Fresno Bee | Clinton's generosity, service reflects her Christian faith Fresno Bee I support Hillary Clinton in calling out Donald Trump and his minions for embodying these deplorable characteristics. Now, let's consider Jesus' teaching about turning the other cheek. Clinton's response to those who continue to malign her: dignified ... |
Follow this link:
Clinton's generosity, service reflects her Christian faith - Fresno Bee
Can a court order a suspect to use the suspects fingerprint to unlock his or her smartphone? Or would that violate the suspects Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination? I wrote about that issue here. This post updates the previous one with two new cases and some additional discussion.
Background. The Fifth Amendment provides in part that no person may be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. This privilege against self-incrimination applies during the investigative phase of a case as well as at trial. And it applies to the disclosure of information that may lead to incriminating evidence even if the information is not itself directly indicative of guilt. However, it applies only to testimonial activity, not to nontestimonial actions like providing fingerprints, blood samples, or voice exemplars. The act of producing evidence that is not itself testimonial may have a compelled testimonial aspect, as when the act of producing the evidence constitutes an admission that the evidence was in the suspects possession or control. United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000) (ruling that tax fraud charges must be dismissed because the charges were based on documents the defendant produced in response to a grand jury subpoena; the defendants act of producing the documents was testimonial because the collection and production of the materials demanded was tantamount to answering a series of interrogatories asking a witness to disclose the existence and location of any incriminating documents; [t]he assembly of those documents was like telling an inquisitor the combination to a wall safe, not like being forced to surrender the key to a strongbox).
Smartphones are often secured by passcodes or fingerprint sensors. Ive written about computer passwords, which present the same Fifth Amendment issues as passcodes, here and here. In brief, some courts view compelling a suspect to provide a passcode as requiring a testimonial act because the passcode is contained in the suspects mind, and because providing the passcode may constitute an admission that the phone belongs to the suspect or is under the suspects control. That doesnt necessarily mean that a court can never order a suspect to provide a passcode. If the court concludes that it is obvious that the phone in question belongs to the suspect so that the act of providing the passcode wouldnt further incriminate the suspect, the court may rule that the suspects knowledge of the passcode is a foregone conclusion, rendering the Fifth Amendment inapplicable. Or the court might rule that the suspect may be required to provide the passcode if given immunity for the act of providing it. Both those possibilities involve complex legal questions that I hope to explore in a future post.
Although passcodes present thorny Fifth Amendment issues, the early authority on point regarding fingerprint sensors suggests that compelling a suspect to use his or her finger to unlock a phone is not testimonial. The suspect is required only to do a physical act placing his or her finger on a sensor and need not admit anything in his or her mind. My earlier post cited the authority available at that time, but we have some new case law now and it points in the same direction.
New cases. The most significant new case is State v. Diamond, __ N.W.2d __, 2017 WL 163710 (Minn. Ct. App. Jan. 17, 2017). The court ruled that a court order compelling a criminal defendant to provide a fingerprint to unlock the defendants cellphone does not violate the Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination.
In brief, the police arrested a burglary suspect and found that he was in possession of a cell phone. They obtained a search warrant for the phone and a court order requiring the suspect to provide a fingerprint to unlock the phone. On appeal, the defendant argued that this violated his Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination. The reviewing court disagreed because the order did not require the defendant to do anything that was testimonial. The court observed that the order did not require him to disclose any knowledge he might have and reasoned that it was no different than an order to provide a voice exemplar or a blood sample.
Less important but also worth noting is State v. Stahl, __ So. 3d __, 2016 WL 7118574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Dec. 6, 2016). Stahl is a case about a courts authority to order a suspect to provide the passcode to a phone, not a fingerprint. But in the course of discussing the passcode issue, the court stated: Compelling an individual to place his finger on [an] iPhone would not be a protected act; it would be an exhibition of a physical characteristic, the forced production of physical evidence, not unlike being compelled to provide a blood sample or provide a handwriting exemplar.
Caveat. Although requiring a suspect to press the suspects finger to a phone may not require any testimonial activity, orders on this point must be crafted carefully to avoid infringing on a suspects constitutional rights. An order requiring a suspect to unlock a phone, or to provide officers with an impression from the finger that unlocks a phone, might implicate the Fifth Amendment because such an order would require the suspect to decide which finger to use and so to share the suspects knowledge of which finger operates the sensor. Unless the foregone conclusion doctrine applies or the Fifth Amendment issue can be removed through the provision of appropriate immunity, such an order might be improper.
Worthwhile secondary sources. I cited a couple of secondary sources in my previous post. Id like to add to the list two blog posts by Professor Orin Kerr, a leading scholar in this area. His principal post on the topic is here, and a shorter one discussing the Diamond case is here.
Link:
Update on Fingerprints, Phones, and the Fifth Amendment ...
