The government typically makes grandiose statements that sound impressive and make the accused sound like the devil himself but reality is almost always an order of magnitude more mild.
Unless I hear otherwise I'm gonna assume it was just pinging back to some C&C infrastructure he owned or something like that.
> Court documents[0] reveal Durachinsky wasn't particularly interested in financial crime but was primarily focused on watching victims, having collected millions of images on his computer, including many of underage children.
Well the relevant thing here is that he still had the pictures on his computer. Maybe he was taking pictures of 15 year olds when he was 14 or whatever, but they arrested a 28 year old man whose hard drive was full of images of people that are at most 17 years old.
This is a computer guy. Nobody would be surprised if he had spare hardware lying around from as far back as the 90s. If he just quick-formatted a bunch of spare drives and tossed them on a shelf years ago any forensics software would find what was on them before he formatted them. Considering that he's been collecting pictures since he was 14 I think it would be hard not to get him for possession if he's a hardware pack-rat.
That's a good point. I would probably forget about old drives as well - I thought they found the pictures on an active drive but realise now that this was a baseless assumption.
To be clear, I mean that the the way US laws are enforced, to the best of my knowledge, being underage yourself doesn't mean you are off the hook for having underage material.
I'd be interested to learn if this isn't the case.
The government typically makes grandiose statements that sound impressive and make the accused sound like the devil himself but reality is almost always an order of magnitude more mild.
Unless I hear otherwise I'm gonna assume it was just pinging back to some C&C infrastructure he owned or something like that.