A US judge on Wednesday blocked federal prosecutors from searching data on a Washington Post reporter’s electronic devices seized during what one press freedom group called an “unconstitutional and illegal” raid last week.

US Magistrate Judge William B. Porter in Alexandria, Virginia—who also authorized the January 14 raid of Post reporter Hannah Natanson’s home—ruled that “the government must preserve but must not review any of the materials that law enforcement seized pursuant to search warrants the court issued.”

The government has until January 28 to respond to the Post’s initial legal filings against the agent’s actions. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for February 6.

  • green_red_black@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Same issue. It’s called chain of evidence, something that is required for evidence to be admissible.

    No matter what solution one can come up with the origin of the evidence is needed

    • hector@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      51 minutes ago

      They present a viable way they found that evidence. They’ve been doing this since forever, using illegal information, then constructing a plausible case for how they found it legally for the courts, which only matters if the accused has good lawyers in the first place.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Parallel construction is a tactic that is used specifically in situations similar to this, in the interest of hiding illegal evidence usage by investigators (amongst other things)