Re:5th Amendment doesn't apply (Score 1)

Yes, by having the encrypted drive, the prosecution does technically possess the documents. Of course, they do not possess the documents in any usable form.

The point of discovery is to bring everything, incriminating or not, before the court, after which the prosecution and the defense will offer theories of what happened, supported by the evidence. It's not the actual possession of a physical document that matters. It's whether the information it contains is shown to the court. Refusing to show information to the court, regardless of whether such information is incriminating or not, is itself a criminal act, namely one of not following the legal process. Similarly, resisting arrest is a separate crime, because you're not following due process.

If the documents, instead of being encrypted, were written in some obscure language for which she is the only surviving speaker, would she be obligated to translate them into English so the courts can read them?