Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Ste <ste_rose0@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 23:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
On 29 May, 00:14, lisabar...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
That is what the charge was. Likewise, if you check, at that time,
people were being charged with unallocated clusters. The CPS dressed
it up as 'making' but when asked to produce the contents would just
mumble 'well you know, hash values and the like'.
It is becoming clear that you so called 'legal eagles' don't actually
know much about how Ore worked.
As I say, I know the principles of it, and I also know the principles
of computer data storage. By "unallocated clusters", what the police
mean is that they found data on the disk related to child porn, but
this data area had no corresponding entry in the allocation tables.
What that normally indicates is that there has been a file on the
disk, and it has then been deleted from the file system. The way
computer file systems work however is that when data is discarded,
only the *pointer* in the allocation tables is immediately destroyed.
The actual data remains, until that area of the disk is reallocated
and overwritten with new data.
What the police may well have found was that the data that constitutes
an image had been overwritten (either completely, or sufficiently
overwritten to make recovery impossible without the resources of the
American NSA). What *was* recovered, however, was data relating to the
hash of the file. Hashes are used for the purposes of error correction
mainly, but can (and are) also be used for identification. The longer
hashes (such as SHA) can identify files with a very high degree of
accuracy (but certainly not 100%).
The fact that "deleted" data was found on your husband's computer, and
the fact that hashes were found amongst the recovered data, suggests
with a high degree of probability then that he once had the relevant
files on his computer (and if the hash related to child porn, then it
suggests with a high degree of probability that he had child porn).
So that's how that logic works. Of course, there are points of attack
in that logic, but that's what you're solicitor is for.
So yes, the charge was Making...but after we got the Encase report and
the Interview tapes....there were no images actually found...only
suspect hash values.
Because the data area relating to the images was probably
substantially larger than the data area relating to the hashes. In the
normal operation of the computer therefore, the hashes are likely to
outlive the image.
So yes, there is/was a charge of hash values...just renamed to sound
more criminal and 'child abuse' centred.
I find it very unlikely that he was charged with "possession of hash
values".
I have been open and honest and it would appear my legal knowledge in
this area is far better than most of yours.
Pride before a fall.
Again, you seem to be focussing on my husband's conviction for a
reason Steve Walker...does the idea of it give you a hard on? I mean
the thread is about the SS and breaches to rights....which a solicitor
and barrister have confirmed we have grounds to take to a judicial
review. Or is that you are threatened by a girl being able to play in
your boys club with more balls than you?
I think me and Steve are just interested to get to the bottom of the
matter. For what "breach of rights" the SS indulged in, they seem to
have been relatively minor and precipitated more by your own behaviour
because you don't like the invasion of privacy when, by definition,
the SS are of course there to invade your privacy and verify your
household.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: AndyW
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- References:
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Ste
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Steve Walker
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Alex Heney
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Steve Walker
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Ste
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Ste
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Steve Walker
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Steve Walker
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: Steve Walker
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- From: lisabartal
- Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- Prev by Date: Re: Jean Charles de Menezes copper gets off AGAIN
- Next by Date: Re: Another pointless police chase with serious injuries at the end
- Previous by thread: Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- Next by thread: Re: People ~F'ing with Life
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|