Lucy Rizzo
October 18, 2017
Forensics
Current Event #5
Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors
I read the article “Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors” for the magazine Forensics on the Scene and in the Lab. The article covered recent court rulings on whether or not the touch ID feature on older versions of the IPhone are covered by the fifth amendment rights or not. The 5th amendment prevents suspects from incriminating themselves by answering questions in a court of law or artifacts at the scene of a crime that are not covered by a police warrant. For example, in a court of law, no one is required to give the personal password to a smart device. Companies will not turn over customer information either, but if a police/ investigative team wishes to crack the combo they are permitted to under the law. A difference in the touch ID feature, is that “Touch ID and similar technologies have made fingerprints akin to a key,” the filing said. “Instead of carrying that key on a metal ring, Apple users now carry five potential keys on each hand.” This information was connecting back to a child pronography case, where authorities asked the residents of the house/ alleged criminals to open all IPads and IPhones in the house to search for footage. This piece of evidence was brought up by the defense attorney to the judge claiming that it was a violation of fifth amendment rights and that anything discovered on the devices should be thrown out. This situation and question is now being discussed by judges in different districts, trying to determine whether or not it was a violation of fifth amendment rights, and if the court of law needs to create any amendments to the law to include touch ID with protection.
This article was a very important conversation to be brought to the public's attention. With the rapid increase in technologies advancements, our courts need to be amending laws to accommodate for these advancements. With new technology coming out every few months, the government needs to create a bureau or cabinet of lawyers, judges, and officials to oversee how these technologies can impact criminal procedures in a court of law so that law enforcement officials do not throw out evidence based upon misconduct. Personally I think that technologies such as touch ID and passwords should be rightfully protected under the law and by major companies such as Apple, Microsoft, and Android. In other court cases we have seen Apple stand by their customer contacts and have not breached these when pressured by courts, which I find very comforting. I also think that it is very important for upcoming generations to know that laws will start adapting to changing times, and will mold to protect a growing community influenced and interconnected with technology.
Overall I found the article very informative. I though the overall message was well developed and the examples were helpful but it was relatively short. Though the story was written today, I am intrigued to see if the writer will follow up on upcoming news and findings regarding this court case and what conclusion is drawn about touch ID protection under the law.
Internal Server Error, www.forensicmag.com/news/2017/10/case-reveals-legal-rules-thumb-tricky-iphone-sensors.
ReplyDeleteIn Lucy Rizzo's review on the article, "Case Reveals Legal Rules of Thumb Tricky with iPhone Sensors" one part I feel she did well on is how she was able to input many direct quotes from the text making her examples as clear as possible. This is an important part when writing about an article because it is the best way two prove your claim. Another way I part the writer of this current event did well in was explaining their evidence. For example, after every piece of evidence they were able to support it with an explanation. This is a necessary part when writing current events because just stating evidence without an explanation makes your evidence seem weak. An additional way the writer showed a well written current event was how her article was organized.For example, her article was separated into three different parts. Her introduction, which talked about what her article is about and what the problem was. Then there is the body paragraph which shows evidence to what the problems that are happening in the article and then there is her conclusion which gives the reader her opinion on the article.
Things i feel the writer could have done better is spaced the writing out more because every pierce of information was all together. The way the writer could have fixed this problem is indenting a few lines to create space for each piece of evidence. Another thing I think the writer could have done better is added a little more information. I feel that there wasn't enough information leaving many questions to outside readers. The way the reader could have fixed this is just using more information or quotes given in the text of the article.
Lastly one thing that I learned from the writer was how the 5th amendment can be used and that people cannot be forced to revealing personal information without the official charge of the offense or crime.
In Lucy Rizzo’s review on the article, “Case Reveals Legal Rule of Thumb Tricky With iPhone Sensors” I think the writer did a good job on explaining the court case and how the touch ID is a violation of the fifth amendment. She explained how the defendant incriminated themselves because they had to open the ipads and iphones which gave away information. Another thing I believe she did well was providing information on the case. She stated a few parts of a child pornography court case, and how the defendants attorney brought up the question that the touch ID violated the fifth amendment. This was important because it then brought up the question of how the fifth amendment was violated, and is now regarded by the public. Finally, the last thing that Lucy did was incorporate her own opinion, and explained her position on the subject. She said that she believes touch ID and phone passwords should be protected under the law, and believes that it was a violation of the fifth amendment. While Lucy’s article was good, there are a few things that she could have added. First off, I think she could have spent a little more time explaining how the fifth amendment works. She did a good job introducing it, but she didn’t explain how it works. Another thing, I think she should have improved her claim a little more, in the start of the article she mentioned the fifth amendment, then jumped into the court case. The topic sentence was a bit scrambled and could have used a little more organization and time. In conclusion, I learned a few things about the law system, how information can be thrown out if it was collected unconstitutionally, which I think is very interesting.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
Https://Www.forensicmag.com/News/2017/10/Case-Reveals-Legal-Rules-Thumb-Tricky-Iphone-Sensors.