12-04-2024, 10:34 PM
One more thing:
"You also forget that your threat to that school was an immanent threat."
actually, no it wasn't for two reasons 1. the threat was posted on a Friday that gave them plenty of time to investigate and corroborate the anonymous informants claim, (they had the whole weekend) BUT THEY DIDN'T. 2. The threat was made on March 16th, the search warrant for the computers wasn't issued until the March 21st - five days after the threat. It had also come to their attention that between my arrest (March 17th) up to March 20th that more post including threats were being made on that same website, while I sat in jail. So, they lost probable cause to get a search warrant for the computers. not only did they lose probable cause for those computers, but they also lost probable cause to have me in jail for a threat against a school. The site required NO LOGIN allowing ANYONE to be anyone on that site.
If the police want to go after people for internet crime, NOW HOW THE FUCKING INTERNET WORKS FIRST.
"You also forget that your threat to that school was an immanent threat."
actually, no it wasn't for two reasons 1. the threat was posted on a Friday that gave them plenty of time to investigate and corroborate the anonymous informants claim, (they had the whole weekend) BUT THEY DIDN'T. 2. The threat was made on March 16th, the search warrant for the computers wasn't issued until the March 21st - five days after the threat. It had also come to their attention that between my arrest (March 17th) up to March 20th that more post including threats were being made on that same website, while I sat in jail. So, they lost probable cause to get a search warrant for the computers. not only did they lose probable cause for those computers, but they also lost probable cause to have me in jail for a threat against a school. The site required NO LOGIN allowing ANYONE to be anyone on that site.
If the police want to go after people for internet crime, NOW HOW THE FUCKING INTERNET WORKS FIRST.