Comment by JasonADrury
16 days ago
You would at the very least make them guess which finger, there's no indication that happened here.
The court can compel you to make your fingers available, it can not force you to disclose which finger or the manner in which you touch that finger on the fingerprint sensor. Apple devices allow only limited attempts.
If you're not being actively helpful, the investigators may end in a rather awkward position.
I'd be wary of trying this as it reeks of "one neat trick" thinking applied to law based on a small technicality where law is often subject to the spirit instead of strictly hewing to the most favorable interpretation the exact wording for the citizen. The warrant can just state you're required to unlock the system not simply "make your fingers available".
It's fun to try to find places where the rules seem to leave holes but it's important to remember the courts don't have to hew precisely to how you read the law. I see that a lot on tech centric boards where the law is treated like it's strictly, precisely, and impartially interpreted down to the exact words (though often not using the legal meaning of words which have decades of caselaw and interpretation informing their legal meaning).
No, it's literally based on existing boilerplate language that's already commonly associated with these warrants based on previous litigation.
Making your body parts available is not testimonial, answering "Which finger?" undoubtedly is.
> answering "Which finger?" undoubtedly is.
Unless that's already established in your circuit you're counting on the court agreeing with your interpretation because the cops/courts certainly think they can compel that.
All I'm doing is cautioning you and anyone else reading against DIY legal interpretations. Have a lawyer.
3 replies →