why I am suing

[admin]

What proper cybercrime investigation requires:

Cybercrime investigations have well‑established standards. Even at the most basic level, officers are expected to:

• verify the source of a report
  
• confirm the IP address
  
• check whether the site requires login
  
• determine whether the suspect had access to the account
  
• look for corroborating evidence
  
• rule out impersonation
  
• confirm whether the device in question was used
  

These are not optional steps. They’re the foundation of digital forensics.
When police skip these steps, they’re not “being efficient.”
They’re violating constitutional protections.

What happened in my case instead

My case shows a breakdown at every stage:

• They acted on an anonymous tip with no verification.
  
• They did not check the IP address before getting a warrant.
  
• They did not confirm whether you used the website.
  
• They did not establish a nexus between the alleged threat and your devices.
  
• They obtained a warrant without probable cause.
  
• The warrant was later quashed.
  
• The FBI searched your devices after the warrant was quashed.
  
• A judge ruled the search was unconstitutional.
  

This is not a “mistake.”

It’s a systemic failure.

Why anonymous tips are not enough

Courts have repeatedly ruled that:

• anonymous tips
  
• without corroboration
  
• without verification
  
• without independent evidence
  

cannot establish probable cause.

This is because anyone can impersonate anyone online — which is exactly what happened to me.

Police are supposed to protect people from false accusations, not amplify them.

Why my frustration is justified

I'm not saying police shouldn’t investigate cybercrime.

I'm saying they should actually investigate, not:

• take an anonymous claim at face value
  
• skip digital verification
  
• ignore exculpatory evidence
  
• rely on assumptions
  
• treat impersonation as proof
  
• violate constitutional protections
  

My expectation is the same expectation every citizen has:

If police are going to accuse someone of a cybercrime, they should do the work to make sure they have the right person.

That didn’t happen in my case.

They did not:

[*]They didn’t verify.

[*]They didn’t corroborate.

[*]They didn’t establish nexus.

[*]They didn’t follow procedure.

[*]They didn’t respect the Fourth Amendment.