Court filings from several law enforcement organizations say that people may just stop helping with police with their investigations if Apple gets its way in an iPhone encryption case in Brooklyn.
The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the Association of Prosecutor Attorneys, and the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York all presented their arguments to try to convince the presiding judge that the iPhone maker is subverting centuries of law by refusing to help in a drug case.
The FBI has dropped the higher-profile pursuit of Apple’s cooperation in accessing a locked device in San Bernardino after shelling out over a million dollars for outside help. But authorities are pushing forward on a case in Brooklyn concerning an iPhone belonging to Jun Feng, who entered a guilty plea months ago. Investigators still want into his device, however, so they’ve evoked the All Writs Act to compel Apple to let them in.
Magistrate Judge James Orenstein has already ruled that Apple doesn’t have to help, but the government is appealing that decision.
“If Apple were to prevail in this court, the public at large may think twice about cooperating with law enforcement when called upon to do so, invalidating centuries of well-settled law and common practice,” the filers said (via ABC News). “Second, Apple’s refusal to provide assistance, if validated by this court, will have far-reaching public safety ramifications by giving criminals a safe haven to conduct their unlawful activities.
“To be clear: If the court adopts Apple’s reasoning, public safety will suffer. Crimes will go unsolved, and criminals will go free.”
In Apple’s own argument last week, it said that it “strongly supports, and will continue to support, the efforts of law enforcement in pursuing criminals. But it refuses to set a precedent that will let authorities “lodge future, more onerous requests for Apple’s assistance.”
We kind of understand the police’s concern, but it’s still pretty weak. We can’t imagine someone refusing to help a criminal investigation “because Apple didn’t,” especially since one of Apple’s primary reasons for not aiding in San Bernardino was that it was unable to do so. But in cases like this one, the courts have routes they can take before dragging device manufacturers into court — namely, compelling the defendant to unlock his own phone under penalty of contempt.
We assume he has the passcode, at least.
Evan Killham is a freelance writer who lives in Nebraska and isn’t interested in football, so he has plenty of time to play and think about video games. He has written for Bitmob and GamesBeat and sometimes, he even goes outside. But not too often because he’s heard there are bees out there. Occasionally, companies send free units for review. Evan subscribes to Cult of Mac’s Reviews Policy and also does not keep the items he receives for possible coverage.
9 responses to “Cops fear Apple could be a bad influence on citizens”
DOJ dropped the case as they got hold of the passcode.
oh bull shit
Criminals will go free? And the shooter in the San Bernardino shooting is still free? The guy’s dead from being shot at the scene of the crime. Right?
The idiots think that every crime is going to be solved and every criminal is going to be caught solely on information from an iPhone? They didn’t find anything worth a damn on the one they got access to after wasting over $1 Million of tax payer money. Imagine that. After all of that time and money wasted on arguing over it, they got NOTHING from the actual device in question. Great. All of that for nothing.. So they really aren’t making a good argument for me to believe them. Retards.
Because every criminal that ever committed a crime before was caught and jailed and all crimes were 100% solved before Apple existed right?
Cops these day are a bad influence on citizens, since they think they are above the laws.
Maybe police forces and the government should focus a little more on that thing called investigating to solve a crime and maybe put some focus on getting police forces back to a place where the police are people who are to be trusted as “the good guys.”
Nowadays it’s often just a matter of filing orders to operators.
All location data and three calls from the cell tower nearest the crime scene says he/she is guilty.
Then open up the phone and se if they took photos when they stabbed the guy…
(We had a hate crime recently where two guys killed a transvestitie, danced over his body, chanting about snakes…all in HD video…..- not filmed with an iphone….)
Case solved.
Every cop in the world want it to be that easy….
If you are going to kill sb, leave your phone at home….:-)
I’d be willing to bet the next iPhone has either facial recognition or a retina scanner as well as Touch ID.
Personal privacy gets nixed when police business is involved. Don’t get me wrong, I think that the FBI and police officers are valuable assets to the public safety. Without them we’d be completely at the mercy of criminals who have no concerns about taking your money, property and life. However, the problem arises that if Apple provides a tool to open up the iPhone, it will eventually be used by criminals and foreign governments to pry into iPhones to do the kinds of things with our personal records, bank accounts and credit card information that would leave us penniless with trashed identities. The minute you compromise security to one group, you can be sure it will be hijacked by the evil element. Also, I’m not certain 100% of the government or police forces might be fully trustable with personal and financial user data.