Exactly, NYT advertisers rely on people like her to stay in business.
iPhone, iPad, Mac are the options. Who really cares where it originated. iCloud syncs across devices. He had his laptop synced with iCloud. So technically they didn’t need to use the tampered with laptop. They just used it to show they had backup to the iCloud data.
They also said they didn’t think laptop was tampered with.
1 Like
To add…
The only way the images leaked publicly is if the data was accessed by someone other than Hunter. Which means his laptop (or a copy of it) was tampered with.
spin away! (as the fbi agent reads messages originating from the laptop).
1 Like
Maybe not “tampered” but definitely accessed by someone other than Hunter. Which makes some of that data inadmissible. Not iCloud data, but locally stored.
imagine that, forensic computer analysts say no evidence was found to show it was tampered with but purp says it was…
so it was!
I disagree somewhat. I would say it was accessed. Tampered to me means something nefarious was going on. But technically you are correct.
Again it’s irrelevant where it originated from. If it’s iCloud or gmail… it’s synced across devices. They don’t need the data locally stored on the laptop. It’s probably best that they don’t actually
and yet ts entered into evidence and they are using it… hmmmm
you should contact the prosecution and let them know what a grave error they are making
otherwise, you do have a point and I have to wonder if the “prosecution” isn’t playing a little game. Bring in the laptop, allow the defense to discredit it, kill two birds with one stone
- get hunter off without making it obvious
- discredit anything else on the laptop so it can’t implicate a certain other person.
1 Like
It’s entered, but they haven’t used it. That’s pretty smart. They have only used data that they can corroborate with iCloud.
So far they aren’t making a grave error.
No idea.
The fact remains… data of that laptop or a copy of it… made its way into the public. Assuming those images were real… that shows the laptop was accessed by someone other than Hunter, the computer shop owner, and the FBI/DOJ
perhaps you missed that the FBI agent is reading messages from it?
From the iCloud account. That’s verified data directly from apple.
Anything on that laptop outside of iCloud corroborated data will not be mentioned or read. If they do… that’s is where the error would come in. But I’m assuming they won’t.
yeah, thy have
Yes, because it’s synced and corroborated.
They will not use any data from that laptop that isn’t present in iCloud. Thus the “and” in your emphasized part
if that were true, they wouldn’t need to list the laptop at all. I have no doubt that anything shared on the cloud could be corroborated from the cloud, but that does not mean everything was.
The laptop was accessed by someone other than Hunter and the DOJ. That makes it forensically problematic.
and the FBI is perfectly capable of doing forensic analysis to determine what, if anything, was changed.
Of course they can and maybe they did. That’s why they only ever reference iCloud with the laptop. They won’t talk about any other data on there.
That is exactly why they asked for the iCloud data. They didn’t have confidence in the laptop alone. I’ve done forensic analysis and been an expert witness before… this is exactly what I would have done.
There you go again, claiming a fact thats not established as a fact.
