Here is some more info on the case.
The Guy was a third grade teacher.
The case involved former third grade teach Ari David Levie, who had been convicted by a lower court on two counts of soliciting a child to engage in sexual conduct when he offered his nine-year-old niece $50 to pose naked for photographs.
The evidence of PGP was used to show criminal intent.
There were no encrypted files found on his compueter.
During court proceedings, the prosecution presented as evidence the fact that Levie’s computer contained a PGP, or Pretty Good Privacy, utility. The court in its finings said that it used this evidence in reaching its verdict.
However, a forensic investigation by police showed that there were no encrypted files on Levie’s computer.
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?cat=2&id=8903Sorry but siding with the courts on this one. The appeals court ruled that submitting the PGP as evidence was minor compared to the testimony of the girl and his searches of "lolita's" on the net. He's a third grade teacher what is he doing with the best encryption program out there? That is what (I think) the prosecutors were pointing out and the Appeals court agreed.
We find that evidence of appellant's Internet use and the existence of an encryption program on his computer was at least somewhat relevant to the state's case against him," Judge R.A. Randall said.
