Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Precisely. They're quite ineffective as of now.

Child Pornography Law Wackiness #5,991:

Take this scenerio: You have two men who's hard drives are confiscated by law enforcement. On both hard drives, deleted child porn is recovered from the slack portions of the hard drive. One of the men is convicted for possession of child pornography, the other is not. The determining deference? One man is knowledgeable about computers, the other is not.

It was recently decided that deleted child porn from hard drives cannot be held against someone with no computer knowledge, as that person unknowingly still possessed the pictures and as such, did not have access to them (or did not intend to access them). However, from my understanding of the ruling, if it can be proven that the person is computer literate, it can be assumed that the person understands how to retrieve deleted material, so the child pornography is still considered to be in their intentional possession.

Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?