He did not "try to cover up his tracks", he did what he'd do basically every day as a normal software developer doing his job. The "encrypted it and uploaded it

He did not "try to cover up his tracks", he did what he'd do basically every day as a normal software developer doing his job. The "encrypted it and uploaded it to a server in Germany" is a red herring that shows exactly how inept the judiciary was in interpreting his actions. Why does it matter that the server was in Germany? Isn't it common sense that he would encrypt any data he uploads? And it's nonsensical to not try and interpret exactly what it is he copied and why he did so. As the vanity fair article points out, he did not in fact copy any of the vast amounts of valuable data he had access to. (He had access to everything!). But he chose tedious infrastructure code instead, to get a sense of what non-proprietary libraries that were used