Barrett Brown, the former self-proclaimed Anonymous spokesperson, has been charged for the third time in four months on federal criminal charges.

Brown was arrested and taken into custody in September after allegedly threatening an FBI agent. In December 2012, he was indicted by a federal grand jury for trafficking “stolen authentication features,” as well as "access device fraud" and “aggravated identity theft.”

On Wednesday, Brown was hit with one count of “concealment of evidence,” and one count of “corrupting concealing evidence.”

The indictments allege that on March 6, 2012, Brown concealed “two laptop computers,” in an apparent attempt to evade a federal investigation. Last October, the Dallas Observer cited a “source,” who said Brown’s laptop was hidden among his mother’s dishes. The new indictment also points to someone who seems to have "aided and abetted" this concealment, under the initials “KM.”

Brown himself seemingly admitted to it the following day, where he posted this on Pastebin: “the Feds came back a couple of hours later with a search warrant for my mom's place—they fully intended to take a certain laptop, and did.”

In 2011, Brown spoke with Ars, saying "the rule of law is void." Since his departure from Anonymous, many members of the group have distanced themselves from Brown.

Legal pressure building

Although currently represented by public defender Doug Morris—who did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment—Brown’s former counsel, Jay Leiderman, continues to follow the case.

“I would not have seen a third indictment coming,” Leiderman told Ars. “You would think the 90 years of prison exposure that they had on him was enough. Are we at a point in society where we think that 90 years is no longer enough?”

Leiderman speculated that the new indictment was a legal pressure tactic against Brown.

“[Fighting against these cases is] about making sure that the public understands how abusive the government is being in using its resources—they’re not prosecuting hacktivists, they’re persecuting hacktivists,” he added. “How the government is handling these speaks to how they’re going to handle them in the future. If anyone touches a computer that the government doesn’t like—the government gives 100 years—fuck, we should just go back to the Stone Age. It’s not safe to use a computer if you can go to prison for 100 years and not even know why.”