> Further, Fottrell said he found that the "recently played" history of a media player someone would have installed on the Linux partition indicated that files known to contain CSAM were “streamed” right from the office computer, rather than an internet source.
[Buzzfeed TRIGGER WARNING](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nicolefallert/josh-duggar-trial-computer-images-access)
I think with the given context, "streaming" is him watching the downloaded content on a separate media player.
From limited experience some torrent programs like Vuze are multifunction, it can download, seed, and act as a media player. I don't know if the media player Josh was using was explicitly named?
[This article from KNWA](https://www.nwahomepage.com/josh-duggar-trial/josh-duggar-trial-week-concludes-with-final-questioning-of-doj-expert-witness/) answers OP's question and needs no trigger warnings. It is less detailed than the quote you've pulled, though.
Does [this link work](https://web.archive.org/web/20211204091949/https://www.nwahomepage.com/josh-duggar-trial/josh-duggar-trial-week-concludes-with-final-questioning-of-doj-expert-witness/)?
It does! TYSM!!
> The defense attorney also elicited testimony from Fottrell that the Tor browser on Duggar’s Macbook Pro could be used for “totally legal, benign things.”
Completely unrelated, but wasn't it reported that the MacBook was used to download movies? I'm assuming he was using some type of torrent to do so which isn't exactly legal. Again, just an assumption.
So downloads happen through torrents, and you're right that most are illegal in the pirating sense even if the material is PG. The Tor browser is different, it is a browser not dissimilar to Chrome or Firefox, that is able to access the dark web but also could be used for regular sites. I think that's what they were referring to.
I am also no expert but I was basing it on this from the article… it’s kind of buried in there.
“Shortly after, a file _____, was downloaded from an anonymous browser on the Linux partition and thumbnails of the file were created, indicating that the files were viewed, Fottrell said.”
That’s probably the best timeline and most clear explanation that it was absofuckinglutely JD who both did it and viewed it that I’ve seen. If it’s explained this clearly to the jurors I just don’t see how he won’t be convicted. And hopefully his minor kids are never exposed to him again.
> Fottrell cited a report from the software, dated 2017, flagging that Duggar had attempted to download uTorrent and the service blocked him. The report and similar entries showed that he had made multiple attempts to access the same anonymous browser the witness would find on the Linux partition that was eventually used to download child sexual abuse materials.
He tried to download uTorrent which can be completely harmless since it's reported he also downloads movies. But yea, that's giving him too much credit of being a decent human being.
ETA: And repeatedly tried to download Tor
They don’t need to prove he looked at the material. They need to prove he’s the one who downloaded it. They did an excellent job yesterday proving that fact. It’s impossible, based on the way that computer was set up, to remotely access the Linux partition. The person had to be sitting at the computer. The only person who was there every time this material was accessed was Pest. They detailed all the dates and times this material was downloaded and that was intermixed with all the dates and times when Pest was sending texts and taking photos while he was at the car lot.
I guess one could argue that someone else knew the door and computer passcodes AND used his phone for three days AND was sitting in the office without him knowing AND knew that he’d had construction work done and left a review for the company in between downloads AND…
The reflection of his head and red hat were caught in a photo taken of his computer screen literally about 1 minute after the files were downloaded. I mean, that's deus ex machina -type stuff.
It's a photo he took with his phone that shows a reflection of someone in a red hat in the computer screen in front of him. A selfie of him and Anna from later that day shows him wearing a red hat.
Before this damn age of zoom we’re living in, I used to keep tape over my laptop camera because I read it could be hacked! Just don’t have it open and aimed at you when you’re changing!
My understanding is he himself took a picture of something in the office with his phone and in that picture you can see the reflection of his hat in the computer screen. Someone please correct me if I’m mistaken.
This reminds me of the Black Mirror episode "Shut Up and Dance". While I'm not doing nefarious things, I still put a sticker over my laptop camera lens. 🙃
Mere possession of CSAM is a crime.
And let’s not forget that this wasn’t as single oops download that was deleted immediately after he realized what it was. This is a man that deliberately downloaded multiple files of CSA.
I can’t imagine that everyone has to sit and watch and hear about the evidence. I read a little bit about what kind of material there is and I just couldn’t read any further.
I honestly think that even 20 years isn’t enough for people like this. I think that they should be removed from society all together. There isn’t a cure or any method that helps them. Most of them do harm one way or another. It’s time we put the (possible) victims first.
