News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by rtkwe on Friday October 10, 2014 @09:42PM (#8440948)
There's one bit that I'm not sure how to read because I'm not a lawyer:

> “Defendant could have established such a personal privacy interest by submitting a sworn statement that could not be offered against him at trial as evidence of his guilt (though it could be used to impeach him should he take the witness stand),”

It sounds like he could provide proof that he owned the server having the contents of the server thrown out. Then provided he didn't take the stand in his own defense the affidavit couldn't be used. Not entirely certain though.

Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by pdabbadabba on Friday October 10, 2014 @10:13PM (#8441000)
Almost there. The affidavit could only be used if he took the stand and gave testimony inconsistent with the contents of the statement.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by Rapzid on Saturday October 11, 2014 @01:42AM (#8441391)
He didn't own the server though, did he? I thought it was leased.
Re:Judge Rejects Defense That FBI Illegally Hacked Silk Road... by rtkwe on Saturday October 11, 2014 @07:46AM (#8441901)
Leased provides the same protections as ownership afaik, just because you have leased a car doesn't mean the police can search it with impunity.