Jen is saying: (1) JM's claim that the hard drive was damaged when it was returned to him makes no sense, because it was already damaged when the defense got it, but the defense fixed it and that's why it was damaged when it was returned to JM (???), (2) the reason they gave a copy of the "Tony" drive to the state was because the FTK software "grabbed the wrong drive" (literally impossible IMO), (3) JM's claim that the drive was damaged by the defense expert in 2014 is inconsistent with his statement that he was able to review the 2008 copy that the state originally made (???), (4) JM doesn't need a copy made in 2014 because he already has the 2008 copy (um, yes, but the 2008 copy wouldn't show the supposed 2009 deletions the defense is claiming happened), (5) JM's complaint that the second copy provided by the defense was a "live" copy of files (which would be altered if anyone looked at the files) rather than a forensic image that could be examined without alteration is nonsense because multiple people accessed the copy already and so JM might as well access it too (???), (6) Spybot can't stop malware from being downloaded (which isn't what JM said IMO--he said Spybot would have prevented Travis from accessing the downloaded files), (7) Some of the *advertiser censored* was not caused by viruses (no details offered) and even if it was, that was probably because Travis was looking at *advertiser censored* in the first place because only people who look at *advertiser censored* get bad viruses, (8) Melendez lied when he said he found no viruses because now JM says there were some (difference between active and quarantined files IMO--Melendez was looking for something that would have been active because that's what Jodi said was happening), (9) Melendez's statement made Jodi look like a liar.
Thank you so much AZlawyer for explaining it in terms that I/we can understand :loveyou: