There's really no way to
improve on what Ms.
pax wrote. By way of a minor expansion, though, I'd like to add an observation.
During a lengthy peace officer career, I unavoidably spent a LOT of time in court. I have a passing acquaintance with court procedure and the rules of evidence in Texas courts. They vary
a bit from state to state but from what I understand, they're quite similar.
If a person, especially one accused of wrongdoing in a "shots fired" situation, gets on the witness stand, their background is pretty much an open book. If it is discovered that such a person has previously proclaimed that he'd lie during a criminal investigation, then any record of such ill-advised declaration is admissible to impeach the credibility of his testimony.
It's no stretch to envision that a person's computer would be seized as evidence. Once examined, it is pretty easy to find the sites where that person has spent a lot of time. The "cookies" are there, as are all the passwords and user names ever registered by said person. Anyone here has enough imagination to figure what's going to happen in court. One example:
Lawyer: So, Mr. WHOMEVER, you admit that you go by USERNAME on The Firing Line forums?
Mr. WHOMEVER: Yes.
Lawyer: And on DATE AND TIME, did you write this about, 'I might lie on certain details to save my skin"?
Mr. WHOMEVER: Well, what I meant was . . .
Lawyer: Just "yes" or "no," please.
Mr. WHOMEVER: Well, yes, I wrote that . . . .
Lawyer: So, isn't it fair to ask you, were you lying when you wrote that, or are you lying here today?
It's uncomfortable for any TFL staffer to imagine that our archives might be subpoenaed into a criminal proceeding. The prized anonymity of the internet is really nonexistant in the face of a court order.