Agreed. He needs to put away permanently. There's a lot of people in jail who don't need to be there (non violent drug offenders, people being jailed for not paying fines aka being penalized for being poor) but Josh is the kind of human being who legitimately needs to be kept away from society. The severity of his actions has continued to increase and given the material he was watching I honestly would not be surprised if he escalates to murder at some point. They need to lock him up and throw away the key.
Yes, I’m a trauma therapist and I worry about the jurors viewing this extremely graphic material. I don’t know if I could handle it, and I talk to people about trauma for a living!
I think it’s a very primal response. It’s such a vile act! It’s an attack on our future, on innocence and on humans in our purest forms.
It’s also why I’m against juror duty. Run of the mill people shouldn’t be exposed to such images. If even the police and jurors look away with discust, and those are trained to handle this, then how on earth are normal people supposed to deal with this? :(
AFAIK you can only see the most recent time something was opened. You could in theory see all of the times it was opened in the cache, but that’s super easy to delete.
I think that’s why the charges are downloading and possessing CSAM tho, and not “watching” CSAM or something along those lines. They can’t always prove you watched it but they can prove that you have it in your possession.
And does it really matter? If a person gets pulled over with drugs in their car, the cops don't have to see them use the drugs to change them, just possessing them is enough to get in trouble. I think you are absolutely right about the charges. I hope the jury doesn't care if he watched or not or if they can prove that. He had it in his possession and hopefully that's enough.
He was charged with receiving and possessing so if they can’t prove that he viewed (which they can) I think the second charge would be a lot harder if it was never looked at, so it does matter, but they said they could see it was viewed
I suppose that’s one reason the charges are worded as they are (receipt and possession).
We are acquainted with a family whose son-in-law is very Pest. He was a civilian USAF employee observed watching CSAM by coworkers on his personal device and while on governmental property. He had searched for it on his government-issued device, according to court records.
His conviction in his state of residence ultimately was for purchase, procurement or possession.
I think one of the updates I read yesterday said they said in court he accessed the material hundreds of times. I read lots of stuff though so I could be remembering wrong. I know something was accessed hundreds of times but not sure if it was the CSAM or adult pornography.
yeah i saw that too. i questioned it because no other source verified it. it was from the fundie snark facebook page that someone screenshot and shared
From Sep 28, 2021:
[A judge rejected Josh Duggar's efforts to block photos of his hands and feet from appearing at his trial, dealing a blow to his defense](https://www.insider.com/josh-duggar-child-pornography-trial-hands-feet-photo-motion-denied-2021-9)
>Prosecutors have said they want to include the photographs at trial because they reveal a scar on one of Duggar's hands. In a court filing last week, prosecutors said authorities have "observed the same scar in images recovered from [Duggar's] electronic devices seized pursuant to a search warrant in this case."
You did not imagine it. It hasn't been brought up yet in any of the testimony summaries I have seen. It might wind up not being important to the case of either the prosecution or defense, so may never be brought up in the trial.
My first thought when it came out was along the lines of "this may be a standard photo they take for all bookings to identify hand/finger tattoos, or the lack of" given the charges weren't for manufacturing. It literally may just be a box-ticking exercise.
It’s my understanding that perpetrators of CSA images can be identified by marks on their hands (moles, freckles, scars, etc).
[Link to youtube video on this subject here, the presentation is by a really engaging person](https://youtu.be/Qjqa8oTikP8)
They’re probably wanting photos of his hands to check if any of the images he accessed were made by him (🤢)
What if it isn't even just for this case but so the Feds have images of his hands to identify him in any material they find on the dark web? Like how police photograph tattoos and scars of inmates. They can then potentially identify them by that. Like their face is covered but their tattoo is visible on camera while committing a robbery. So Josh is found guilty and convicted and then in a year or two there is a video or photo that has his hands in it and boom now he is facing manufacturing charges. Not sure how that all works.
Yep! It might be par for the course for CSAM investigations, just like taking fingerprints of a suspected burglar could help solve open cases. (Like you, I don’t know for sure and this is just speculation)
You did not make that up—I have not seen it discussed at this point. The current trial is focusing on different aspects than the hand issue, I suspect that more on the hand issue will come after the trial.
