tennis maynard writes:
Thank goodness my government is protecting me from George Norris! And to
think they might be wasting the money they're spending chasing him --
feeding the hungry, housi\ing the homeless, providing health care for
those without, and proitecting me from muggers, murderers, and thieves!

Satire is an important tool, but I am left wondering wether you mean
the police should not have confiscated the things they did because you
know this guy and think he is one of the Good Guys, or because seizing
things that way is just plain wrong.

If it is the first option I think you should reconsider. Laws apply to
everybody. "But not him" is not an expression you would want to hear
spoken by a judge in a civilized society.

If it is the latter - how do you mean the police should catch
criminals if they are not allowed to secure evidence? (I see the
problem of the police keeping PCs until they can be regarded as
technical dinosaurs because they don't have the manpower to do what
they should, which is make a backup they can look at) A judge
obviously thought this was servere enough to let the police seize the
records.

What would this guy have done if his harddisk had died on him? He is a
professional and doing a trade. If his whole livelyhood is locked up
in the wellbeing of one computer, something is awfully wrong.

How far would _you_ trust a $500 piece of machinery?

Geir