3 ms·

They'll just say "can't comment on an active investigation" if they don't find anything to make the whole thing seem worthwhile.

• zmmmmm 11y ago
  To which it would be reasonable to ask, "so why did you hold this whole case in public, against Apple's wishes, if it is now so secret you can't even comment on it?"
  • imron 11y ago
    To which they will reply, "we would not have commented on what we found on the device if Apple had been compelled to help us break in to it, and we will not be commenting on what found on the device now" Holding the case in public, and publishing the contents of the phone in public are very different things
    • zmmmmm 11y ago
      > Holding the case in public, and publishing the contents of the phone in public are very different things And saying they "can't comment" as the GP suggested is different to publishing contents of the phone. They could easily comment on whether they found anything or not, whether it had any importance to the case, the nature of what they might have found without revealing specifics. If they do simply say they "can't comment" then we will know they are lying, because because they already did comment, quite voluntarily: they just held a whole court case in public about it which revealed all kinds of gory details. A court case which Apple asked to seal and the FBI said "no, we want this to be public".
• anigbrowl 11y ago
  That's why you should ignore the media reports on any legal case and read the actual court filings, or at least follow coverage written for lawyers instead of the general public, which has little interest in learning anything about how public institutions actually function.