This is exactly what they were trying to do in the San Bernadino case with the iPhone. They were trying to set a precedent using an 'indefensible' case. He was a terrorist! We should stop terrorism! It was never about that specific iPhone. Same thing here. If they get to use this technology here what's to stop them doing it in other cases?
It's a shame defence attorneys get paid such low wages. They are the front line defence against this stuff and the state always has a strong advantage over them in every trial.
