Just to be clear, since I worded it pretty badly. I don't suggest anyone non-LE should examine the files. I meant they might be of use to LE. Jack is correct, though, and I wouldn't presume anything more than the potential usefulness.
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Jim Halfpenny <[email protected]>wrote: > > > 2009/9/10 Michael Dickey <[email protected]> > >> Personally, I think I would wipe it clean off. That's not something I'd >> like to ever mess with or run afoul of. >> >> But there may be value in forensically examining the files or the victims, >> so it might be best to report the incident and turn over evidence. >> > > I for one would not expect a friendly or sympathetic response from law > enforcement if I approached them with such evidence. My gut instinct is to > securely delete and ignore, grave though the crime may be. If you are not a > law enforcement officer it's not your business to investigate crimes and > doing so could land you in hot water. IANAL but I don't think you are duty > bound to report a crime if the only report you can give is, "Paedophiles are > using anonymising tools on the Internet." > > Consult legal council. You may wish to document incidents where you are > inadvertantly exposed to such material and keep a copy of this log with a > solictor should you ever get into trouble. > > Jim > > _______________________________________________ > Pauldotcom mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom > Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com >
_______________________________________________ Pauldotcom mailing list [email protected] http://mail.pauldotcom.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pauldotcom Main Web Site: http://pauldotcom.com
