Always remember: your fingerprint is identification. You can be forced to identify yourself to law enforcement. Do not make it your password. Your password is something you know, not something you are.
I don't know the verbatim message, but it says something along the lines of "Passcode is required to enable Touch ID"
Edit: with Touch ID enabled, if you slide to the lock screen without touching the sensor, it says "iPhone requires your passcode after restarting" but the title says "Touch ID or Enter Passcode"
I think you could just argue that you didn't want the disturbed and/or wanted to save some battery.
No. The difference is that the action is taken to obstruct a specific investigation. Generally protecting information without regard to a specific investigation is not obstruction. Same as shredding papers years before they become relevant to an investigation is also not obstruction.
> I think you could just argue that you didn't want the disturbed and/or wanted to save some battery.
Like perjury, proving obstruction may be difficult. That doesn't make it any less illegal.
Difficult to prove.
Any muppet attorney can come up with a hundred reasons why this was a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
> The court's ruling noted that FBI forensic examiners were unable to get past TrueCrypt's encryption (and therefore were unable to access the data) unless Doe either decrypted the drives or gave the FBI the password, and the court then ruled that Doe's Fifth Amendment right to remain silent legally prevented the Government from making him or her do so.
So it seems like the law is a bit ambiguous on this front.