“In this country we have rights,” Mark Cuban blogs. “Under the 6th Amendment we have very specific rights: ‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.'”

“In the current case facing Apple, the terrorists who had possession of the phone are deceased. However, in one of the next times Apple is called upon to open up a phone to enable access, chances are good that the person in possession of a phone during an illegal and possibly heinous act will be alive, be an American citizen and demand ‘to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence,'” Cuban writes. ” In the event Apple loses the current case to the FBI, setting a precedent that they can be compelled to unlock phones for the FBI and other government agencies, each and every defendant in such cases will have the assistance of counsel for their defense. What do you expect every defense lawyer to do in order to protect their client who has had a phone opened?

“Once the phone is ‘cracked’ by Apple or any device or Operating System developer, whatever is found by the FBI or whatever government agency is involved, is going to be labeled “planted” or false evidence,” Cuban writes. “The defendants lawyer is going to scream as loud as they can that whatever was found was not originated by their client. That Apple, in cahoots with the government agency, modified their software to not only unlock the phone, but to also write to the device everything the government agency needs to gain a conviction. Pictures. Texts. Logs. Files. Videos. All originated and/or imported by the code in order to gain a conviction.”

“The best way to disprove this allegation by the defense attorney?” Cuban writes. “Line by line publication of the code used to open it. Reviewed by who knows how qualified and how many “experts” who will pass judgement based upon who paid them. Possibly a line by line presentation of the code to a jury of the defendant’s peers.

“Yes, the FBI and Apple would do everything possible to try to stop this presentation, but what if they cannot?” Cuban writes. “Which is exactly why Apple must win the current case against the FBI. There is a near ZERO chance that the code created by Apple to break into their phones can stay private under current laws.”

Much more in the full article – highly recommended – here.

MacDailyNews Take: The more prominent people who line up to support Apple, the better.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Visit the Apple-backed reformgovernmentsurveillance.com today.

SEE ALSO:
U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch plays disinformation card in iPhone unlocking fight – March 1, 2016
The FBI’s case against Apple got kneecapped in Brooklyn: The judges rebuke couldn’t have been stronger – March 1, 2016
U.S. Magistrate Judge: The U.S. government cannot force Apple to unlock an iPhone in New York drug case – February 29, 2016
Verizon CEO McAdam supports strong encryption; Apple vs. FBI should be addressed by U.S. Congress – March 1, 2016
House Judiciary Committee members consider legal brief in support of Apple vs. U.S. government – March 1, 2016
Apple will tell Congress that strong encryption protects against terrorists – March 1, 2016
U.S. Representative Darrell Issa on Apple vs. FBI: Very scary when your government wants to know more about you – February 24, 2016
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Apple’s top lawyer: U.S. government order weakens security for all iPhones – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook decried Obama’s ‘lack of leadership’ on encryption during a closed-door meeting last month – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Tim Cook can probably defy the US government all he wants and not go to jail – February 29, 2016
Apple CEO Cook picks up where Snowden left off in privacy debate – February 29, 2016
Obama administration set to expand sharing of data that N.S.A. intercepts – February 28, 2016
If Apple loses, your home could be the next thing that’s unlocked: Access to your security cameras would be just a judge order away – February 28, 2016
The Apple vs. FBI fight is about something more basic than software and laws – February 28, 2016
Apple privacy battle with Washington looms as watershed moment – February 26, 2016
Apple’s lawyer: If we lose, it will lead to a ‘police state’ – February 26, 2016
Apple: The law already exists that protects us from U.S. government demands to hack iPhone – February 26, 2016