DOJ Reached Out To San Bernardino Victims For Legal Support Before Going To Court Against Apple
from the and-they-want-us-to-believe-it's-not-a-pr-campaign? dept
The FBI keeps insisting that it's legal fight with Apple is not about the precedent and not about using the tragic incident in San Bernardino as an emotional plug to break down strong encryption. And yet... now it's come out that even before going to court, federal prosecutors from the DOJ went to the families of those killed in the San Bernardino attacks and asked them to file an amicus brief of support with the court:Even more interesting? Larson himself hadn't previously been representing any of the victims. Instead, the local district attorney "connected him" with survivors and relatives of those killed.Stephen Larson, the lawyer for the victims, told the Guardian the office of the US attorney for the central district of California contacted him on 14 February with a request to file a brief asking Apple to aid in unlocking the phone.
On 16 February, the federal attorney, Eileen Decker, requested a federal magistrate, judge Sheri Pym, issue a warrant for the unlocked iPhone 5C. Pym provided it that day.
It's not clear who he's actually representing right now. So far, at least a few of the relatives of those murdered have actually come out in support of Apple. We already mentioned Karen Fagan:
Karen Fagan, of Upland, is the ex-wife of Harry “Hal” Bowman and mother of their two daughters.And then there's Carole Adams as well:
“This is a very different thing than asking for data that is Apple’s possession,” Fagan wrote in an email. “They have complied with all of those requests. This is asking them to build a new piece of technology that could be used to invade the privacy of any iPhone. Furthermore, the FBI is citing an act written in 1789 (instead of new legislative action) to justify their request.
“I know that it is a tempting argument to say that we should allow government access to private information in order to make people feel safe. After all, the argument goes, people who aren’t breaking the law have nothing to hide. While that may be true, American citizens have been granted privacy rights, and this request breaches those rights,” Fagan wrote.
Her son was killed in the San Bernardino, Calif., massacre — but Carole Adams agrees with Apple that personal privacy trumps the feds’ demands for new software to break into iPhones, including the phone of her son’s killer.I'm sure that plenty of others will sign on to Larson's amicus brief, but the fact that it was all pre-vetted by the DOJ certainly seems noteworthy, and highlights how the DOJ/FBI recognize how much of a publicity stunt this case really is.
The mom of Robert Adams — a 40-year-old environmental health specialist who was shot dead by Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife — told The Post on Thursday that the constitutional right to privacy “is what makes America great to begin with.”
[....]
“This is what separates us from communism, isn’t it? The fact we have the right to privacy,” she said. “I think Apple is definitely within their rights to protect the privacy of all Americans.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: amicus brief, doj, fbi, precedent, publicity stunt, san bernardino, victims
Companies: apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The upside
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The upside
The only thing I can think of to get around that is a new Modified version of iOS that the government wants that correctly Digitally signed by Apple and somehow forcing a Auto update. Maybe there's a way to get around by doing that?!?!
That still requires work from Apple to do such a thing that the court has no right in asking Apple to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The upside
What about a factory reset, are the FBI expecting Apple to be able to us that to force an upgrade without destroying any data?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only purpose of contacting the families to speak up on the issue is a purely emotional appeal, which doesn't belong among the factors that lead to a court decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"My body and organs may be used for non-profit medical research. My death, body and organs may not be used for political gain, publicity, or out of context in a court of law to influence the court via emotional means; only for facts-based deliberation."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The transfer was so easy, a child could do it. Unfortunately, DeForest Kelly was not available, so the transfer was effected by the Head of Antonin Scalia, recently installed in its own jar, attached to an Arduino-controlled robot body.
Again, thank you for your donation to the Department of Justice Posthumus Thinking Tank.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The privacy issue is also moot. First and foremost, there is the question of ownership of the phone (the City owns, it, not the end user). They are acked for the phone to be unlocked and helping where possible. Second, the right to privacy is not without limits, and especially during a murder investigation. it's pretty hard to say "you can't read that, it's private". If the courts deem it worthy of review (and have done so in this case) there is no real privacy issues.
Honestly, when i read those quotes, I think that Apple is working harder than anyone to spin the story. It's working too, because you have bought into it hook line and "every other post on your blog this week".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you really think that Apple prepares a patch for every phone Individually? A signed patch can be applied to any phone running the same OS version, unless Apple complicate the patch itself to run a pre-install check.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A few days ago, I started getting pestered by iTunes that my iOS was out of date. It wanted me to install an update to iOS 9.2.1. I've been ignoring it, but finally applied it yesterday, and the nag screens went away.
