| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.18 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A presente dissertação tem por objetivo abordar a partir de uma decisão emitida pelo Juiz Steven Frucci no estado de Virginia/USA, no sentido de que as pessoas não têm de desbloquear seu smartphone protegido por senha para a polícia do estado, porém, no caso dos smartphones protegidos por digitais e senhas a problemática alusiva a autoincriminação referente a colheita de provas obtidas em aparelhos dessa natureza de propriedade do arguido à sua revelia e sem a devida autorização judicial, bem como as consequências jurídicas que podem advir de tal fato em relação a garantia de não autoincriminação e ao direito ao silêncio, sobretudo no que diz respeito a eventual violação ao princípio nemo tenetur se detegere, fazendo uma breve análise do caso concreto. Este assunto já é motivo de grande preocupação por parte da doutrina criminal em face do avanço da tecnologia. Tecemos comentários acerca do protagonismo e da importância que a criptografia exerce no tema. A dificuldade de se ―quebrar‖ as senhas e as formas de criptografia utilizadas. Procuramos, também, contextualizar o assunto jurisprudencialmente. Ressaltamos os princípios que informam o tema, a quebra de sigilo de dados e sua influência na intimidade e na vida privada das pessoas. O direito ao silêncio como garantia a não autoincriminação e a fragilidade dessa garantia no direito atual. A produção de provas do arguido contra si mesmo, e as provas ilícitas por derivação, abordando a teoria dos frutos da árvore envenenada e seu nexo de causalidade com o nemo tenetur. Tecemos, ainda que, de passagem, breves comentários sobre a teoria da conclusão antecipada (foregone conclusion). Abordamos, ainda, o direito ao silêncio, de per si e sua relativização. A relação entre a globalização do terrorismo, as providências que os organismos internacionais têm adotado para combate-lo e suas consequências nefastas paro o direito de permanecer em silêncio.
The present dissertation aims to address a decision issued by Judge Steven Frucci in the state of Virginia / USA, in the sense that people do not have to unlock their password protected smartphone for state police, but in the case of smartphones protected by digital and passwords the problematic allusive to self-incrimination regarding the collection of evidence obtained in devices of this nature owned by the defendant in his her absence and without the due judicial authorization, as well as the legal consequences that may result from this fact in relation to the guarantee of non-self-incrimination and the right to silence, especially as regards any breach of the principle nemo tenetur se detegere, giving a brief analysis of the case. This subject is already cause for great concern on the part of criminal doctrine in the face of the advancement of technology. We have comments about the leading role and importance of encryption in the subject. The difficulty of "breaking" the passwords and the forms of encryption used. We also seek to contextualize the matter jurisprudentially. We emphasize the principles that inform the subject, the breach of secrecy of data and its influence in the intimacy and the private life of the people. The right to silence as a guarantee of non-self-incrimination and the fragility of this guarantee in current law. The production of evidence of the defendant against himself, and the illicit evidence by derivation, addressing the theory of the fruits of the poisoned tree and its nexus of causality with nemo tenetur. We write, however, in passing, brief comments on the theory of foregone conclusion. We also address the right to silence, per se and its relativization. The relationship between the globalization of terrorism, the measures that international bodies have taken to combat it, and its nefarious consequences stand for the right to remain silent.
The present dissertation aims to address a decision issued by Judge Steven Frucci in the state of Virginia / USA, in the sense that people do not have to unlock their password protected smartphone for state police, but in the case of smartphones protected by digital and passwords the problematic allusive to self-incrimination regarding the collection of evidence obtained in devices of this nature owned by the defendant in his her absence and without the due judicial authorization, as well as the legal consequences that may result from this fact in relation to the guarantee of non-self-incrimination and the right to silence, especially as regards any breach of the principle nemo tenetur se detegere, giving a brief analysis of the case. This subject is already cause for great concern on the part of criminal doctrine in the face of the advancement of technology. We have comments about the leading role and importance of encryption in the subject. The difficulty of "breaking" the passwords and the forms of encryption used. We also seek to contextualize the matter jurisprudentially. We emphasize the principles that inform the subject, the breach of secrecy of data and its influence in the intimacy and the private life of the people. The right to silence as a guarantee of non-self-incrimination and the fragility of this guarantee in current law. The production of evidence of the defendant against himself, and the illicit evidence by derivation, addressing the theory of the fruits of the poisoned tree and its nexus of causality with nemo tenetur. We write, however, in passing, brief comments on the theory of foregone conclusion. We also address the right to silence, per se and its relativization. The relationship between the globalization of terrorism, the measures that international bodies have taken to combat it, and its nefarious consequences stand for the right to remain silent.
Description
Keywords
Direito penal Smartphone Direito ao silêncio Auto-incriminação Prova Teses de mestrado - 2020