Yup reading the law clearly show the only proof is the prosecution states the contents and date as they do in the filing. The filing contains what they call pr

Yup reading the law clearly show the only proof is the prosecution states the contents and date as they do in the filing. The filing contains what they call proof, I believe it better characterised as an assertion. No jury, just a judge decides if Lauri goes to jail and the only thing that can prevent it is if he proves the contrary. Ever try and prove a negative ? Decryption showing no file won't necessarily be sufficient, as the document could still be on a double decrypt in the salt. They want named documents, the defendant gives them up or goes to jail. Interesting to note one of the documents is "pirate" movies. (The court filing literally says "pirate", wtf does that even mean). Suppose the movie was crap and he deleted it. IMHO RIPA 49 is a travesty should not be legal. Quite possibly isn't, we shall see when it gets to the human rights court - though if I had to put money on it the govt. knows its dodgy and won't let it go that far.