities also haven't said whether the iPhone and iPod in the Arkansas case are the same models or whether the FBI will use the same method to try to get into the devices.
Hiland said he could not discuss details of the murder case in Arkansas, but confirmed the FBI had agreed less than a day after the initial request
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Yep and all the other big companies treat people’s info as a commodity to buy and sell, but Apple is really the bad guys here. Sad!
“Apple did the right thing, and I will support them and any other company or individual who stands up to tyranny from within that we now live with.”
YEAH! SCREW the Constitution!
When did the right to a legal
search get put in there, yesterday?
How far we have fallen.
You lie. The government asked for a tool to defeat the number of attempt limiter. They also asked that it specifically also be able to enter numerous codes without having to physically enter them into the keyboard. The FBI said they wanted to be able to rapidly enter passcodes via wireless methods.
This is all in their original affidavit. They indeed asked for a backdoor.
And where is the right in the Constitution of the government to compel a company or an individual to do something against their will? This was not about Apple refusing to honor a search warrant. This was about the feds forcing a company to be compelled to perform an action under the allure of a law from 1789 that had nothing to do with the case.
If Apple had capitulated, the government would then have carte blanche to peruse our cell phones without probable cause (that would be the Fourth Amendment.)
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.,/B>
Pretty sure those conditions were met in this case. Or am I missing the part where it says you don't have to comply with a legally obtained search warrant? We've had a great deal of success using them in the past catching bad guys. Just because it's inside an iPhone doesn't make it less able to be searched. The guy who owns it owns the thing to seized and the thing to be searched. What, this doesn't count?
And yes, once again we are talking about the possibilities of caging two murdering little thugs. Or doesn't that matter in your opinion?
it is not Apple’s responsibility to make their product totally secure. If you want absolute security, obtain a very high order security ap.
I disagree. Had Apple cooperated, they could have retained control of the process. Now the process is out of their hands, and they have completely lost control of it.
Now it's going to be done against their will, instead of with their cooperation.
What control would Apple have?
“Here’s another search warrant, get cracking!”
“Yes master, FBI.”
Interesting. Well above my pay grade, but interesting none-the-less. d:^)
No I don't. *I* unlike many people who discuss this issue, have actually READ the relevant filings.
I am one of the few people who actually know what the H3ll they are talking about.
The government asked for a tool to defeat the number of attempt limiter. They also asked that it specifically also be able to enter numerous codes without having to physically enter them into the keyboard.
But this does not constitute a "Back Door." It also does not constitute a tool which was to be given to the FBI. The FBI filing with the court explicitly said Apple could retain custody of the phone, custody of the software, and the FBI would never touch it.
Apple deliberately ignored these assurances and started an immediate fearmongering campaign based on deliberately ignoring these assurances.
The FBI said they wanted to be able to rapidly enter passcodes via wireless methods.
They did not say that. They left the means of bypassing the keyboard up to Apple to decide. Using a hardwired USB port was perfectly acceptable to the FBI.
“Yes master, FBI.”
That is deliberate Propaganda Distortion. More like:
"Yes Master, US CONSTITUTION; THE HIGHEST LAW IN THE LAND."
I expect huge corporations to obey our constitutional laws too. They do not get a pass because they are big.
If a Court issues a warrant or writ to do so, Apple better F***ing do so. Yes, the LAW is Apple's Master, and Apple inc D@mn sure better obey it!
Read the FBI order and read Apple’s letter to its customers. The issue was not about a search warrant. Apple had already worked with the feds to assist them as far as it could comply (which Apple did not reveal just as cellular phone carriers do not reveal what they provide to law enforcement.) The feds wanted to compel Apple to perform an action that it could not do, specifically because it created its current IOS to be secure. The feds wanted Apple to create an operating system that would allow the feds to access the iPhone and change the features of its existing IOS. Remember that Apple put certain security features into its IOS as result of the feds (i.e., the NSA and God knows which other alphabet agency) already snooping on our cell phones and emails. Remember Edward Snowden? The feds were using this latest incident of terrorism to make the case that the feds need to access cell phones. Cellular phone records including calls made to and from the iPhones in question were already handed over to the feds. A warrant compels someone to hand over information or allow a premises to be searched. It does not compel someone to have to perform an action such as writing new programming code.
“If you have no understanding of cryptography or digital encryption, I suggest you do some research. There are no security experts anywhere in the world who thought the bullying of Apple was good for business.”
The other part of the world do not interest me. They do not live under our rule of law, which says nothing was done here that was even slightly illegal or unconstitutional. Our concern for laws “anywhere in the world” should have nothing to do with our Constitutional RIGHTS or our Constitutional OBLIGATIONS. It’s a two way street. Jugears in the White Hut may want us to live under other laws, but I do not. If we do not observe the ability to capture two alleged murderers by hacking into a phone, what is next? I’ll stand with my country and my Constitution, thanks.
Stop hiding behind the constitution. The abuses in the past few years by the Feds are rampant and there are no signs of backing down. This is the same govt that got away with fast and furious and Prism. Keep saluting the flag as our rights eroded long ago.
FBI agrees to unlock iPhone, iPod in Arkansas homicide case
You are responding to another thread.
“Stop hiding behind the constitution.”
Turn in your citizenship papers, you subversive American! Hiding behind the Constitution! Citing the Bill of Rights! HOW DARE YOU?
Heh heh heh. Priceless. You can’t get this kind of humor anywhere else.
Isn’t it comfortable with a jack boot firmly placed on your neck?
Whether the Feds have engaged in abuses elsewhere, does not justify refusing to comply with the law in this particular case. In this particular case, the law was with the FBI, and against Apple, and Apple should have complied with it rather than attempt to subvert the law with their mob-ocracy.
This is the same govt that got away with fast and furious and Prism.
I do not believe the government is monolithic. I believe it has branches and people that are bad, and branches and people who are relatively good and trying to do their jobs. "Fast and Furious" was not perpetrated by the FBI. I believe most of the men and women of the FBI are probably decent people with ethics and a desire to do their job properly.
Now I have nothing good to say about the ATF. As far as I'm concerned, they appear to be the malevolent Keystone Kops of supposed law enforcement. They are primarily bunglers, and secondarily bad eggs with delusions of significance.
"Prism" is an NSA thing, and I must admit I am concerned about what sort of skullduggery the NSA is up to nowadays.
Ok. Thank you for the reasonable response.
“Isn’t it comfortable with a jack boot firmly placed on your neck?”
Yeah, I imagine it would be. The SOB that tried to boot one there would be more uncomfortable though. Thanks for your concern, but I’m able to take care of myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.