Yeah, he's the young dirtbag. He was making the argument that anyone could have gotten into Trayvon's Twitter account and sent those messages.  That sounds like the sort of lame excuse someone makes when their computer history shows them all over the kiddie porn sites. :rolleyes: I think that if a phone is in a persons possession and considered a persons property, then they are responsible for everything on that phone. after all, if a person has child porn on a device, regardless of ownership, if it's in your possession -- you're held accountable.     so the argument that they weren't made by trayvon, should be thrown out under law, otherwise it sets a HUGE precedence in the legal system that the legal system simply doesn't want.     a lot of lawyers and judges should be against the ruling that trayvons phone data can't be used, because that means in future cases they can reference back to this case and infer that a person can't be held accountable for any incriminating evidence such as statements on their phone because it would be 'impossible' to assume that those statements were made by them.     so let's say we have a murderer who essentially admits to how they did it over the phone.....if they use this case as a reference, it sets a precedence for that to be entirely inadmissible. but the scope of such a precedence has much further reaching implications than we can imagine, due to the variability in court cases and their circumstances.    I just don't see any precedence that would allow the judge to deny the phone data, because there are PLENTY of cases where writing in a persons possession and data on a personal device has been used against them in evidence. not to mention the device was double password protected, which gives even more just cause to believe that only trayvon could have created those texts.