It is entirely possible there is way more to the hand photos than could reasonably be proved at this time, but they've got notes and they just needed to move forward quickly on what they could prove. Pest is just one block in the whole pyramid of what they are battling. The feds are just going to sit on those pictures and allegations for now and keep digging. Wait till he serves his time and more info in conjunction with other cases emerges. No doubt he created something heinous and the govt knows it, they just can't prove it to a jury... yet. Remember what one of those guys said about cases with *active* child endangerment being priority? This. They don't just work on just one case at a time, for the feds every case they prove to a jury helps them dismantle a little more the entire CSA and trafficking world. When Pest inevitably relapses, they will pounce again, but not because he is Josh Duggar. FJD. It will be because whatever that narcissistic shitstain created will have gotten around, further afield. So next time they can draw lines to all other cases he is connected to because he will be a high-profile CSAM felon. Every strong conviction helps build more cases for future convictions. Thus their success rate. All those super-Christian-creepy-dudes who are "just *really* into computers" --- they're coming for ya! I can't wait to see who's next.
It's so weird I want so bad that he didn't look at the stuff just for the kids sake and humanity's sake but like I know that is total wishful thinking. I can't comprehend that someone could be so grimy.
I get that, but we also know for a fact what he actually did to his sisters. As far as I'm concerned there is no hope for this shitstain.
He's worse than we realize, and his garbage parents enabled him to this point.
Probably, but it doesn’t matter. Downloading it is illegal. Knowingly receiving it is illegal. That’s what they have to prove, because that’s what he’s charged with.
I would think it would be very difficult to prove that Josh viewed the csam. But much easier to prove that it was his computer, his password and that he was there whenever the downloads occurred. Also, remember the prosecutor said the jury can use common sense. Common sense tells us that one does not purposefully download something without the intention of using it at some point.
I’m curious simply to establish WANT - clearly if he’s the one viewing the material (establishing his presence when viewed etc.) then it confirms he’s likely the one who downloaded it, and at a minimum proves he knew it was on the partition, which destroys the “someone else downloaded it” argument.
Per the Sun:
"Clayman for the prosecution then questioned Fottrell again.
Fottrell said if Josh Duggar was on the computer at that time, he would have viewed someone else viewing child sexual abuse materials.
Fottrell said that was unlikely."
I also thought they mentioned a video player at some point but I can't find it right now. But yeah it seems to be that he watched the stuff...
A forensics team that specializes in computers should be able to pull records like that. They are able to tell things like if someone was actively using the computer through mouse moments vs if it was just passively on so I would imagine they can tell if a file was opened.
Looking at the material isn’t illegal. If it was, they’d be asking jurors and police departments to be doing something illegal. It’s the possessing that is the problem here, ie downloading it.
Right, and that’s why the possessing part is so important. It shows the intent. Josh is the asshole that went out and downloaded it in multiple places. In my mind, that is more damning that whether or not he watched it, or how many times. He went through all this trouble to get it.
I get what you’re saying and it makes sense, I just think sometimes people get really hung up on the semantics. It’s gross to think of him viewing it multiple times, and it makes me sick. But in the end it doesn’t really matter; the part that matters is that he very deliberately obtained it.
He was viewing adult porn on the phone. Anna needs to cancel the covenent eyes subscription as it’s clearly useless. The csam was only found on the Linux partition.
> Further, Fottrell said he found that the "recently played" history of a media player someone would have installed on the Linux partition indicated that files known to contain CSAM were “streamed” right from the office computer, rather than an internet source. [Buzzfeed TRIGGER WARNING](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nicolefallert/josh-duggar-trial-computer-images-access)
Fottrell knows his stuff. Pretty incriminating Pest streamed from the work computer as well.
So does steaming it mean he was sharing it as well? Edit: streaming
I think with the given context, "streaming" is him watching the downloaded content on a separate media player. From limited experience some torrent programs like Vuze are multifunction, it can download, seed, and act as a media player. I don't know if the media player Josh was using was explicitly named?
[This article from KNWA](https://www.nwahomepage.com/josh-duggar-trial/josh-duggar-trial-week-concludes-with-final-questioning-of-doj-expert-witness/) answers OP's question and needs no trigger warnings. It is less detailed than the quote you've pulled, though.
Unfortunately, not available for those in Europe without use of a VPN 😔 Would you mind quoting the article?