The co-founder of the Washington-based firm that commissioned the explosive and largely unsubstantiated anti-Trump campaign research dossier will reject a Senate subpoena to testify before Congress next week and invoke his Fifth Amendment rights, according to the heads of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Glenn Simpson, the former Wall Street Journal reporter who helped start political intelligence firm Fusion GPS, has been a key figure in the Russian election meddling saga ever since the dossier, which alleged a years-long Kremlin conspiracy to elect Donald Trump and included colorful sex stories, was leaked to the press after the Republicans November victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Since March, the Senate Judiciary Committee has pressed for Mr. Simpsons testimony and documents relevant to the case. His attorneys, Joshua A. Levy and Robert F. Muse, have rebutted with numerous defenses, including citing confidentiality agreements between Fusion GPS its clients. This week, a Judiciary hearing which would have featured Mr. Simpson had he voluntarily attended was canceled.
Late on Friday committee leadership executed hardball tactics to force him to tell what he knows as chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley, an Iowa Republican, and ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, announced theyd subpoenaed him.
Glenn Simpson, through his attorney, has declined to voluntarily attend Wednesdays Judiciary Committee hearing regarding compliance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act, the senators wrote in a statement. Therefore, a subpoena has been issued to compel his attendance. Simpsons attorney has asserted that his client will invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in response to the subpoena.
Mr. Simpsons lawyers in a letter reported by Politico, argued that this hearings purported focus on FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act] is pretext for an exploration of Fusion GPS reported work, on behalf of other clients, to investigate the ties of Donald J. Trump, his campaign and their associates to Russia.
Wednesdays committee hearing is also scheduled to feature Donald Trump Jr. and President Donald Trumps one-time campaign manager Paul Manafort.
On Friday, Mr. Grassley and Ms. Feinstein said both Trump confidantes had agreed to negotiate to be interviewed and provide relevant documents but the Senators also reserved the right to subpoena them if necessary.
Legal battle to continue
More legal battle is expected between Mr. Simpson and the committee.
Washington insiders woke Saturday debating whether the political operatives strategy to assert his Fifth Amendment rights to protect himself against self-incrimination - would hold up or if hed put himself at risk of being held in contempt of Congress, which could mean future criminal charges.
Deeper digging into the dossier could also be embarrassing for both Democrats and Republicans.
Mr. Simpson hired former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele in 20015 to compile opposition research on then-candidate Trump. The resulting dossier which was reportedly sourced from the Kremlin allegedly received initial financial support from anti-Trump Republicans before being taken over and distributed by Democrats. It contained a lurid and largely discredited tale of a years-long Russian effort to elect the former reality TV star and property developer.
The Trump White House has vigorously denounced the allegations as a pile of garbage and FAKE NEWS! ever since online news service BuzzFeed posted all 35 pages.
This week The Washington Times reported that the FBI is routinely using the dossier as a checklist that agents tick off as they question witnesses in its Russia investigation. Sources told The Times it was strange that a gossip-filled series of memos is guiding the bureaus work.
For months Mr. Grassley has pushed to learn more about Mr. Steeles FBI relationships, which allegedly date back to help the former British spy provided the bureaus investigation of FIFA chief Sepp Blatter, whose 17-years reign over the football World Cup governing body ended amid corruption allegations.
Former FBI Director James Comey, whom Mr. Trump fired in May, has refused to publicly answer questions about the bureaus relationship with Mr. Steele.
Additional drama next week is expected from Mr. Trump Jr. and Manaforts testimony. Democrats are eager to question both about a meeting they held last year with a Russian lawyer who promised to provide comprising information about Ms. Clinton. Republicans are keen to start clearing the air on an issue that has distracted Washington from Mr. Trumps agenda.
On Friday, Reuters reported it had found public records contradicting statements by the lawyer who met Mr. Trump Jr. and Mr. Manafort that shed never worked for the Russian government. The news agency found Natalia V. Veselnitskaya had once represented Russias top intelligence agency, the F.S.B., which replaced the K.G.B. after the fall of the Soviet Union.
See the original post here:
Boss of firm behind anti-Trump dossier to plead the Fifth at congressional hearing - Washington Times
Harris Markowitz was overjoyed when he was nominated for Shorty Award's "Snapchatter of the Year" last year. The award show, which honors the best in social media, pitted the 25-year-old against the likes of DJ Khaled, who would later be crowned.
Markowitz's nomination, however, piqued the interest of some major brands like Zillow and Coca-Cola, which soon commissioned him to create content for their brand's Snapchat accounts.
Fifteen months later, Markowitz's personal Snapchat account is mostly dark, and he isn't working on any brand accounts anymore. "We saw a decline in viewership on Snapchat and an increase on Instagram," Markowitz told CNBC recently.
