That's definitely one of the concerns, since the case at hand is about content discovered in unaddressed space. There's already some court precedent saying that

That's definitely one of the concerns, since the case at hand is about content discovered in unaddressed space. There's already some court precedent saying that such images can't be prosecuted for mere possession since it's unclear how they arrived there. In the past, that's meant "malware or remote access", but it does create concern about "the person doing the search, who put the image somewhere that there would be no record of how it arrived there".