3 ms·
Yes, but why are the files needed if it is know which files the drive contains based on hashes, as thousands of hashes matching known images should be plenty to
by mickronome 10y ago
Yes, but why are the files needed if it is know which files the drive contains based on hashes, as thousands of hashes matching known images should be plenty to convict on ?
Maybe the hashes can only tell that some drive contains the images, and the prosecutor believes it is this particular drive, and tries to avoid having to deal with that defense ?
If there is evidence that the particular drive contains those images, why bother with the drive at all ? This is the part that doesn't make sense to me.
- haikuginger 10y agoBecause without the images, you have to lead a jury through the fundamentals necessary to make them believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the presence of certain strings of hexadecimal digits in a log file is conclusive evidence in its own right. Because failure to do so means that the defendant walks free. Because as long as he's in contempt, he's behind bars indefinitely, so why attach a specific term to his incarceration unnecessarily?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]