"Perhaps without realizing the prejudicial effects on Brown, the media
   repeatedly
   has publicized potentially inadmissible and prejudicial information,
   such as Browns
   (1) incarceration status, (2) anarchist idealology, (3) three
   indictments and potential
   sentences, (4) admissions of conduct and involvement in Anonymous
   activities,
   (5) relationship to other Anonymous figures or hackers, (6) troubled
   childhood and
   alternative schooling, (7) declaration that he was an atheist, (8) use
   and abuse of ecstasy,
   acid, heroin, suboxine, and marijuana, (9) lack of steady employment,
   (10) claimed
   diagnoses of ADHD and depression, (11) associates descriptions of Brown
   as a junkie,
   name fag, moral fag, court jester, (12) self-proclaimed and otherwise
   assigned titles with
   Anonymous (spokesperson, senior strategist), (13) receipt of data
   stolen through hacks
   conducted by other Anonymous members, (14) use of the stolen data to
   prank call
   individuals, publicize personal and confidential information, (15)
   associates and Brown
   opining that Brown would end up in jail, and (16) property seized by
   FBI."
   Is the prosecution assuming the judge knows what namefagging is?
   Also, what do "reserved" exhibits mean? Are those to be presented at a
   later date?
   R