For those reasons, the court said that forcing the individual to decrypt the hard drives would not amount to self-incrimination since it would not change the outcome of the court case or their final ruling.
It's certainly interesting to think about. Imagine that the defendant was accused of embezzling 1000 BTC, but the actual number is much higher, 5000, for example. The court only knows and has evidence for the 1000 BTC. Providing them with access to the computer would be self-incriminating if they can obtain evidence for the remaining 4000 bitcoin. I wonder what would happen then.