Publicity Seeking Florida Sheriff Promises To Put Tim Cook In Jail For Refusing To Decrypt iPhones
from the the-crazy-sheriffs-are-acting-up-again dept
We've written quite a few times about Polk County, Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd. You may recall him from the time he arrested two teenagers because they admitted to "bullying" another teen who committed suicide. Judd also promised to arrest the parents of both girls as well, stretching an already ridiculous understanding of the law to absolute breaking points (in fact all of the charges were dropped against the girls, because, all the talk of bullying was basically not true).Judd also has made news for falsely arresting and then publicly shaming men, saying that they're "sexual predators" and parading them in front of the press, seizing their money and possessions and then "negotiating" to only give them back some of what they seized. Oh, and then there was the time that Judd used Craigslist to help arrest prostitutes... but then blamed Craigslist for the problem.
Judd certainly has a reputation for generating press attention by saying the most outrageous things, and he's keeping that up now, by holding a press conference to announce that if Apple CEO Tim Cook doesn't decrypt an iPhone for him, Judd will arrest Cook. Yeah, good luck with that plan.
"Let me tell you, the first time we do have trouble getting into a cell phone, we're going to seek a court order from Apple and when they deny us I'm going to go lock the CEO of Apple up," Judd said in a press conference Wednesday.Another report of the press conference said that Judd followed this up, for emphasis, with: "I'll lock the rascal up."
Yeah, you see, that's not how the law actually works. And you'd think, as Sheriff, Judd should know that. But he doesn't. Or he does and he doesn't care. Neither of which is a good sign in a sheriff.
"You cannot create a business model to go, 'we're not paying attention to the federal judge or to the state judge, because we're above the law,'" Judd said.Of course, that's not the issue at all. It's not about ignoring a judge, it's about building a secure product, and what kinds of things a court can or cannot force a company to do to the security of its products. No one is saying they're "above the law." Except, it seems, Sheriff Grady Judd, who thinks that he can put Apple's CEO in jail based on his own desires, rather than what the law actually says.
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: encryption, free speech, grady judd, law, polk county, tim cook, warrants
Companies: apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is how broken our law is
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When will Judd arrest himself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When will Judd arrest himself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beneath Above the Law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Court Order
Is there an app for that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Court Order
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ah, it finally comes out. He wants to sue Apple for trademark infringement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I pretty sure that one day we will find out that he has been taking bribes, sexualy abusing young boys, paying male prostitutes and using confiscated drugs. Anyone who grandstands like that guy has something to hide - be sure of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We need a new game with new rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We need a new game with new rules."
Yeah! one with no lobbyist! No need for fund raising if the process was prepaid with equal exposure for each candidate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There should be two version of secured software
1. With a "backdoor" or "golden key" for all government, congressmen, people in the law enforcement community, DOJ etc...
2. The other type with actual security for the rest of the world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Believe it or not, Apple is allowed to appeal any order issued by any court. It's hilarious that law enforcement seems to think that the appellate courts don't exist.
Due process must be a real bitch to law enforcement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or the crime was committed within his jurisdiction. Most jurisdictions (at least in the US) have policies and procedures on allowing an outside jurisdiction to execute an arrest within for such circumstances.
And if the suspect is declared a 'fugitive from justice' the courts will NOT observe or enforce jurisdictional restrictions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about safes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about safes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about safes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would love to see that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I would love to see that
If there's any goodwill left in the tech industry towards law enforcement at this point the one who has it isn't paying attention. It's been clear for a good while now that a great many in the latter see the tech industry as their enemy, or at the very most a useful tool to use for their own gains no matter the cost.
When you've got the DOJ/FBI arguing that because Apple has helped them in the past that they should be forced to do so again, despite the significant differences between the cases, it's clear that willing cooperation is a good way for a company to open themselves up to a world of trouble down the road, and they're better off refusing any request until they get a court order forcing it, and even then should weigh how much compliance will cost versus an appeal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I would love to see that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I believe we more accurately call this type of "promise" a "threat".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clearly he hasn't throught this through
Has he said enough to actually be in trouble?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Due Process is Not a Crime (yet)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, just ditzy cop.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's a publicly traded company - it's not like they could even do what LavaBit did and shut down; the shareholders wouldn't allow it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, you see Sheriff Judd and his type construe filing an appeal itself as "defying court orders". Remember, these are people who taser other people for not moving fast enough. They don't tolerate being questioned. At all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If yer going to get disappeared anyway, may as well go out with a bang.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If it walks like a duck...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If it walks like a duck...
Clear case of someone who should never be granted any amount of authority. Even if this is just grandstanding for the next election, it raises the expectations of some voters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ars Article: Here
He's a moron.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1- Some people can't learn and 2- disobey a judge
With regard to ignoring a judge's order he might find himself in jail. Judges can do that. Putting him in jail with some folks the sheriff put there might be an interesting experience for him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Buford T. Justice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Buford T. Justice
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AC is an idiot. First, Tim Cook is only the CEO. The sheriff wouldn't be able to arrest him. Second, The sheriff would have to prove that Tim Cook committed a crime within his jurisdiction. Since I seriously doubt Tim Cook has been to Florida when a crime was committed requiring the unlock of an iPhone, this argument falls flat.
There's not a court in this country who would extradict a CEO of a tech company to the state of Florida simply for refusing to install a backdoor or unlock an iPhone.
Finally, when it all comes down to it, Tim Cook would never be extradicted until it makes its way through the federal courts.
AC is also an idiot because it's obvious he believes that we don't have "due process" in this country. Everyone is entitled to appeal any order handed down by any court.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]