3 ms·

> Looking at the case results the prosecution lost the case for reasons that would be apparent to anyone that understood how IT systems worked. Can you share a

> Looking at the case results the prosecution lost the case for reasons that would be apparent to anyone that understood how IT systems worked. Can you share any details, even in a very abstract way, on what it was? I'm curious as to how weak their case was - because if it was something as asinine as thinking that filesystem file modification dates are trustworthy or that any activity in the Windows Event log proves that a human user was physically sat at the machine then I'd like to know why the prosecution didn't have someone on their side to tell them they didn't have a case so they wouldn't waste time with a trial?

kingcharles 5y ago
LOL. Two things here. If this is a criminal case the prosecutor will have an expert who testifies that these things are immutable, and then as a defendant you will not have enough money to have your own expert to refute it. And anyway you'll never find a lawyer that knows anything technical about computers to even come up with these sorts of technical challenges. Plus the judge hates nitpicky challenges to evidence like this, so he'll fuck you for even bringing them up.