No, but that's not the scenario we're talking about.
If you a) have an encrypted chunk of data that's 1TB, b) when subpoenaed, hand over only 50GB worth of data, and c) are using a tool that is known of it's ability to offer "hidden volumes" to supply plausible deniability, you can be damn sure that a judge is going to find that suspicious.
The more relevant question is: is it suspicious enough to permit the judge to issue a contempt citation? Well, that's a question for the lawyers, but I'd sure as hell hate to be the test case.
I haven't used TC in a long time but don't you determine the size of the volume/container when you create it, not when you put data into it? That would mean it's entirely believable that you created a larger (1TB) volume with future use in mind but have yet only had a need for a part (50GB) of it.
Of course that's the scenario we're talking about. Having a big volume is about as relevant as a big hard drive. Would you buy a 250GB drive when the 1TB version is the same price (or less)? Of course not. Bigger is better. So why would you create a small encrypted volume when you have boatloads of diskspace to spare?
And no, that's not how contempt works. IANAL but Wikipedia says this:
To prove contempt, the prosecutor or complainant must prove the four elements of contempt:
Existence of a lawful order
The contemnor's knowledge of the order
The contemnor's ability to comply
The contemnor's failure to comply
There's no way to prove your ability to comply with decrypting a hidden volume for as long as it remains hidden.
If you a) have an encrypted chunk of data that's 1TB, b) when subpoenaed, hand over only 50GB worth of data, and c) are using a tool that is known of it's ability to offer "hidden volumes" to supply plausible deniability, you can be damn sure that a judge is going to find that suspicious.
The more relevant question is: is it suspicious enough to permit the judge to issue a contempt citation? Well, that's a question for the lawyers, but I'd sure as hell hate to be the test case.