I have no idea what got updated on my phone from 9.2.1 to 9.2.1, nor why my phone suddenly started reporting it needed the update. It could be that they applied an out of band security fix; it could be that they installed a back door. I have no way of knowing.
Both sides are applying a large amount of torque to this story; I figure with that much force, eventually it'll fall apart and we'll be able to do a post mortem on the remains.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
see, if someone got their touch ID fixed by an unauthorized source, it can get messed up and brick the phone (in the name of security).
People got upset, so Apple fixed it.
Now if you get your touch ID fixed by an unauthorized source, it simply shuts off the touch ID function.
Now, why that was an un-numbered update, I am not sure. It should have been 9.2.2.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Second, the right to privacy is not without limits, and especially during a murder investigation.
Yes, if we are investigating a murder it's ok to screw all the rest of the population to get such murderer. Who cares about civil rights, it's a murderer!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Gee Ninja, I didn't think you were quite that much of an idiot. Opinion changed, I guess.
My point is that during an investigation, the courts may order access to things that would otherwise be private. This is the phone used by the person who committed the crime, and the investigation may go to areas that for others is private.
My point is that during an investigation of a major crime, police do look in places where you (the accused) might consider private, but that are not - say your bank records or your mailbox. Privacy isn't an absolute.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This isn't about the privacy of the shooters. It's about the privacy for those who own iPhones.
They can't ALL be under investigation for murder.
Please, try and keep up. I was better with you trying to argue a backdoor isn't a backdoor, rather than this slop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The precedent this would set is just as bad if you never touch an Apple product. If the precedent is set, then ANY software company can be compelled to do the same -- and possibly under a gag order at that. Since this is a novel application, it wouldn't fly under a gag order, and needs its day in public court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
which is why I, who have never owned an Apple phone, and has no intention of ever owning an Apple phone, someone who is generally considered to be an "apple hater," strongly back them in this matter.
It's not about this bastard. It's not about Apple. It's not about the Apple fanbois. It's about everyone. Sure, it's JUST the FBI now (the same FBI that under it's founding director kept a selection of files that could end the career of almost every major political figure and government official of the day), but what about when it's the Chinese or the Russians? Once it's done once, it's almost impossible for Apple to refuse any request, and that's not even considering if this build where to be leaked. Can you imagine what a scammer could do with it?
No, this is bad. It's bad for everyone who doesn't think 1984 seems like a utopian paradise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We've always been at war with Eastasia
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't worry, we'll just manufacture another terrorist plot where we control everything this time around...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't worry, we'll just manufacture another terrorist plot where we control everything this time around...
Perhaps the FBI needs access to the phone to destroy evidence of complicity and/or prior knowledge which would embarrass the FBI.
It was quite unseemly how quickly the Apple ID was changed, and it destroyed the ability to easily gain access to the data. Perhaps intentional?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Don't worry, we'll just manufacture another terrorist plot where we control everything this time around...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Don't worry, we'll just manufacture another terrorist plot where we control everything this time around...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't worry, we'll just manufacture another terrorist plot where we control everything this time around...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seeking a new descriptive term or word
Now, the FBI is attempting to get the families of the San Bernardino victims to speak out in favor of forcing Apple to ... do whatever it is the feds are asking them to do.
I'd suggest 'astroturfing', or perhaps 'false flag politics' but those already conveys similar ideas and connote some modicum of effective camouflage and desired result.
Can we come up with a term or expression to suggest an attempt at astroturfing which has been or will most likely be bungled in some fashion?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Seeking a new descriptive term or word
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Seeking a new descriptive term or word
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This explains so much.
I mean, just think about all the "foiled terrorist plots": the "terrorists" tend to be from the bottom of the clue drawer. Maybe that's not who the FBI was aiming for. But when they figured that's what they got, they harvested early rather than risk getting the real constitution-jerker bungled by incompetence.
This one here was a success, so of course they are riding it for all they can. Crime-surfers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
#StandWithApple
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/apple-privacy-petition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually, possession would explain a lot of U.S. politics.
Though one does not really need to look for demons any more. People think they possess money, but particularly in politics, it's rather the other way round.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And it can get you 20 years in the state pen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not finding the actual case filing on-line
(And it has never been obvious to me how to search RECAP - has anyone done a tutorial?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]