The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has held that investigators may force a criminal defendant to decrypt his computers where "the compelled decryption would not communicate facts of a testimonial nature to the [government] beyond what the defendant already had admitted to investigators."  The court held that the act of decryption would merely be communicating a "foregone conclusion"—things the government already knew, such as the fact that the defendant owned and controlled the computers—and therefore would not violate the defendant’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.  The decision follows in the line of a handful of other cases that have addressed the same issue.  But it remains unsettled exactly how much the government must already know about what is on the computer, and the defendant’s relation to the computer, before it can force decryption without running afoul of the Fifth Amendment.