Looks like Daugherty's parents consented to the seizure of the electronic devices

[QUESTION]

They didn't even read the search warrant nor ask for a copy. They allowed the police to take all the electronic devices they wanted and as your legal guardians if your property and owner of the home, they had that right.

They won't need to use that angle because the seizure was obviously legal, but just a thought they could go back on.

Then your own defense attorney gave consent for the searching of those electronic devices to continue. 

It's looking bad for you Toad....

[admin]

They didn't even read the search warrant nor ask for a copy. They allowed the police to take all the electronic devices they wanted and as your legal guardians if your property and owner of the home, they had that right.

They won't need to use that angle because the seizure was obviously legal, but just a thought they could go back on.

Then your own defense attorney gave consent for the searching of those electronic devices to continue. 

It's looking bad for you Toad....

The were never given a copy of the warrant, nor was I or I would challenge it back in 2018. No there is a difference between consent and a search warrant. A consent can and often does allow the police to search and seize anything, this was however a warrant, that wasn't particularize to what they were to seize. but there was no consent, this was under a search warrant.

[admin]

Search Under Consent:

In this case, an individual voluntarily agrees to let law enforcement officers search their property.

No warrant is required since the consent was freely given.

The person granting consent can limit the scope of the search and revoke consent at any time.

Search Under a Warrant:

A search warrant is a legal document authorized by a judge or magistrate.

It allows law enforcement to conduct a search of specific areas and seize certain items.

Warrants are issued based on probable cause and must describe the place to be searched and the items to be seized.

The individual being searched cannot revoke the warrant or limit the scope of the search.

[admin]

Search Under Consent
Pros:

1. Voluntary Cooperation: The individual willingly agrees to the search, fostering a cooperative relationship with law enforcement.
   
2. Speed: No need to wait for a warrant, allowing for immediate action.
   
3. Flexibility: The individual can specify the areas to be searched, potentially making the process smoother.
   

Cons:

1. Revocation: The individual can withdraw their consent at any time, halting the search.
   
2. Scope Limitations: The individual can limit the areas to be searched, potentially hindering the investigation.
   
3. Pressure Concerns: There may be concerns about whether the consent was truly voluntary or given under duress.
   

Search Under a Warrant
Pros:

1. Legal Authority: The warrant is backed by judicial approval, ensuring the search is based on probable cause.
   
2. Comprehensive Search: The warrant specifies the scope of the search, allowing law enforcement to thoroughly investigate.
   
3. No Revocation: The individual cannot revoke the warrant, ensuring the search is completed.
   

Cons:

1. Time-Consuming: Obtaining a warrant can take time, potentially delaying the investigation.
   
2. Rigid Scope: The search is limited to the areas and items specified in the warrant, which may not always cover unexpected discoveries.
   
3. Invasiveness: The search can be more intrusive, as law enforcement has the authority to search specified areas without the individual's consent.
   

[admin]

As I stated many times before, the search warrant was a general warrant because 1. the warrant allowed them to seize everything on the computer. 2. they didn't have probable cause.

[admin]

But my parents NEVER consent to anything, I called them from jail, and they wanted me to consent, and I told them to tell the police to get a warrant.

[QUESTION]

Your parents consented. As they own the house and the property, you had no say in the matter.

As you said..

"No warrant is required since the consent was freely given"

But like I said, the DA won't need to use that...

Plus your own attorney gave permission for the search to continue and the judge made it clear to you the investigation as going to continue. You changed your story on that from 90 days to 1 year to 3 years... You even had a countdown on Kiwifarms stating that....

---

As I stated many times before, the search warrant was a general warrant because 1. the warrant allowed them to seize everything on the computer. 2. they didn't have probable cause.

You just don't understand. They can seize computers, cellphones and such... It's done every day and the ACLU has no argument about it either...