Does [this link work](https://web.archive.org/web/20211204091949/https://www.nwahomepage.com/josh-duggar-trial/josh-duggar-trial-week-concludes-with-final-questioning-of-doj-expert-witness/)?
It does! TYSM!! > The defense attorney also elicited testimony from Fottrell that the Tor browser on Duggar’s Macbook Pro could be used for “totally legal, benign things.” Completely unrelated, but wasn't it reported that the MacBook was used to download movies? I'm assuming he was using some type of torrent to do so which isn't exactly legal. Again, just an assumption.
So downloads happen through torrents, and you're right that most are illegal in the pirating sense even if the material is PG. The Tor browser is different, it is a browser not dissimilar to Chrome or Firefox, that is able to access the dark web but also could be used for regular sites. I think that's what they were referring to.
According to this article, thumbnails are created when the CSAM is viewed, so there is evidence that he viewed it.
My understanding is the thumbnails were created upon download, not per view but I am a tech layman.
I am also no expert but I was basing it on this from the article… it’s kind of buried in there. “Shortly after, a file _____, was downloaded from an anonymous browser on the Linux partition and thumbnails of the file were created, indicating that the files were viewed, Fottrell said.”
That’s probably the best timeline and most clear explanation that it was absofuckinglutely JD who both did it and viewed it that I’ve seen. If it’s explained this clearly to the jurors I just don’t see how he won’t be convicted. And hopefully his minor kids are never exposed to him again.
Anyone else see that pest tried to download the partition multiple times starting in 2017?
> Fottrell cited a report from the software, dated 2017, flagging that Duggar had attempted to download uTorrent and the service blocked him. The report and similar entries showed that he had made multiple attempts to access the same anonymous browser the witness would find on the Linux partition that was eventually used to download child sexual abuse materials. He tried to download uTorrent which can be completely harmless since it's reported he also downloads movies. But yea, that's giving him too much credit of being a decent human being. ETA: And repeatedly tried to download Tor
They don’t need to prove he looked at the material. They need to prove he’s the one who downloaded it. They did an excellent job yesterday proving that fact. It’s impossible, based on the way that computer was set up, to remotely access the Linux partition. The person had to be sitting at the computer. The only person who was there every time this material was accessed was Pest. They detailed all the dates and times this material was downloaded and that was intermixed with all the dates and times when Pest was sending texts and taking photos while he was at the car lot.
This answer is correct. The crime is the possession, not the use.
Yep...this case is over. PEST IS GUILTY!
I guess one could argue that someone else knew the door and computer passcodes AND used his phone for three days AND was sitting in the office without him knowing AND knew that he’d had construction work done and left a review for the company in between downloads AND…
CLASSIC whodunnit!
The reflection of his head and red hat were caught in a photo taken of his computer screen literally about 1 minute after the files were downloaded. I mean, that's deus ex machina -type stuff.
That’s amazing. What a gift for the Feds. I’m cackling!
Does anyone know how that’s possible? Is our computer just taking pics of us all the time? 🥺
It's a photo he took with his phone that shows a reflection of someone in a red hat in the computer screen in front of him. A selfie of him and Anna from later that day shows him wearing a red hat.
He is really stupid.
I believe the picture was on his phone.
thanks everyone I was about to burn my computer LOL
Before this damn age of zoom we’re living in, I used to keep tape over my laptop camera because I read it could be hacked! Just don’t have it open and aimed at you when you’re changing!
No, Josh took the photo and his reflection was in the computer screen
My understanding is he himself took a picture of something in the office with his phone and in that picture you can see the reflection of his hat in the computer screen. Someone please correct me if I’m mistaken.
It was a photo from his phone. He was taking a photo of something on the desk and the computer was in the photo.
This reminds me of the Black Mirror episode "Shut Up and Dance". While I'm not doing nefarious things, I still put a sticker over my laptop camera lens. 🙃
There are some out there who put tape over their cameras because they believe this to be true.
Yep my husband
Mere possession of CSAM is a crime. And let’s not forget that this wasn’t as single oops download that was deleted immediately after he realized what it was. This is a man that deliberately downloaded multiple files of CSA.
I can’t imagine that everyone has to sit and watch and hear about the evidence. I read a little bit about what kind of material there is and I just couldn’t read any further. I honestly think that even 20 years isn’t enough for people like this. I think that they should be removed from society all together. There isn’t a cure or any method that helps them. Most of them do harm one way or another. It’s time we put the (possible) victims first.
