can't This is why child porn exists in the capacity it does.    You can make accusations without any sort of evidence that you can show the public to counter the accusations.    Unlike drug crimes where the product is consumed or back in the 70s when this stuff was made on print where it could be burned when confiscated, digital crime can be copied ad infinitum and police departments see it as their responsibility to keep copies so that they can file hash search quicker, taking the risk that the content leaks anyway because it still exists. All witnesses are tossed aside for certified "experts" who can only be experts in the field if they're a witness for the prosecution, no such witness to argue if a picture or movie is illegal or isn't can exist as a freelance for the defendant because that would make them the same as those that they are currently charging.    In short, it's the perfect crime to prosecute because your target can be tepid and impotent and regardless if you catch them red-handed or are part of a vast conspiracy to put it on their devices to frame them, they are 99% of the time going to plead guilty because the deck has been stacked that they can't survive prosecution.    And all you have to do is tell the public what you say it is and they recoil. And you don't have to prove it to the public to make your case because it would be illegal to show them.    It's like when Jake Tapper was on CNN telling people it was legal for him to look at a document but not his audience, so trust him, and only him and his interpretation of it. It's why everyone should be reluctant to pull out the torches and pitchforks because, quite frankly, if they do something to piss the government off, it's their turn, your turn, next.