[vel0city]

I mean its a very radically different thing in almost every way than what was originally proposed. The zines didn't commit any crimes.

Let's say you hide someone who didn't actually commit a crime but you thought they did. Are you still guilty of hiding a suspect in the crime that wasn't a crime?

The standard was:

> I care if the accused believed they were and moved them for that purpose

So to that poster what matters was that the zines being useful or not to the investigation was not relevant, it was if the person thought it was potentially relevant or not.

The wife owning some zines is evidence of a crime? Really? Owning some zines is evidence of criminal activity these days?