In fact, they can't just show up, take a couple of files and leave the computers and cellphones, no court would accept those files as valid evidence. Computers need to be search within the boundaries of the search warrant in a quarantined environment.  The FBI agent stated they were only looking for evidence of your school threats when they came across the child porn.

The delay was due to the fact they had to identify the child in the image, which they did do.

You're fucked.

[admin]

Your parents consented.  As they own the house and the property, you had no say in the matter.

As you said..

"No warrant is required since the consent was freely given"

But like I said, the DA won't need to use that...

Plus your own attorney gave permission for the search to continue and the judge made it clear to you the investigation as going to continue.  You changed your story on that from 90 days to 1 year to 3 years... You even had a countdown on Kiwifarms stating that....

---

As I stated many times before, the search warrant was a general warrant because 1. the warrant allowed them to seize everything on the computer. 2. they didn't have probable cause.

You just don't understand. They can seize computers, cellphones and such... It's done every day and the ACLU has no argument about it either...

In fact, they can't just show up, take a couple of files and leave the computers and cellphones, no court would accept those files as valid evidence. Computers need to be search within the boundaries of the search warrant in a quarantined environment.  The FBI agent stated they were only looking for evidence of your school threats when they came across the child porn.

The delay was due to the fact they had to identify the child in the image, which they did do.

You're fucked.

You are wrong, there was no consent, if there was consent, they wouldn't have needed a warrant. Secondly if there was consent, a person giving the consent can at any time remove that consent, which if that was the case as you argue, then us asking for the return of the computers means I had relinquished my consent, and they have to return the computers, but that's not the case, they had a warrant. This was a search warrant issued by a judge.

They can take the computer to search, but in the search warrant they must list what they are looking for with in the computers, which they have probable cause for. they can't seize ever file within the computer, even the US Supreme Court has stated that. YOU don't understand that search and seizure are two things within the fourth amendment. The court have even stated that search and seizure are two separate things under the fourth amendment. Like I said they can take the computer to search, but they can't seize everything on the computer, they can only seize what is listed in the warrant that is the fruits or contraband of a crime which they have probable cause for. A search warrant cannot also be used to list one thing to be search and seized only for law enforcement to look for something else. The plain view doctrine is also limited when it comes computers as the courts has noted that ever file on the computer is in plain view and when a search warrant doesn't particularize what they are looking for with in the electronic device the warrant become a general warrant, and the police officers cannot use plain view doctrine.

[QUESTION]

but in the search warrant they must list what they are looking for with in the computers

Which they did.

But like I said, your parents consented to the search when they showed up, they probably were nice enough to escort them to your bedroom and that spare room with the cross (maybe put up so they can drive the demons out of you) so they wouldn't have to tear the house apart for hours, especially since your parents had guest there... They didn't seize all the electronic devices, they didn't seize your parents cellphones and any devices the guest of the house would have had for example.

Cops probably had a good laugh at your sex and barbie doll collections...

And you are confused between seizure and search... They can seize your computers, what they can't do is search every single file at random for a goose chase, but child image files on the open is probable.. Especially since you flashed child porn on your old Twitch feed (remember that?). I might still have the mp4 for that, I'll have to check.. If so, I'm obligated under the law to contact the feds about it.

[admin]

Which they did.

But like I said, your parents consented to the search when they showed up, they probably were nice enough to escort them to your bedroom and that spare room with the cross (maybe put up so they can drive the demons out of you) so they wouldn't have to tear the house apart for hours, especially since your parents had guest there... They didn't seize all the electronic devices, they didn't seize your parents cellphones and any devices the guest of the house would have had for example.

No, they didn't There was no list of what they were looking for on the computers and they had no probable cause to seize the computers to begin with because they did not corroborate the tip, which is required to have probable cause.  Again, they did not consent the police had a search warrant, which allowed them to search the house and seize all electronic devices within the house. The room with the cross is the living room, moron. there was no guest at our house, and they did seize all the devices (ALL 15 DEVICES)

I suggest you read some court cases.