Journalists might look into exactly what happened on that side of things, but this particular article doesn't seem to have done that, and some assertion in there might be incorrect or misleading.

Best not to feed Internet pitchfork villagers, who have shown countless times that they're collectively dumb as snot, with no sense of process, critical thinking, nor decency.

I'd think the identities of public servants isn't really relevant at this point, but rather, what was the evidence and chronology.

As techies, we're best suited to tackle some of the evidence around tech, like what was the tech, how does it work, how was it represented, how was it used, what did it do, etc.