Already incriminated by a witness.
With the usual "I am not a shark lawyer" disclaimer, it would seem in this case that there are reasonable grounds to force a password confession despite the Fifth Amendment, as the police have a reliable witness, the defendant's sister, who has testified as to seeing the images on the external hard drive.
Whilst this is one person's word against another's, I would have thought such testimony was sufficient existing evidence that "the defendant would be incriminating himself" would no longer apply as it is the sister who has incriminated him with her testimony.
And why on earth, if you were in possession of such images, would you show them to your sister?!
Biting the hand that feeds IT
