3 ms·

(16 minute video, didn't watch) Generally speaking, search warrants are pretty easy to get for prosecutors, and for good reason: If they required a ton of hard

(16 minute video, didn't watch) Generally speaking, search warrants are pretty easy to get for prosecutors, and for good reason: If they required a ton of hard evidence to get, then a prosecutor wouldn't need it any more, they'd just charge the suspect. The entire reason for having search warrants is that there is "something" (a fact) which suggests you'll "probably" find evidence of a crime. So because they are easy to get, why exactly would a prosecutor need to forge a warrant?

phpisthebest 4y ago
because they often do not have facts, just conjecture and assumption. No facts Thus was born the "confidential informant" to get around that last little problem the 4th amendment held in their way
hackish 4y ago
I'm no fan of the U.S. justice system, but the evidence in the affidavit included in the search warrant application undoubtedly gets the form signed in this case. Did this FBI special agent risk the case, his career, and prior cases to take down a barely-six-figure crime scheme? Or did he open his network share and print "AO_106_Affidavit_for_Search_Warrant_7-87-scanned-OCR-dont-use.docx", last edited by Johnny the intern, instead of "AO106-latest.pdf"?
- AifVI 4y ago
  Exactly. The evidence in the video is utterly meaningless. Here is what he has: - The scan of the magistrate judge's pen looks like it is running out of ink. - The form was copied and edited, and some of the edits use inconsistent fonts or have artifacts from being printed and scanned previously. - The magistrate judge left off the year in one instance, and the time in another. So what? Nothing about that says anything was forged. It's not unusual for attorneys and the Court to use messed up forms, because the forms aren't what matters. You could hand-write it on a napkin and it would be valid. Nor is it unusual for a hurried judge to be inconsistent in how they sign things. Nothing here indicates a "forgery."

phpisthebest 4y ago

because they often do not have facts, just conjecture and assumption. No facts Thus was born the "confidential informant" to get around that last little problem the 4th amendment held in their way

hackish 4y ago

I'm no fan of the U.S. justice system, but the evidence in the affidavit included in the search warrant application undoubtedly gets the form signed in this case. Did this FBI special agent risk the case, his career, and prior cases to take down a barely-six-figure crime scheme? Or did he open his network share and print "AO_106_Affidavit_for_Search_Warrant_7-87-scanned-OCR-dont-use.docx", last edited by Johnny the intern, instead of "AO106-latest.pdf"?

AifVI 4y ago
Exactly. The evidence in the video is utterly meaningless. Here is what he has: - The scan of the magistrate judge's pen looks like it is running out of ink. - The form was copied and edited, and some of the edits use inconsistent fonts or have artifacts from being printed and scanned previously. - The magistrate judge left off the year in one instance, and the time in another. So what? Nothing about that says anything was forged. It's not unusual for attorneys and the Court to use messed up forms, because the forms aren't what matters. You could hand-write it on a napkin and it would be valid. Nor is it unusual for a hurried judge to be inconsistent in how they sign things. Nothing here indicates a "forgery."