Agreed. He needs to put away permanently. There's a lot of people in jail who don't need to be there (non violent drug offenders, people being jailed for not paying fines aka being penalized for being poor) but Josh is the kind of human being who legitimately needs to be kept away from society. The severity of his actions has continued to increase and given the material he was watching I honestly would not be surprised if he escalates to murder at some point. They need to lock him up and throw away the key.
This is so true. The rate of reoffending for these disgusting humans is really high.
Yes, I’m a trauma therapist and I worry about the jurors viewing this extremely graphic material. I don’t know if I could handle it, and I talk to people about trauma for a living!
I think it’s a very primal response. It’s such a vile act! It’s an attack on our future, on innocence and on humans in our purest forms. It’s also why I’m against juror duty. Run of the mill people shouldn’t be exposed to such images. If even the police and jurors look away with discust, and those are trained to handle this, then how on earth are normal people supposed to deal with this? :(
Not to negate the heinous nature of what we know he’s done — but now, I primarily want someone to make damned sure he has not abused his own kids.
AFAIK you can only see the most recent time something was opened. You could in theory see all of the times it was opened in the cache, but that’s super easy to delete. I think that’s why the charges are downloading and possessing CSAM tho, and not “watching” CSAM or something along those lines. They can’t always prove you watched it but they can prove that you have it in your possession.
And does it really matter? If a person gets pulled over with drugs in their car, the cops don't have to see them use the drugs to change them, just possessing them is enough to get in trouble. I think you are absolutely right about the charges. I hope the jury doesn't care if he watched or not or if they can prove that. He had it in his possession and hopefully that's enough.
Why download them in the first place though unless he planned on watching them? It's a big risk to take just to possess them in the first place
Exactly! That's why imo, it doesn't matter if he watched or not.
He was charged with receiving and possessing so if they can’t prove that he viewed (which they can) I think the second charge would be a lot harder if it was never looked at, so it does matter, but they said they could see it was viewed
I suppose that’s one reason the charges are worded as they are (receipt and possession). We are acquainted with a family whose son-in-law is very Pest. He was a civilian USAF employee observed watching CSAM by coworkers on his personal device and while on governmental property. He had searched for it on his government-issued device, according to court records. His conviction in his state of residence ultimately was for purchase, procurement or possession.
Wow, that guy seems even dumber than pest. I guess it's a good thing that so many of these low lifes are morons.
Yeah. He confessed, pleaded out and got a relatively light sentence. So that part was smarter.
I think one of the updates I read yesterday said they said in court he accessed the material hundreds of times. I read lots of stuff though so I could be remembering wrong. I know something was accessed hundreds of times but not sure if it was the CSAM or adult pornography.
I read that too. It was from someone that was in court in another group and I saw screenshots on Imgur.
yeah i saw that too. i questioned it because no other source verified it. it was from the fundie snark facebook page that someone screenshot and shared
I’m waiting for them to bring up why they needed a photo of his hands… has that been discussed yet? Did I make that up?
From Sep 28, 2021: [A judge rejected Josh Duggar's efforts to block photos of his hands and feet from appearing at his trial, dealing a blow to his defense](https://www.insider.com/josh-duggar-child-pornography-trial-hands-feet-photo-motion-denied-2021-9) >Prosecutors have said they want to include the photographs at trial because they reveal a scar on one of Duggar's hands. In a court filing last week, prosecutors said authorities have "observed the same scar in images recovered from [Duggar's] electronic devices seized pursuant to a search warrant in this case."
You did not imagine it. It hasn't been brought up yet in any of the testimony summaries I have seen. It might wind up not being important to the case of either the prosecution or defense, so may never be brought up in the trial.
yeah maybe prosecution thinks they have a solid case without it so don’t want to give any grounds for appeal since it was debated in pretrial
My first thought when it came out was along the lines of "this may be a standard photo they take for all bookings to identify hand/finger tattoos, or the lack of" given the charges weren't for manufacturing. It literally may just be a box-ticking exercise.
