[Powerofmene]

But that does not mean he downloaded them if someone else has access to his computer nor does that mean they are still there.

I read the article to mean that the police have proof that hashes of known child pornography were downloaded and are not on the computer so they are assuming that they were downloaded to the external hard drive. How can they see what files are sitting on a password protected encrypted drive? Who is to say that it is this external hard drive these files were download onto?

I just believe that more is needed to meet the "foregone conclusion" threshold.

[jsjohnst]

Read this link:

https://arstechnica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/rawlsopin...

Specifically the top paragraph on page 7. If you can get through that paragraph and still give him the benefit of the doubt, then you are more open minded than I am.

[Powerofmene]

Who is giving him benefit of the doubt? I have repeatedly said there may be child pornography on the drive or evidence of other crimes. I am simply saying there are a number of reasons he is unable or unwilling to do as he has been ordered by the Writ.

[Powerofmene]

Then the police need to work with the prosecutor and the prosecutor needs to bring charges and get a trial underway.

Prisons are overcrowded enough and it costs a pretty penny to house prisoners without us starting to house people indefinitely who have not been charged with a crime.