Now, it's also really not that plausible for someone to put joints in my purse/car/house without my knowing about it. That's because #1, I don't go around letting people open my purse, and #2, I know very well if someone's using drugs or not (it's easy to spot them, even when not high, and it's especially easy since only people I know well come over) and I don't allow anyone like that in my house or car, because I don't want to be legally associated with it. What they do in their own home I don't question, but it's not done around me. Yes, I have had friends who have started using drugs, and no, they were no longer allowed in my car or house, and definately not near my purse. That is a controlled substance, which is entirely different from them having something that is legal for many people but not legal for others.
It is entirely plausible that someone could have used my computer and put things on it that I didn't know about.
Remember that this case is completely different from anything involving illicit drugs in yet another way. Computers are often shared and used by friends that come over. My friends often check their email, websurf, etc. on my computer when they are over. I do not watch them to see if they are doing something illegal. It is MUCH more likely I would know if they had illegal drugs in my house than that I would know they downloaded some songs and left them in the "share" file.
I think with a competent lawyer, you wouldn't get convicted. If you are attractive and good at seeming like you are a nice, honest and slightly stupid citizen, I doubt it would even make it to trial.
Do the joints look exactly like regular cigarettes, and did the person put them inside a pack with other regular cigarettes?
The joints could look like the big fatties in a Cheech and Chong movie and be wrapped up in baggy with the word "JOINTS" written on them, but if they were stuffed under the sofa in your living room, your not likely to see them every day. But that won't stop a drug-sniffing dog from finding them during a DEA raid. Just like the illegal mp3 files could be named "PIRATED SONY RECORDS SONG.mp3" or the more innocent looking "innagoddadavida.mp3" and left in a directory you hardly look in. Posession is unlawful and subject to criminal sanction and in this case, civil penalty as well.
I could also claim complete ignorance of the way that the song downloading program works. I could plausibly claim complete ignorance that it was even on my computer. I am blonde, all it would take is a little white-out on my computer screen.
Let me introduce you to a legal phrase, here and now, before you end up trying to use that one: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." It's not right, it's not fair, but it's the law and judges and lawyers use it every day with great success. And if you are going to use the blonde defense, you better hope you have a male judge and a nice rack...and I don't mean spice rack! ;)
Nobody could claim that they didn't recognize the funny looking pills or joints in their purse.
I've seen a few women in court claim that...just before being found guilty. And not long after them was the girl who's boyfriend stashed a few hits of acid under the seat of her car...she managed to plead trafficing down to posession because she had a nice rack...and I STILL don't mean spice rack.
It doesn't have to be about drugs. It's about the execustion of law. A stolen bike has nothing to do with a stolen purse, but DA's will still treat both as theft cases. The rules of evidence for drug cases would just as easily be applied to copyright infringement.