01-08-2025, 05:21 AM
![[Image: stupid.jpg]](http://160.32.227.211/stupid.jpg)
There is BIG difference between Nick Rekieta and my case. I believe Nick warrant and Affidavit was based on a known informant while mine wasn't, the informant in my case was anonymous and was uncorroborated by the FBI and the police without additional investigation. His search warrant was based on the search for items (drugs) in his home, Mine was based on the seizure of 15 computers without stating in the warrant or affidavit what the crime was, or what they were looking for. They do mention in my warrant " information pertaining to internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed towards schools or public officials" but as the motion to suppress states: "However, that clause is in and of itself both overbroad and insufficiently particular. The affidavit did not contain any information establishing threats to public officials or towards schools in general. Had they actually connected Daugherty to that post (which they did not) the only possible thing they could investigate him for was the March 16, 2018, threat "FUCK YOU YOU STALKING MOTHER FUCKERS. I'LL SHOW YOU WHO IS AUSTIC. I'LL GO TO FUCKING MEMORIAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND MAKE SANDY HOOK LOOK LIKE A SUNDAY SCHOOL PICNIC" posted on hateandflame.com." They did NO investigation to link me to the threat, instead they arrested me and stole my stuff, based on a fucking LIE
His (Nick) warrant was valid while mine is a general warrant.
My Case
1. The information for the informant was uncorroborated and the police and the FBI DID NO INVESTIGATION into the case.
2. The warrant seized 15 computers without stating what they were looking for and allowed the seizure of "any and all data" without limiting what they can search for on those 15 devices.
perhaps you should read the motion to suppress and stop being a dumbass
suppression.pdf