"Perhaps without realizing the prejudicial effects on Brown, the media repeatedly has publicized potentially inadmissible and prejudicial information, such as Brown’s (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