The shift mirrors the relentless rise of the Facebook-owned Instagram Stories platform since its launch nearly one year ago, costing Snapchat its popularity with a medium it largely pioneered.
"Snapchat should've went back to the drawing board and figured out a new way to compete, instead of being romantic to how [it] has been running for the last couple of years," Markowitz said.
In a statement to CNBC, Ben Schwerin, vice president of partnerships for Snapchat's parent company Snap, said that the company's intent was "to build the best possible storytelling platform for you and your closest friends. Over the past few years, we've been delighted to see that many of the world's most influential people in fashion, sports, music, and entertainment were also using stories to connect with their biggest fans."
Yet Markowitz's outlook is shared by many non-celebrity social media influencers who struggle with posting on both platforms simultaneously.
In a recent study, social media marketing firm Mediakix looked at 12 top influencers who maintain a dual presence on Instagram and Snapchat. The firm found that over a 30-day period, those accounts overwhelmingly preferred Instagram Stories to Snapchat, posting 25 percent more on the former than the latter.
To be certain, Snapchat where boldface names such as DJ Khaled, Kim Kardashian and Chrissy Teigen are prolific users is a slightly different animal than most other social platforms.
Those who post don't 'like' or re-share the disappearing video snippets that helped the platform become wildly popular with Millenials, most of whom use Snapchat to communicate with friends, celebrities and experience events. In that context, high follower counts are less important when the content is ephemeral and can't go viral.
Still, in a space built on an instantly recorded video where two giants are slugging it out for users, is there room for both?
Influencers with small but loyal followings may market your brand better than the social media giants. Learn why these micro-influencers are game-changers.
Influencer marketing is a strategy in which businesses from all around the internet are competing. Creating a brand campaign around someone with a celebrity-status following has been a great first step in the evolution of influencer marketing in social media.
Micro-influencers, who have smaller audiences, are sliding up the scale. According to Abtin Masseratagah, CEO of Northrn, they are impacting the marketing industry at the highest rate. In today's world of marketing, every brand across the internet has the opportunity to work with someone who has invested time with a target audience the company may not have known it had.
To learn more about how micro-influencers are taking social media by storm and why they will change the way the influencer marketing game is played, read the three points below:
Micro-influencers are effective at marketing strategy because they are more invested in what they are doing on their social media channels of choice.
In fact, Adweek published an article saying these micro-influencers are personally more involved in their channels than mega-influencers. They have everything invested in what they are doing, which brings more personality, style and flair.
Masseratagah mentioned a report from Markerlythat studied Instagram engagement, with surprising findings:
Markerly recommends that brands pursue accounts with 1,000 to 10,000 followers in the micro-influencer category, as they receive more engagement than users with more followers.
Based on this fact alone, we can see the impact micro-influencers have on marketing as a whole. Someone who dedicates their marketing to one social channel and puts everything they've got into this channel will come out with better results than others trying to juggle every social channel.
One of the downsides of an influencer who has millions of followers is the connection theory of being relevant to an individual who has certain wants or needs for their life.
Micro-influencers have built loyal followings because they tap into a smaller, more targeted user base. This way, everything they do or say is relevant and useful to their particular audience.
Take two influencers who are huge in the social space today, the Kardashian sisters, who were given an assignment from a brand. Micro-influencers were given the same assignment. Digidayreported that the micro-influencers received a higher conversion rate.
A survey by Experticity showed 82 percent of customers would rather be sold to by a micro-influencer anyway. That's loyalty.
Micro-influencers are becoming the go-to source of big brands. These small influencers pack a huge wallop because of their connectivity, personality and relativity to their audience.
Don't think about social media in terms of followers. This is just a number and isn't relevant to the power someone can bring to a social marketing campaign. Think about the impact they have with so few followers. This is the key to bringing more advanced social marketing strategies to your business.
One of the reasons so many brands reach out to these micro-influencers is because their followers value their opinion. For some women, it's simply going to Instagram to get ideas about what type of dress they should wear on a night out.
Everyone has a person in some niche where you look forward to reading or watching what they're going to put up next. You keep up with them because they are serving up their own brand of "regular" and connecting with you on this level. Masseratagah said he jumps over to a certain micro-influencer's account whenever he needs some handyman ideas for around the house. Watching or reading about their experiences doing things you want to do builds trust and respect for them.
Authenticity is what users of social media want from every brand. It develops the relationship and creates a more advanced sales process further down the road.
So if you're trying to become an influencer and you thought the only thing preventing this from happening was your number of followers, think again. Maybe you own a company and are thinking about taking the plunge into influencer marketing. If either of these things are true, take a closer look at the micro-influencers in your niche, and you will find that not only is their audience reliable and trustworthy, but their results are real. This is why they are the unsung heroes of so many accomplished brands online.
Nathan Resnick
Read more:
3 Ways Micro-Influencers Are Impacting Social Media Marketing - Business.com