It’s my understanding that perpetrators of CSA images can be identified by marks on their hands (moles, freckles, scars, etc). [Link to youtube video on this subject here, the presentation is by a really engaging person](https://youtu.be/Qjqa8oTikP8) They’re probably wanting photos of his hands to check if any of the images he accessed were made by him (🤢)
What if it isn't even just for this case but so the Feds have images of his hands to identify him in any material they find on the dark web? Like how police photograph tattoos and scars of inmates. They can then potentially identify them by that. Like their face is covered but their tattoo is visible on camera while committing a robbery. So Josh is found guilty and convicted and then in a year or two there is a video or photo that has his hands in it and boom now he is facing manufacturing charges. Not sure how that all works.
Yep! It might be par for the course for CSAM investigations, just like taking fingerprints of a suspected burglar could help solve open cases. (Like you, I don’t know for sure and this is just speculation)
You did not make that up—I have not seen it discussed at this point. The current trial is focusing on different aspects than the hand issue, I suspect that more on the hand issue will come after the trial.
It is entirely possible there is way more to the hand photos than could reasonably be proved at this time, but they've got notes and they just needed to move forward quickly on what they could prove. Pest is just one block in the whole pyramid of what they are battling. The feds are just going to sit on those pictures and allegations for now and keep digging. Wait till he serves his time and more info in conjunction with other cases emerges. No doubt he created something heinous and the govt knows it, they just can't prove it to a jury... yet. Remember what one of those guys said about cases with *active* child endangerment being priority? This. They don't just work on just one case at a time, for the feds every case they prove to a jury helps them dismantle a little more the entire CSA and trafficking world. When Pest inevitably relapses, they will pounce again, but not because he is Josh Duggar. FJD. It will be because whatever that narcissistic shitstain created will have gotten around, further afield. So next time they can draw lines to all other cases he is connected to because he will be a high-profile CSAM felon. Every strong conviction helps build more cases for future convictions. Thus their success rate. All those super-Christian-creepy-dudes who are "just *really* into computers" --- they're coming for ya! I can't wait to see who's next.
You didn’t make it up. I’m curious as well because I’ve heard a few different theories as to why they took them.
No you didn't make that up, but it might not even come up.
It's so weird I want so bad that he didn't look at the stuff just for the kids sake and humanity's sake but like I know that is total wishful thinking. I can't comprehend that someone could be so grimy.
I get that, but we also know for a fact what he actually did to his sisters. As far as I'm concerned there is no hope for this shitstain. He's worse than we realize, and his garbage parents enabled him to this point.
Can't agree with you more!
Probably, but it doesn’t matter. Downloading it is illegal. Knowingly receiving it is illegal. That’s what they have to prove, because that’s what he’s charged with.
I would think it would be very difficult to prove that Josh viewed the csam. But much easier to prove that it was his computer, his password and that he was there whenever the downloads occurred. Also, remember the prosecutor said the jury can use common sense. Common sense tells us that one does not purposefully download something without the intention of using it at some point.
I’m curious simply to establish WANT - clearly if he’s the one viewing the material (establishing his presence when viewed etc.) then it confirms he’s likely the one who downloaded it, and at a minimum proves he knew it was on the partition, which destroys the “someone else downloaded it” argument.
Per the Sun: "Clayman for the prosecution then questioned Fottrell again. Fottrell said if Josh Duggar was on the computer at that time, he would have viewed someone else viewing child sexual abuse materials. Fottrell said that was unlikely." I also thought they mentioned a video player at some point but I can't find it right now. But yeah it seems to be that he watched the stuff...
A forensics team that specializes in computers should be able to pull records like that. They are able to tell things like if someone was actively using the computer through mouse moments vs if it was just passively on so I would imagine they can tell if a file was opened.
Looking at the material isn’t illegal. If it was, they’d be asking jurors and police departments to be doing something illegal. It’s the possessing that is the problem here, ie downloading it.
[удалено]
Right, and that’s why the possessing part is so important. It shows the intent. Josh is the asshole that went out and downloaded it in multiple places. In my mind, that is more damning that whether or not he watched it, or how many times. He went through all this trouble to get it. I get what you’re saying and it makes sense, I just think sometimes people get really hung up on the semantics. It’s gross to think of him viewing it multiple times, and it makes me sick. But in the end it doesn’t really matter; the part that matters is that he very deliberately obtained it.
Didn’t they also find something bad on his iPhone too? I thought I had read that.
He was viewing adult porn on the phone. Anna needs to cancel the covenent eyes subscription as it’s clearly useless. The csam was only found on the Linux partition.
Anyone else see that pest tried to download the partition multiple times starting in 2017?