Reply #30: Hmm, yes and no [View All]

[anigbrowl]

Agreed that it is not relevant insofar as it affects the question of whether Kernell acted criminally in accessing her account. It would be just as illegal if her yahoo account contained nothing but messages like 'dinner at 8? xxx Todd'.

On the other hand, when she's saying that her email was full of Serious business and the prosecution is arguing that it increases the gravity of the offense, it seems legitimate for the defense to question why such sensitive information was so poorly protected - or rather, whether such poorly protected information could be as sensitive and important as the prosecution claims.

Like, say you entered an unlocked house, and stole a pile of costume jewelry before fleeing; and later it turned out that this included a real diamond necklace. you'd be guilty of trespass and theft, for sure. but it wouldn't be as bad as if you had trashed the place looking for the hidden safe and then forced your way in in search of that same diamond necklace.

Mind you, I see in news reports that in this particular county it's super right wing and Palin is extremely popular, so that's going to limit the defense's desire to probe her on the security issues :-/