Somebody needs to plant child porn on the supreme court justices' computers, so that judges understand the implications of "possession is 9/10ths of the law."
In 2004, a District Attorney in the Netherlands was targeted by a crime reporter. Near the DA’s home, this reporter had found a computer that the DA had discarded, and which upon examination was found to contain sensitive information and ‘child porn’. He was never arrested, and two years later, the State decided not to bring charges, they concluded that all the material had been downloaded from mainstream websites. The affair did damage this person’s reputation, and he quit in 2004.
That actually is a concern. It would be exceedingly simple for someone to plant images on another person's hard drive. Much easier than planting other physical contraband.
Taking it one step further entirely possible that the person who was the object of the plant had other borderline images as well which in some way enhanced the guilt of the truly law breaking images. (For example let's say the grandfather had the hose pictures and some really bad stuff. The existence of both would seem to make a stronger case for the law breaking images than just the clearly law breaking images alone.)
Hell, install the porn as part of a setup.exe payload and put it in an obscure folder 9 levels down from C:\Windows\System32\drivers. Who would ever look there besides the friendly officers inspecting your machine?
Child porn pretty much tops the list of scumbag behavior, but the fact that the judicial, legislative and enforcement arms are such technological noobs is not helping the world be a better place.
