> As far as SSDs are concerned, the state of the drive cannot be taken to indicate that its owner did or did not interact with it in ways that allow prosecutors to infer guilt or innocence.

> "The fact that data has been purged does not mean a human knowingly did it (e.g. accidental guilt). [But] data purging may make a guilty person look innocent (e.g. accidental innocence)," says Bell.

Wait - Prosecutors can infer guilt because I purged my hard drive? Because, of course, the only thing that I might want to delete personally must be criminal in nature, and not, say, personal correspondence or confidential information.

This article seems like good news to me. The only bad news that I see is that the analysts who worked on the article will have more difficult jobs in the future.

> Wait - Prosecutors can infer guilt because I purged my hard drive?

Right after quoting this:

> "The fact that data has been purged does not mean a human knowingly did it (e.g. accidental guilt).

How did you manage to infer the exact opposite of what you just quoted?